Started By
Message
re: Voter ID: For or Against
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:04 pm to 3nOut
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:04 pm to 3nOut
quote:
it's more prominent than you would present.
Link?
Here's one:
Politifact
quote:
"Still, yes, it’s plausible and occasionally people have done it. ... But by all accounts it’s a very rare phenomenon."
2
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:07 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
but the efficiency of poll workers and waiting times are of significantly less importance to me than having people absorb all the information available before making a selection.
Early voting normally starts around 2 weeks before Election Day. You think people can't figure out who they're voting for 2 weeks out?
quote:
Maybe I'm old school. Elections are important, being informed is important, and making an effort is important.
No one is arguing that.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:11 pm to Stonehog
Audit Finds Evidence of Widespread Voter Fraud in North Carolina
According to this audit by the North Carolina Elections Oversight Committee, at least 81 dead people have been voting from the grave, and more than 35,000 people with matching full names and dates of birth voted in both North Carolina and another state in the 2012 general election.
the NBC correspondent pinpointed nearly 100 ineligible voters in his county alone. Several admitted on camera to (a) not being US citizens, and (b) voting in US elections. "I vote every year!" one woman boasted.
LINK
According to this audit by the North Carolina Elections Oversight Committee, at least 81 dead people have been voting from the grave, and more than 35,000 people with matching full names and dates of birth voted in both North Carolina and another state in the 2012 general election.
the NBC correspondent pinpointed nearly 100 ineligible voters in his county alone. Several admitted on camera to (a) not being US citizens, and (b) voting in US elections. "I vote every year!" one woman boasted.
LINK
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:19 pm to BillyBobPorkin
That's a Boom, oh that's a Boom.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:19 pm to 3nOut
quote:
but it's more prominent than you would present.
Honestly, it's probably only rampant in small, municipal elections, or at least that's where it is more impactful. Sure, it happens in statewide and national elections, but not to the point of swinging many, if any, elections. That's not to say there shouldn't be something done to combat it, but I think a lot of the recent bills across the states are overkill.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:22 pm to Stonehog
quote:
Early voting normally starts around 2 weeks before Election Day. You think people can't figure out who they're voting for 2 weeks out?
I guess my real issue is that most people don't make any effort to really know who they're voting for and any October/early November surprises that come out should be given their full weight, especially when concerning the segment of our population that consumes info by the headline.
I generally know who I'm voting for two weeks before election, but I like to wait for election day in case some stuff comes out that would cause me to change my vote. I think that should be the norm more than me being old school.
Early voting marginalizes the impact of any important information that can come up during the early voting period.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:23 pm to Vols&Shaft83
It would be if those same named people were cross-referenced with SS numbers. Turns out the article did and found 716, while yes not zero a number much lower than the 35,000. It's not crazy to think two John Smiths may have been born on the same day.
In short, I wish that article would have made more of an effort to report numbers that actually prove something instead of focusing on the big one that proved nothing. That goes to you too Billy Bob.
In short, I wish that article would have made more of an effort to report numbers that actually prove something instead of focusing on the big one that proved nothing. That goes to you too Billy Bob.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:24 pm to BillyBobPorkin
quote:
35,000 people with matching full names and dates of birth voted in both North Carolina and another state in the 2012 general election.
I can't believe you have the nerve to insult another person's intelligence.
If 35,000 people with the same name and date of birth voted in two different states, how would a photo ID help that? They could have one in both states. This is about in-person voter impersonation. Do you even know what that means?
Stop now while you're way behind.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:24 pm to Stonehog
quote:
Link?
CT
NC
Texas
now, voting laws caught these people of course, but adding any layer of that doesn't hurt.
that's like saying rape is against the law and people are doing it, but it's really rare, so let's not put anything else as a safeguard. ridiculous? hyperbole? yes. but your argument sounds the exact same.
ETA: I agree that in-person voter fraud is much rarer, but to act like this impedes one soul is ridiculous.
This post was edited on 9/30/14 at 2:27 pm
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:26 pm to Mizzeaux
quote:
Early voting marginalizes the impact of any important information that can come up during the early voting period.
Like what?
What of consequence is going to come out to impact how you think Candidate A is going to govern in office? You should know their policy stances and political philosophy by two weeks out, the only thing that is coming out at that point is tabloid bullshite.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:28 pm to 3nOut
quote:
that's like saying rape is against the law and people are doing it, but it's really rare, so let's not put anything else as a safeguard. ridiculous? hyperbole? yes. but your argument sounds the exact same.
Not even in the same ball park. The argument against voter ID laws is that they would do more harm than good.
I don't think anyone would argue against more laws to prevent rape.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:30 pm to Stonehog
quote:
I don't think anyone would argue against more laws to prevent rape.
why would you argue against laws to prevent voter fraud?
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:33 pm to Vols&Shaft83
For.....I can't understand why this is even a question or an issue. If you're legal, what is the damn problem?
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:33 pm to 3nOut
quote:
why would you argue against laws to prevent voter fraud?
Because deceased voters overwhelmingly vote democrat.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:33 pm to 3nOut
quote:
why would you argue against laws to prevent voter fraud?
Already answered in the post you responded to:
quote:
The argument against voter ID laws is that they would do more harm than good.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:34 pm to Stonehog
quote:
The argument against voter ID laws is that they would do more harm than good.
ok. and i say that they would do more good than harm.
quoting yourself is not an argument.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:35 pm to Stonehog
quote:
argument against voter ID laws is that they would do more harm than good.
To democrats you mean
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:37 pm to 3nOut
It comes down to whether you think potentially disenfranchising a legal voter is more harmful than someone casting an illegal vote. Both are bad, but which one is worse? I go back to the constitution on that and think the former is more harmful, but that's just me.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:38 pm to 3nOut
As long as you either send an ID card with voter registration as well as mail a voter ID card to every registered voter and go canvass to ensure every registered voter has an ID, there's nothing wrong with it.
Posted on 9/30/14 at 2:39 pm to Stonehog
What harm is there?
Page 4 of 13
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News