Raw Power Posted February 16, 2017 at 02:21 AM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 02:21 AM You're narrowing the definition of voter fraud to only the polling place. What about absentee ballots? Tampering with the results? Those things are under the voter fraud umbrella and wouldn't necessarily involve anyone at the polling place. Good example... how would a voter ID law stop these forms of fraud? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomKoz Posted February 16, 2017 at 03:03 AM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 03:03 AM Death sentence for voter fraud, death sentence for illegal immigrants voting, death sentence for submitting fraudulent absentee ballots, death sentence for tampering with results, death sentence for voting more than once per election! Problem will solve itself quickly! Why is the Left sooooo against Voter ID if the ID's are free (paid by taxpers)?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishjames Posted February 16, 2017 at 03:31 AM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 03:31 AM You're narrowing the definition of voter fraud to only the polling place. What about absentee ballots? Tampering with the results? Those things are under the voter fraud umbrella and wouldn't necessarily involve anyone at the polling place. Good example... how would a voter ID law stop these forms of fraud? Voter ID would stop people from voting under someone else's name. I have a couple questions for you. How do you stop people who are not eligible to vote, (illegals, felons, non-citizens,) from voting? How do you keep poll workers from voting for others illegally, especially when they have control of the voter rolls, and can just vote for those who have not come in to vote? And why are you so opposed to keeping our elections honest? We spend millions of dollars on furniture for government buildings, but cannot afford to implement some type of voter ID? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomKoz Posted February 16, 2017 at 04:05 AM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 04:05 AM WGN now reporting about a whole bunch of dead people signing petitions for a Democrat running for Coroner!! Boooyaaa! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spec4 Posted February 16, 2017 at 01:10 PM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 01:10 PM The "election" of Al Franken to senator in Minnesota comes to mind. Google how his first election went and draw your own conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Posted February 16, 2017 at 01:15 PM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 01:15 PM You're narrowing the definition of voter fraud to only the polling place. What about absentee ballots? Tampering with the results? Those things are under the voter fraud umbrella and wouldn't necessarily involve anyone at the polling place. Good example... how would a voter ID law stop these forms of fraud? I didn't say an ID would stop these forms. I was pointing out other forms that you were, seemingly, not recognizing. You pointed out your experience as an election judge. Did you know the true identity of everyone that came to the polling place to vote? Did the other judges? Is it a possibility that someone not eligible to vote could have given a false name and voted at that particular polling place? An ID could have nelped identify those attempting to vote fraudulently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRJ Posted February 16, 2017 at 02:36 PM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 02:36 PM I'm pretty sure that signature needs to match against registration records when getting your ballot. So there is a data point that could be used to help election judges screen voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Posted February 16, 2017 at 03:21 PM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 03:21 PM I'm pretty sure that signature needs to match against registration records when getting your ballot. So there is a data point that could be used to help election judges screen voters.Do the judges where you vote actually compare signatures or just give a cursory glance and keep the line moving? Just wondering, as the ones at my designated polling place don't appear do more than make sure the name is the same. In their defense, i know my handwriting has "evolved" over the years and a case could me made that the copy they have on file no longer matches my signature as I write it today. Here's another thing...my kids are all grown and don't live in the same town as we do any longer, yet they all appear on the voter list. My middle name is my son's first name. I routinely have to correct the election judges as they nearly always start to tear the stub off for him rather than me. He doesn't even live in this state. Hasn't for years. I tell them that every time I vote and have contacted the county clerk's office and notified them. What's stopping me, other than honesty and integrity, from voting my ballot in the morning and then returning when they're busy and voting his ballot or getting an absentee ballot in his name and voting in person using mine? It's the same with my daughters. One lives a couple of towns over...a 20 minute drive. Theoretically, she could vote where she lives and then come here and vote again. An ID system of some sort could potentially prevent those scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikew Posted February 16, 2017 at 04:24 PM Author Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 04:24 PM Does everyone remember the news cycle from the 2012 elections when it was announced that international election observers were here? The group was from "Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe". While liberals waited with baited breath for the OSCE observers to announce how terrible the conservatives were,the unofficial reaction was that the observers thought we were nuts for allowing some people to vote without photo ID. This was toned down somewhat for their official report, suggesting that required ID should be free if needed to ensure compliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRJ Posted February 16, 2017 at 04:43 PM Share Posted February 16, 2017 at 04:43 PM I'm pretty sure that signature needs to match against registration records when getting your ballot. So there is a data point that could