Don’t Believe Voter Fraud Happens? Here’s Some Examples

[Wry Catcher]

We all know the Left strongly declares that the effort to pass voter ID laws is nothing but discrimination as, according to them, there is no such thing as voter fraud.


Well, here an article with a link to almost 200 cases as well as outlining 7 up front.


Now, watch the cries that this can't be true because the site is …. select the charge yourselves. Read the piece @ Don t Believe Voter Fraud Happens Here s Some Examples

I doubt anyone - left or right - denies voter fraud exists. Voter fraud is not the issue, the issue is, is the solution to voter fraud worse than the crime?

• How does reducing polling places prevent voter fraud?
• How does moving polling places to greater distances from likely Democratic Voters reduce voter fraud?
• How does preventing students away at college, prevent voter fraud?
• How does making roadblocks to obtaining a proper ID preventing voter fraud?

I suspect, it is easier to buy a gun than to vote in many Red States. If voter fraud is so rampant why hasn't Congress issued a National ID card for free, or defined what is a legal form of ID for use in a National Election. Charging would be a poll tax, and if the Congress had taken this action the issue would be mute, and, would put Republican Governors in the spot light if they required different rules for local elections.

I don't think it should be all that EASY to register to vote or to vote. I want people who care about America and who have a clue what their vote means to be the ones who vote. I don't want people voting who have to be provided a name on a slip of paper and who are promised some kind of reward if they vote for that name to vote.

If having a photo ID is problematic for anybody, then let all those trying to sign up everybody and their dog as voters with the intention of telling them how to vote put their effort into providing a photo ID to the teensy number of people who for whatever reason don't have them. And then they can drive them to the city clerk's office so they can use that photo ID plus proof of residence to register.

People who can't be bothered with all that frankly have no business voting in the first place.

Wow, you clearly believe voting is a privilege not a right, and those you don't approve of should be denied the privilege to vote, especially those who can't be bothered?

You also believe those who work to get out the vote engage in a criminal conspiracy.

My opinion is that everyone who wants to vote has the right to vote, prior restraint has no business in the process. Let them vote, then, if an official at the polling place needs proof of the persons eligibility, the burden is on him to place a hold on the vote and the County/Parish Clerk will need to decide to allow the vote or provide evidence under penalty of perjury to the US Attorney, who must then prosecute the alleged offender in Federal Trial Court as well as anyone who conspired to defraud the election.

This ^^^ is the American method of jurisprudence, notwithstanding your opinion and bias.

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

 

[Foxfyre]

We all know the Left strongly declares that the effort to pass voter ID laws is nothing but discrimination as, according to them, there is no such thing as voter fraud.


Well, here an article with a link to almost 200 cases as well as outlining 7 up front.


Now, watch the cries that this can't be true because the site is …. select the charge yourselves. Read the piece @ Don t Believe Voter Fraud Happens Here s Some Examples

I doubt anyone - left or right - denies voter fraud exists. Voter fraud is not the issue, the issue is, is the solution to voter fraud worse than the crime?

• How does reducing polling places prevent voter fraud?
• How does moving polling places to greater distances from likely Democratic Voters reduce voter fraud?
• How does preventing students away at college, prevent voter fraud?
• How does making roadblocks to obtaining a proper ID preventing voter fraud?

I suspect, it is easier to buy a gun than to vote in many Red States. If voter fraud is so rampant why hasn't Congress issued a National ID card for free, or defined what is a legal form of ID for use in a National Election. Charging would be a poll tax, and if the Congress had taken this action the issue would be mute, and, would put Republican Governors in the spot light if they required different rules for local elections.

I don't think it should be all that EASY to register to vote or to vote. I want people who care about America and who have a clue what their vote means to be the ones who vote. I don't want people voting who have to be provided a name on a slip of paper and who are promised some kind of reward if they vote for that name to vote.

If having a photo ID is problematic for anybody, then let all those trying to sign up everybody and their dog as voters with the intention of telling them how to vote put their effort into providing a photo ID to the teensy number of people who for whatever reason don't have them. And then they can drive them to the city clerk's office so they can use that photo ID plus proof of residence to register.

