Philly Election Officials Charged With Voter Fraud

[Rexx Taylor]

Preserving the integrity and authenticity of the US vote ought to be supported by both extreme lefties and right wingers alike. Validation and authentication is key. These factors are already paramount in order to receive Government services and have access to government buildings; namely, in the form of State issued ID as one of the validation mediums..... Hardly disenfranchisement or oppressing.

Democrats dont care about integrity or authenticity. They've proven that much.

with a democrat governor, you think that republicans will be watching all of the blue precincts in 2016?

You really are that stupid, aren't you.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

just once i wish many of the blue districts in purple states would call their votes in before the red districts. it seems way too often that the GOP candidate is ahead by 1/2/3 points, and then the blue districts call in the votes and the Democrat wins. and remember that district that had "0" votes from Romney?

 

[JoshuaZ]

just once i wish many of the blue districts in purple states would call their votes in before the red districts. it seems way too often that the GOP candidate is ahead by 1/2/3 points, and then the blue districts call in the votes and the Democrat wins.

What you are seeing is that urban areas are generally bluer. Urban areas have more voters and often more people per a voting district so it takes more time for them to finish voting.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

just once i wish many of the blue districts in purple states would call their votes in before the red districts. it seems way too often that the GOP candidate is ahead by 1/2/3 points, and then the blue districts call in the votes and the Democrat wins.

What you are seeing is that urban areas are generally bluer. Urban areas have more voters and often more people per a voting district so it takes more time for them to finish voting.

but of course, but the average american never trusts the areas that are heavily populated for an accurate/honest result. Philly in particular is one metropolis where no one trusts the numbers. I have heard so many stories of districts that have more adults registered than living in the actual district.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The amount of RWNJ stupid on this thread is so large, it may indeed cause USMB to crash.

cereal_killer - did you improve the structural integrity of the USMB force fields? You are going to need it.

 

[LeftofLeft]

One illegal vote is one too many. It fraudulently cancels out the legitimate vote of someone else. Voter ID may be part of the authenticity. Perhaps authentication verification and additional steps comes on behalf of local election commissions with checks and balances.

So disenfranchising a hundred thousand is worth stopping one illegal vote?

Who where and how are you getting 100k voters being disenfranchised? Do you make them up? We are talking about authentication of the voter. Simple.

 

[Darkwind]

In fact, they don't. Why not do some research on voter ID in other nations and get back to us.

Funny you should say that. Why don't you go look to the reply to The Rabbi [sic] above about how actual examples. Voter ID in the US has a different impact than it does in Europe because getting IDs takes money here (whereas it generally doesn't in many European countries), and this is compounded by other barriers in the US, such as not having a universal government ID and having election day not be a holiday.

Are you going to be dishonest in our entire exchange? I need to know now so I can decide whether or not to ignore you from here on out.

Everywhere voter ID was proposed, free ID's were part of the legislation.

So tell Me. If I require EVERYONE to show an ID to get...oh, lets say welfare........who am I disenfranchising?

See the reply to The Rabbi[sic] above, which answers the same thing (and has the same basic response about apparently wanting to assume that people who disagree with you must be lying and why that's not generally helpful).

It has been proven time and again that no one is disenfranchised because they don't have an ID, and each time that the left says that people can't afford it, they simply ignore the basic fact that each time the ID is provided free of charge. When you are told that the ID's are free, and you continue to say, "But if they have to pay for them...." You are being dishonest. Basic comprehension skills.

Yet they seem to be able to produce that same ID for a check from the government.

So, answer My question.


If I require EVERYONE to show an ID to get...oh, lets say welfare........who am I disenfranchising?

Why don't you read the sources I linked to? There are a lot of people of low income who don't have IDs but aren't on wellfare, or are people are on social security. And many states have less strict ID requirements for welfare than they have for voting. Please read the sources given.

If they are on welfare without some form of ID, they are doing so fraudulently. No one can just walk into a state aid agency and say I need help and they are given that help without first proving who they are, why they need help, and the availability of other resources.

Here is an idea. Go research what is needed to get government assistance.

 

[JoshuaZ]

Funny you should say that. Why don't you go look to the reply to The Rabbi [sic] above about how actual examples. Voter ID in the US has a different impact than it does in Europe because getting IDs takes money here (whereas it generally doesn't in many European countries), and this is compounded by other barriers in the US, such as not having a universal government ID and having election day not be a holiday.

Are you going to be dishonest in our entire exchange? I need to know now so I can decide whether or not to ignore you from here on out.

Everywhere voter ID was proposed, free ID's were part of the legislation.

So tell Me. If I require EVERYONE to show an ID to get...oh, lets say welfare........who am I disenfranchising?

See the reply to The Rabbi[sic] above, which answers the same thing (and has the same basic response about apparently wanting to assume that people who disagree with you must be lying and why that's not generally helpful).

It has been proven time and again that no one is disenfranchised because they don't have an ID, and each time that the left says that people can't afford it, they simply ignore the basic fact that each time the ID is provided free of charge. When you are told that the ID's are free, and you continue to say, "But if they have to pay for them...." You are being dishonest. Basic comprehension skills.

Yet they seem to be able to produce that same ID for a check from the government.

So, answer My question.


If I require EVERYONE to show an ID to get...oh, lets say welfare........who am I disenfranchising?

Why don't you read the sources I linked to? There are a lot of people of low income who don't have IDs but aren't on wellfare, or are people are on social security. And many states have less strict ID requirements for welfare than they have for voting. Please read the sources given.

If they are on welfare without some form of ID, they are doing so fraudulently. No one can just walk into a state aid agency and say I need help and they are given that help without first proving who they are, why they need help, and the availability of other resources.

Here is an idea. Go research what is needed to get government assistance.

Missing the point. Many states have different standards for what ID is needed for welfare from what standard is needed for voting- I stated that explicitly and you ignored it. But you also ignored completely the rest of my comment, that there are people who aren't on welfare who are low income, as well as people who are on social security. Why don't you respond to the issues I actually raised rather than a strawman?