be used to help election judges screen voters. Do the judges where you vote actually compare signatures or just give a cursory glance and keep the line moving? Just wondering, as the ones at my designated polling place don't appear do more than make sure the name is the same. In their defense, i know my handwriting has "evolved" over the years and a case could me made that the copy they have on file no longer matches my signature as I write it today. Here's another thing...my kids are all grown and don't live in the same town as we do any longer, yet they all appear on the voter list. My middle name is my son's first name. I routinely have to correct the election judges as they nearly always start to tear the stub off for him rather than me. He doesn't even live in this state. Hasn't for years. I tell them that every time I vote and have contacted the county clerk's office and notified them. What's stopping me, other than honesty and integrity, from voting my ballot in the morning and then returning when they're busy and voting his ballot or getting an absentee ballot in his name and voting in person using mine? It's the same with my daughters. One lives a couple of towns over...a 20 minute drive. Theoretically, she could vote where she lives and then come here and vote again. An ID system of some sort could potentially prevent those scenarios.I've had same experience. Agree, ID is a good fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted February 17, 2017 at 02:16 AM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 02:16 AM Reasons why there's not much empirical evidence of voter fraud = 1. Not Investigated + 2. It's Fraud ! The reason why, is because both halves of the One Party System (both R half and D half) benefit from voter fraud. So neither side will investigate the other. The shovel that digs up dirt on the other, gets the shoveler dirty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DD123 Posted February 17, 2017 at 02:36 AM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 02:36 AM Two recent examples of voter fraud: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-will-monitor-virginia-polls-election-day/ http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/ Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that investigating voter fraud would limit access to voting. How would an investigation limit access to voting? It's an investigation, dummy. I find highly interesting how the left is so against this. If there's nothing there, then let's investigate it, and then put into place measures to prevent people from voting more than once, dead people voting, people that aren't citizens, and clean that crap up. What's even more interesting about the left's stance on this is the fact that they insisted that Bush cheated both times he was elected. I'm not going to argue against that, because it's probably true. So if Bush cheated, and the GOP knows how to cook the elections, then why not come forward and finally shut this argument down? If people are too poor to obtain a government issued ID, then it should be subsidized by each state. More than likely, there won't be very many people that need that considering everyone has a government issued ID these days. My cousins wife has been a social worker for decades and works with some of the poorest people. They all have ID's despite being on government aid. I actually asked her this question before pretending that I was curious about her job. She considers herself "extremely progressive" so if she knew why I was asking I would've gotten a different answer. I was asking her under the guise of showing interest in what she does The voting systems can easily be validated by tying the databases into each state's DMV, cross referencing with immigration status, and the social security death index databases to vet the info. You could also tie e-verify into it. My new company could tackle a project like this EASILY. Wouldn't even take that long from the start of the project to the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted February 17, 2017 at 02:59 AM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 02:59 AM You should prove that you are who you are and that you can legally vote in that area. And anyone who says that they can't get a id are either lying or know that it would be illegal for them to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkroenlein Posted February 17, 2017 at 03:03 AM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 03:03 AM Two recent examples of voter fraud: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-will-monitor-virginia-polls-election-day/ http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/ Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that investigating voter fraud would limit access to voting. How would an investigation limit access to voting? It's an investigation, dummy. I find highly interesting how the left is so against this. If there's nothing there, then let's investigate it, and then put into place measures to prevent people from voting more than once, dead people voting, people that aren't citizens, and clean that crap up. What's even more interesting about the left's stance on this is the fact that they insisted that Bush cheated both times he was elected. I'm not going to argue against that, because it's probably true. So if Bush cheated, and the GOP knows how to cook the elections, then why not come forward and finally shut this argument down? If people are too poor to obtain a government issued ID, then it should be subsidized by each state. More than likely, there won't be very many people that need that considering everyone has a government issued ID these days. My cousins wife has been a social worker for decades and works with some of the poorest people. They all have ID's despite being on government aid. I actually asked her this question before pretending that I was curious about her job. She considers herself "extremely progressive" so if she knew why I was asking I would've gotten a different answer. I was asking her under the guise of showing interest in what she does The voting systems can easily be validated by tying the databases into each state's DMV, cross referencing with immigration status, and the social security death index databases to vet the info. You could also tie e-verify into it. My new company could tackle a project