People who can't be bothered with all that frankly have no business voting in the first place.

Wow, you clearly believe voting is a privilege not a right, and those you don't approve of should be denied the privilege to vote, especially those who can't be bothered?

You also believe those who work to get out the vote engage in a criminal conspiracy.

My opinion is that everyone who wants to vote has the right to vote, prior restraint has no business in the process. Let them vote, then, if an official at the polling place needs proof of the persons eligibility, the burden is on him to place a hold on the vote and the County/Parish Clerk will need to decide to allow the vote or provide evidence under penalty of perjury to the US Attorney, who must then prosecute the alleged offender in Federal Trial Court as well as anyone who conspired to defraud the election.

This ^^^ is the American method of jurisprudence, notwithstanding your opinion and bias.

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I doubt anyone - left or right - denies voter fraud exists. Voter fraud is not the issue, the issue is, is the solution to voter fraud worse than the crime?

• How does reducing polling places prevent voter fraud?
• How does moving polling places to greater distances from likely Democratic Voters reduce voter fraud?
• How does preventing students away at college, prevent voter fraud?
• How does making roadblocks to obtaining a proper ID preventing voter fraud?

I suspect, it is easier to buy a gun than to vote in many Red States. If voter fraud is so rampant why hasn't Congress issued a National ID card for free, or defined what is a legal form of ID for use in a National Election. Charging would be a poll tax, and if the Congress had taken this action the issue would be mute, and, would put Republican Governors in the spot light if they required different rules for local elections.

I don't think it should be all that EASY to register to vote or to vote. I want people who care about America and who have a clue what their vote means to be the ones who vote. I don't want people voting who have to be provided a name on a slip of paper and who are promised some kind of reward if they vote for that name to vote.

If having a photo ID is problematic for anybody, then let all those trying to sign up everybody and their dog as voters with the intention of telling them how to vote put their effort into providing a photo ID to the teensy number of people who for whatever reason don't have them. And then they can drive them to the city clerk's office so they can use that photo ID plus proof of residence to register.

People who can't be bothered with all that frankly have no business voting in the first place.

Wow, you clearly believe voting is a privilege not a right, and those you don't approve of should be denied the privilege to vote, especially those who can't be bothered?

You also believe those who work to get out the vote engage in a criminal conspiracy.

My opinion is that everyone who wants to vote has the right to vote, prior restraint has no business in the process. Let them vote, then, if an official at the polling place needs proof of the persons eligibility, the burden is on him to place a hold on the vote and the County/Parish Clerk will need to decide to allow the vote or provide evidence under penalty of perjury to the US Attorney, who must then prosecute the alleged offender in Federal Trial Court as well as anyone who conspired to defraud the election.

This ^^^ is the American method of jurisprudence, notwithstanding your opinion and bias.

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clrify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apologize to you.

PS I notice you have chosen not to comment on the bullet points, above, methods used by Republican Governors which have nothing to do with voter fraud.

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't think it should be all that EASY to register to vote or to vote. I want people who care about America and who have a clue what their vote means to be the ones who vote. I don't want people voting who have to be provided a name on a slip of paper and who are promised some kind of reward if they vote for that name to vote.

If having a photo ID is problematic for anybody, then let all those trying to sign up everybody and their dog as voters with the intention of telling them how to vote put their effort into providing a photo ID to the teensy number of people who for whatever reason don't have them. And then they can drive them to the city clerk's office so they can use that photo ID plus proof of residence to register.

People who can't be bothered with all that frankly have no business voting in the first place.

Wow, you clearly believe voting is a privilege not a right, and those you don't approve of should be denied the privilege to vote, especially those who can't be bothered?

You also believe those who work to get out the vote engage in a criminal conspiracy.

My opinion is that everyone who wants to vote has the right to vote, prior restraint has no business in the process. Let them vote, then, if an official at the polling place needs proof of the persons eligibility, the burden is on him to place a hold on the vote and the County/Parish Clerk will need to decide to allow the vote or provide evidence under penalty of perjury to the US Attorney, who must then prosecute the alleged offender in Federal Trial Court as well as anyone who conspired to defraud the election.

This ^^^ is the American method of jurisprudence, notwithstanding your opinion and bias.

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

 

[Nyvin]

Wow, you clearly believe voting is a privilege not a right, and those you don't approve of should be denied the privilege to vote, especially those who can't be bothered?

You also believe those who work to get out the vote engage in a criminal conspiracy.

My opinion is that everyone who wants to vote has the right to vote, prior restraint has no business in the process. Let them vote, then, if an official at the polling place needs proof of the persons eligibility, the burden is on him to place a hold on the vote and the County/Parish Clerk will need to decide to allow the vote or provide evidence under penalty of perjury to the US Attorney, who must then prosecute the alleged offender in Federal Trial Court as well as anyone who conspired to defraud the election.

This ^^^ is the American method of jurisprudence, notwithstanding your opinion and bias.

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Wow, you clearly believe voting is a privilege not a right, and those you don't approve of should be denied the privilege to vote, especially those who can't be bothered?

You also believe those who work to get out the vote engage in a criminal conspiracy.

My opinion is that everyone who wants to vote has the right to vote, prior restraint has no business in the process. Let them vote, then, if an official at the polling place needs proof of the persons eligibility, the burden is on him to place a hold on the vote and the County/Parish Clerk will need to decide to allow the vote or provide evidence under penalty of perjury to the US Attorney, who must then prosecute the alleged offender in Federal Trial Court as well as anyone who conspired to defraud the election.

This ^^^ is the American method of jurisprudence, notwithstanding your opinion and bias.

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

The issue is why some are not able to obtain a "POSITIVE" ID. Define positive, then consider how this has been manipulated by R. Governors - don't pretend to be stupid, this entire charade is a product of the Republican Party's difficulty in winning national elections.

Keep in mind, some are seniors, born at home and lack even a birth certificate - and have voted for years. Others are students residing out of state and some states do not hold a student ID as "positive".

Maybe we do need a new Constitution, one where the president and each member of congress are elected by popular vote, that would get rid of gerrymandering and the Electoral College. Of course that has nothing to do with voter fraud, since the ballot box can be stuffed or lost, and computer generated results hacked and changed.

Once again you have ignored the other ways in which the GOP has worked to keep voters from the polls. Why is that?

 

[Foxfyre]

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well if you think wanting an informed electorate and a fair and honest vote is bias and all the other uglies you accused me of in this post, what can I say? What should we say about those who seem to want to make it easier to commit voter fraud and who don't care if those who vote know who or what they are voting for?

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

The issue is why some are not able to obtain a "POSITIVE" ID. Define positive, then consider how this has been manipulated by R. Governors - don't pretend to be stupid, this entire charade is a product of the Republican Party's difficulty in winning national elections.

Keep in mind, some are seniors, born at home and lack even a birth certificate - and have voted for years. Others are students residing out of state and some states do not hold a student ID as "positive".

Maybe we do need a new Constitution, one where the president and each member of congress are elected by popular vote, that would get rid of gerrymandering and the Electoral College. Of course that has nothing to do with voter fraud, since the ballot box can be stuffed or lost, and computer generated results hacked and changed.

Once again you have ignored the other ways in which the GOP has worked to keep voters from the polls. Why is that?

I have ignored it because to think that is just too dumb to waste my time on.

 

[Care4all]

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

 

[Care4all]

In person voter fraud at the poll is the LEAST way voter fraud would take place...the absolute LEAST Foxfyre.

Your example of someone voting in the place of a dead man and his wife seeing his name signed off on at the Polling place could be solved completely, if the State removed dead people from the Voter list when they issue their state death certificate.