like this EASILY. Wouldn't even take that long from the start of the project to the end. It will limit access to voting when the people who vote illegally learn that you can get in real, actual trouble for doing it. And my answer to voter ID yes or no. Absolutely. Proving your citizenship in good standing is only reasonable. My great, great, great, great grand daddy fought in the American Revolution for the Independence of this great nation. I can spare the $10 every 4 years to keep it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tip Posted February 17, 2017 at 04:26 AM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 04:26 AM Know of numerous stories of folks who left home, moved out of state, registered to vote out of state and voted in every election. Several years later they then moved back to hometown, went to register to vote, found that they were still registered to vote and also found out they had voted in every election for the years they lived out of state. So who voted for them? Several I know actually filed complaints - only to be told the elections had been certified and there was nothing that could or would be done. That's the problem with voter fraud - once the election is certified it's considered a moot point and rarely followed up on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chibooey Posted February 17, 2017 at 05:10 AM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 05:10 AM Voter ID's would be great, however why have them when you do not need any ID or proof of citizenship to register to vote. Since anyone can register without proof of citizenship any ID isn't going to stop the fraud. Start with verifying citizenship then move on to identification. For those that believe that voter fraud is non existent or a very minimal problem I would ask how do you know that is true since no one has ever really investigated to determine the extent of the problem. We must investigate to determine if there is a real problem. (I totally believe we have a large problem that politicians are ignoring). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockman Posted February 17, 2017 at 12:27 PM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 12:27 PM No ID. I registered 33 years ago and I have had to do it again. I have voted in every election since that time and no one has ever voted in my place. ID has never been needed and I'm happy with that. The anonymity of your vote is sacred, but the fact that you voted should not be. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted February 17, 2017 at 12:29 PM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 12:29 PM Voter fraud is a human rights violation. What is the difference if I'm barred from a polling place or someone simply drums up an illegal vote that nullifies my vote? The end result is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted February 17, 2017 at 07:02 PM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 07:02 PM Yes. Every other first country (and second, some third world as well) requires voters present identification prior to casting a ballot. The cost of the ID....you can't walk down the street without government issued identification. That's illegal. Stop and identify statutes make it illegal to even walk out your front door without any identification. So it's preposterous that I'm legally required to carry identification on my person when I'm in public, yet I'm not required to show said identification to a poll worker. Need ID to get welfare, so it boggles the mind as to why the argument that the poor can't afford to get a (heavily subsidized, if not outright free of charge) state issued ID. Bottom line, if I'm legally required to carry ID at all times, then it defies logic to not require identification at the ballot box. If ID required to receive government assistance such as SNAP, TANF, Medicaid, whatever, then it's logical those same "poor" people have ID, that voter ID law would not be a barrier to voting. The REAL reason we do not have voter ID is because it makes it more difficult to commit voter fraud. It's politicians pandering. No one is disenfranchised by voter ID laws. ETA: Anyone who says voter fraud is a myth, tell them to Google "Margarita Fitzpatrick v. Jeff Sessions" where a Peruvian national who is fluent in English admitted to voting in TWO federal elections. Here is the first paragraph of the opinion affirming the order of deportation (for illegally voting in federal elections). "Margarita Del Pilar Fitzpatrick, a citizen of Peru, had lived in the United States for three years when she applied for a driverâs license in Illinois. She contends that when filling out the forms at the Department of Motor Vehicles she displayed her green card and her Peruvian passportâbut she admits that she also checked a box claiming to be a citizen of the United States. The form sternly warns aliens not to check that box, and Fitzpatrick does not contend that she has any difficulty understanding written English. (She came to the United States in 2002 to study English in college, and after earning a certificate as a medical translator she spent some time working as an interpreter before training as a nurse.) As required by the motor-voter law, 52 U.S.C. §§ 20503â06, the form also contained a checkbox that would lead to registration as a voter. Fitzpatrick maintains that the desk clerk asked whether she wanted to register, and when she inquired âAm I supposed to?â he replied: âItâs up to you.â She checked that box, was duly registered, and in 2006 twice voted in elections for federal officials." Yes, no voter fraud at all. That explains why a woman is being deported for violating 18 U.S.C. §611, the law explicitly stating that aliens are expressly forbidden from voting in federal elections. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Posted February 17, 2017 at 07:08 PM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 07:08 PM Two recent examples of voter fraud: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-will-monitor-virginia-polls-election-day/ http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/ Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that investigating voter fraud would limit access to voting. How would an investigation limit access to voting? It's an investigation, dummy. Nancy Pelosi...lol...I wonder what those that suggest Pres. Trump in mentally unstable think about her mental capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted February 17, 2017 at 07:30 PM Share Posted February 17, 2017 at 07:30 PM Two recent examples of voter fraud: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-will-monitor-virginia-polls-election-day/ http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/ Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that investigating voter fraud would limit access to voting. How would an investigation limit access to voting? It's an investigation, dummy. Nancy Pelosi...lol...I wonder what those that suggest Pres. Trump in mentally unstable think about her mental capacity. These liberals remind me of the poster with monkeys, eyes, ears covered up. See no evil, hear no evil. Therefore no evil exists it's like Schroedinger's Cat but without the desire to learn the truth. They don't want to see it, they don't want to hear it, so it doesn't exist as far as they're concerned. Hey, Ms. "I got trolled by a fake Twitter account" Pelosi, who said she'd fight President Bush (like last week, not...when Bush was POTUS...woman is off her rocker), just because "you" refuse to see the problem doesn't automatically make it disappear. Another thing, I've never seen so many flaming fringe left liberals who suddenly care about the Constitution. Not once in my life have I seen so many liberals, the overwhelming majority of whom are beyond ignorant, citing the Constitution. Some illegal is trying to argue DAPA conferred legal status and, therefore, he is entitled to Due Process. Well that's all fine and dandy, except DAPA was and is illegal so any status conferred, rights gained, whatever, were never lawfully conferred so the Due Process (and others) rights are void ab initio. I do give him credit as LPR status was conferred, so (assuming DAPA is legal, which is not the case) he does have all of the rights that we, as American citizens, enjoy. That makes a huge, incorrect assumption, but that would be the case. Expect more of this garbage. A lot more. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DD123 Posted February 18, 2017 at 02:29 AM Share Posted February 18, 2017 at 02:29 AM Two recent examples of voter fraud: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-will-monitor-virginia-polls-election-day/ http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/ Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that investigating voter fraud would limit access to voting. How would an investigation limit access to voting? It's an investigation, dummy. Nancy Pelosi...lol...I wonder what those that suggest Pres. Trump in mentally unstable think about her mental capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Illiniwek Posted February 18, 2017 at 12:13 PM Share Posted February 18, 2017 at 12:13 PM Two recent examples of voter fraud: http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-will-monitor-virginia-polls-election-day/ http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/ Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that investigating voter fraud would limit access to voting. How would an investigation limit access to voting? It's an investigation, dummy. Nancy Pelosi...lol...I wonder what those that suggest Pres. Trump in mentally unstable think about her mental capacity. She's the poster child for bat sh** crazy...lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted February 18, 2017 at 05:16 PM Share Posted February 18, 2017 at 05:16 PM The poll tax argument for no ID is bunk. In order to become a US Citizen you need to be born. Is it a poll tax, the hospital bills for your birth? And you have to be 18, so is that a poll tax that there is 18 years of cost of living?If one is a naturalized citizen, is it a poll tax that the above plus you paid tons of immigration fees and then N400 form filing to get your citizenship?You pay tons of taxes and fees and costs before getting the right to vote. An ID card does not count. You should already have one for everyday use anyway, so there is no net cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TriumphRider Posted February 24, 2017 at 07:53 PM Share Posted February 24, 2017 at 07:53 PM YES - ID should be a requirement to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikew Posted February 25, 2017 at 04:45 AM Author Share Posted February 25, 2017 at 04:45 AM If one is a naturalized citizen,One takes a test to become a naturalized citizen. So in passing, it is a test to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobPistol Posted February 25, 2017 at 06:15 PM Share Posted February 25, 2017 at 06:15 PM If one is a naturalized citizen,One takes a test to become a naturalized citizen. So in passing, it is a test to vote. Precisely! A test to get a human right. Oh, the humanity! Someone call the ACLU! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomKoz Posted March 3, 2017 at 01:54 PM Share Posted March 3, 2017 at 01:54 PM “According to a release from Husted, 385 people who are not citizens of the United States are registered to vote in Ohio. Out of those, 82 voted in at least one election in the last year.” http://eheadlines.com/red-alert-ohio-secretary-of-state-makes-stunning-announcement-regarding-illegal-aliens-in-their-state-video/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiet Observer Posted March 3, 2017 at 04:06 PM Share Posted March 3, 2017 at 04:06 PM If one is a naturalized citizen,One takes a test to become a naturalized citizen. So in passing, it is a test to vote. Precisely! A test to get a human right. Oh, the humanity! Someone call the ACLU! Just as there is no right for a foreigner to enter the United States, there is no right for a non-citizen to become a naturalized citizen. Both are privileges that may be granted by the government to an individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallbore Posted March 3, 2017 at 06:42 PM Share Posted March 3, 2017 at 06:42 PM I think there should be both sn id and finger print. All prints should be run afterward. Anyone found voting twice should do heavy community service for party he voted against. Proving who we are is just smart and good citizenship. There are many upsides with no downside.If one whats to call it a burden or sacrifice then so be it. Many have sacrificed much more for our our freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.