In addition to this, in the example of this that you gave is HIGHLY UNUSUAL...only a friend, relative, or neighbor would know that this man died, and would know this man's party affiliation and would know this dead man's address....so this man had criminal friends or criminal relatives or criminal neighbors.... that stole his identity at the Poll/voting place....no ifs, ands, of butts about it.

And this man thief going to the polling place, not knowing that the Mrs. of this dead man wouldn't be behind him in line at the voting place, or knowing that this dead man was not acquaintance with the woman manning the poll, or any other neighbor of the dead man was not in line behind him,....is a risk too GREAT for most criminals to take.

Can you TRULY not understand this?

IN PERSON voter fraud is not even 100th on a list of easy ways to commit voter fraud.

This is WHY we KNOW the Republican dogma on Gvt issued Photo ID's MANDATORY at the polling place is merely to DISENFRANCHISE legitimate citizen voters that they believe will vote for Democratic politicians.

We are ON TO YOU, (Republicans) and you can't fool us or baffle us with your bull crud.

Voter fraud takes place, in big numbers, with unaudited electronic voting, with absentee ballots, with gerrymandering.....etc etc etc, but in person voter fraud, registers nil on the richter scale...

it's too hard to do at the polling precinct because you have to know a person's name, a persons address, and their party affiliation which is all asked by the worker manning the list of registered voters at the poll, you have to know the person the perp is trying to impersonate is not in line behind him, or his wife or sister or cousin is not manning the poll as a volunteer, or the coworker or kids or neighbor is not behind you in line and the risk of getting caught is nearly 100%.....

absentee ballot would be a way to go that would be easier and less risky.

 

[rightwinger]

Woman standing in line behind my sister to vote in the Bronx, "This is my sixth vote today"

My Sister went to vote in Texas and she heard the registrar whisper.....here comes a negro, don't let her vote

 

[jasonnfree]

The right wing never lists the number of voters prosecuted for voter fraud. Probably because they can't seem to find any that were prosecuted. C'mon repubs, give us the list you're hiding from us.
Below is a link of some republicans who might have voted fraudulently including
Ann Coulter and the Mittster.

Did Mitt Romney Ann Coulter Jon Huntsman Commit Voter Fraud Alternet

 

[Foxfyre]

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

 

[jasonnfree]

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

Waiting for that list of ineligible voters that throw elections. I gave you romney and coulter. Why haven't they been prosecuted yet?

 

[Foxfyre]

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

Waiting for that list of ineligible voters that throw elections. I gave you romney and coulter. Why haven't they been prosecuted yet?

Oh I don't know. Probably because they aren't guilty of anything prosecutable?

 

[jasonnfree]

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

Waiting for that list of ineligible voters that throw elections. I gave you romney and coulter. Why haven't they been prosecuted yet?

Oh I don't know. Probably because they aren't guilty of anything prosecutable?

I'm giving you a couple people who voted fraudulently and you've come up with not one person who has voted fraudulently. Probably because mitt has clout is my answer. Waiting for the list of fraudsters that keep you awake at night.

Did Mitt Romney Commit Voter Fraud Mother Jones

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

Waiting for that list of ineligible voters that throw elections. I gave you romney and coulter. Why haven't they been prosecuted yet?

Oh I don't know. Probably because they aren't guilty of anything prosecutable?

I'm giving you a couple people who voted fraudulently and you've come up with not one person who has voted fraudulently. Probably because mitt has clout is my answer. Waiting for the list of fraudsters that keep you awake at night.

Did Mitt Romney Commit Voter Fraud Mother Jones

Some people like to throw stuff at the wall to see if anything sticks--they don't care if they are falsely accusing somebody. And they are just as dishonest in their personal insults and ad hominem arguments. And some things are just too dumb to merit a response. Do have a nice day.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Gee, innocent until proven guilty is an ideal you oppose. Yes, that does make you ugly, if not an American.

Personally insulting and with a reading comprehension dysfunction too. Do you hear voices that aren't there as well as seeing words that aren't written? Have you considered consulting somebody about that?

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

The issue is why some are not able to obtain a "POSITIVE" ID. Define positive, then consider how this has been manipulated by R. Governors - don't pretend to be stupid, this entire charade is a product of the Republican Party's difficulty in winning national elections.

Keep in mind, some are seniors, born at home and lack even a birth certificate - and have voted for years. Others are students residing out of state and some states do not hold a student ID as "positive".

Maybe we do need a new Constitution, one where the president and each member of congress are elected by popular vote, that would get rid of gerrymandering and the Electoral College. Of course that has nothing to do with voter fraud, since the ballot box can be stuffed or lost, and computer generated results hacked and changed.

Once again you have ignored the other ways in which the GOP has worked to keep voters from the polls. Why is that?

I have ignored it because to think that is just too dumb to waste my time on.

You have no credibility and have offered nothing on this thread that is not the prevalent meme of the right, aka parroting.

 

[Wry Catcher]

What part are you suggesting I did not comprehend? I simply inferred from your biased opinion that anyone who could not obtain a proper ID was guilty of voter fraud, and thus should be denied the right to vote. If that is not your opinion, please clerify and if warranted I will offer my mea culpa and apoligize to you.

Well get your rmea culpa out there then because I have not said that, I did not say that, and I would not say that. But for sure anybody who is unable to obtain positive ID shouldn't be allowed to vote. That is only common sense. The federal law specifies eligibility to vote as those who are 18 years of age and U.S. citizen and legally registered plus some other requirements related to certain types of election. How in the world can a person who cannot show positive ID demonstrate that he or she is legally eligible to vote?

They prove their identity when they register, why do you need them to prove it again when they go to the polling station?

Foxfyre
To verify that the person who registered is the same person who votes.

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

You don't want a fair and honest vote, nor does the GOP. But keep on parroting the usual lies, half-truths, rumors, innuendos and character assassinations of conservative talking heads and the mendacious tanks owned by the Koch Brothers. Lincoln was spot on when he said:

"You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time."

Abraham Lincoln​

Read more at You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but... - Abraham Lincoln at BrainyQuote

"Some" of the people seem to dominate the conservative right, those who post Idiot-Grams along with their parroted lines.

 

[jasonnfree]

You can do that by them showing their voters registration card, or by them showing their latest pay stub or showing an electric bill with name and address....

Insisting that all must have Gvt photo ID is absolutely NOT NECESSARY at all to do that verification so the ulterior motive is NOT to verify the person voting is the person registered.

If people are required to register in person with a government official and shows photo ID and proof of residency etc. to register, then I have no problem with a voter registration card as proof of identity to vote. Realistically though, there is no reason that a photo ID requirement would disenfranchise anybody at the polling place and people are far more likely to have that always on their person while you use a voter registration card once every two years and it is far easier to misplace that. Those who accuse those of us who want a fair and honest vote of wanting to keep people from voting, you're right. We don't want people voting who are not legally entitled to cast that vote. But to accuse us of trying to keep citizens from casting an honest vote is mean spirited, dishonest, and just wrong.

We can as easily say that those who don't want any proof of identity to vote want a rigged election, want fraud and corruption in the process. Wouldn't you object to that characterization?

Waiting for that list of ineligible voters that throw elections. I gave you romney and coulter. Why haven't they been prosecuted yet?

Oh I don't know. Probably because they aren't guilty of anything prosecutable?

I'm giving you a couple people who voted fraudulently and you've come up with not one person who has voted fraudulently. Probably because mitt has clout is my answer. Waiting for the list of fraudsters that keep you awake at night.

Did Mitt Romney Commit Voter Fraud Mother Jones

Some people like to throw stuff at the wall to see if anything sticks--they don't care if they are falsely accusing somebody. And they are just as dishonest in their personal insults and ad hominem arguments. And some things are just too dumb to merit a response. Do have a nice day.

Well I threw threw names out there where there was questionable voting. I'm still waiting for the names of all those people voting illegally. Or just one or two. Surely there must be some prosecutions as evidence of voter fraud in large (or small) numbers. Illegal voting is one of many fears conservatives/republican live under, at least the ones posting here.