Rigged Elections and Voter Fraud - how common is fraud? Not very.

[Tilly]

I personally believe it is seriously egregious to disenfranchise the single person who made the effort to honestly vote by allowing that persons vote to be nullified by fraudulent voting. The person who makes the effort to vote honestly should be more valued.
If such people begin to believe that not only does the system make a mockery of one person one vote, but fraud does too, well, we would all be justified in thinking 'why bother'?
And there where would we be. Fraud cannot be tolerated.

 

[OKTexas]

That one guy is not alone, a female illegal was just caught here in TX, she registered and voted multiple times before getting caught. Now answer my question, how many more are out there like them?

And I answered you gun grabber, not very many.

How many mass shooters are out there? Guess we better grab all the guns, 'cause you never know. Gun grabber logic.

How many mass shootings have gone undetected for years? Come on knucklehead, you want to go there, let's go.

What does that matter? You want to disenfranchise thousands to stop dozens. Gun grabbers want to take guns from law abiding citizens to stop mass shootings. You're both equally wrong.

You claim only dozens, prove that claim. You claim thousands are being disenfranchised, yet voting continues to set records for participation, even in the States that have ID requirements. Show me one example were a States participation has declined due to ID requirements.

Yes, thousands would be disenfranchised if the restrictive types of ID the GOP run states implement we're in place in all states. Fortunately, many states take the right to vote seriously and don't set out to disenfranchise voters like many GOP run states do.

It has already been proven that voter fraud is extremely rare.

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

 

[Seawytch]

And I answered you gun grabber, not very many.

How many mass shooters are out there? Guess we better grab all the guns, 'cause you never know. Gun grabber logic.

How many mass shootings have gone undetected for years? Come on knucklehead, you want to go there, let's go.

What does that matter? You want to disenfranchise thousands to stop dozens. Gun grabbers want to take guns from law abiding citizens to stop mass shootings. You're both equally wrong.

You claim only dozens, prove that claim. You claim thousands are being disenfranchised, yet voting continues to set records for participation, even in the States that have ID requirements. Show me one example were a States participation has declined due to ID requirements.

Yes, thousands would be disenfranchised if the restrictive types of ID the GOP run states implement we're in place in all states. Fortunately, many states take the right to vote seriously and don't set out to disenfranchise voters like many GOP run states do.

It has already been proven that voter fraud is extremely rare.

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

There you go with your gun grabber logic again. We don't know how many mass shooters there are out there just waiting to shoot up a middle school. Better take all the guns...

And yes, participation fell among minorities.

After controlling for all these factors, they found "substantial drops in turnout for minorities under strict voter ID laws." Their analysis suggests that turnout for Latino voters was suppressed by 10.8 points in states with strict photo ID laws, compared to states without them. For multiracial Americans, the drop was 12.8 points.

The laws also increased the participation gap between whites and non-whites. "For Latinos in the general election, the predicted gap from whites doubled from 5.3 points in states without strict photo ID laws to 11.9 in states with strict photo ID laws," the study found. For black voters in the primaries, the strict photo ID laws caused the gap with white voters to almost double to 8.5 points.

The net effect of all this? "Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place." Democrats weren't the only ones affected, either. The data showed that Republican turnout was depressed by 4.6 percentage points too.

New evidence that voter ID laws ‘skew democracy’ in favor of white Republicans​

 

[OKTexas]

How many mass shootings have gone undetected for years? Come on knucklehead, you want to go there, let's go.

What does that matter? You want to disenfranchise thousands to stop dozens. Gun grabbers want to take guns from law abiding citizens to stop mass shootings. You're both equally wrong.

You claim only dozens, prove that claim. You claim thousands are being disenfranchised, yet voting continues to set records for participation, even in the States that have ID requirements. Show me one example were a States participation has declined due to ID requirements.

Yes, thousands would be disenfranchised if the restrictive types of ID the GOP run states implement we're in place in all states. Fortunately, many states take the right to vote seriously and don't set out to disenfranchise voters like many GOP run states do.

It has already been proven that voter fraud is extremely rare.

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

There you go with your gun grabber logic again. We don't know how many mass shooters there are out there just waiting to shoot up a middle school. Better take all the guns...

And yes, participation fell among minorities.

After controlling for all these factors, they found "substantial drops in turnout for minorities under strict voter ID laws." Their analysis suggests that turnout for Latino voters was suppressed by 10.8 points in states with strict photo ID laws, compared to states without them. For multiracial Americans, the drop was 12.8 points.

The laws also increased the participation gap between whites and non-whites. "For Latinos in the general election, the predicted gap from whites doubled from 5.3 points in states without strict photo ID laws to 11.9 in states with strict photo ID laws," the study found. For black voters in the primaries, the strict photo ID laws caused the gap with white voters to almost double to 8.5 points.

The net effect of all this? "Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place." Democrats weren't the only ones affected, either. The data showed that Republican turnout was depressed by 4.6 percentage points too.

New evidence that voter ID laws ‘skew democracy’ in favor of white Republicans​

Seems USGAO has different views.

GAO did not find consistent reductions in turnout among Asian-American or Hispanic registrants compared to White registrants, thus suggesting that the laws did not have larger effects among these subgroups.

Elections: Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws [Reissued on February 27, 2015]

And as far as your link goes, a gap between 1% and 11%, how can you call a study scientific with built in possibilities of error of between 100% and 1,000%?

 

[Seawytch]

What does that matter? You want to disenfranchise thousands to stop dozens. Gun grabbers want to take guns from law abiding citizens to stop mass shootings. You're both equally wrong.

You claim only dozens, prove that claim. You claim thousands are being disenfranchised, yet voting continues to set records for participation, even in the States that have ID requirements. Show me one example were a States participation has declined due to ID requirements.

Yes, thousands would be disenfranchised if the restrictive types of ID the GOP run states implement we're in place in all states. Fortunately, many states take the right to vote seriously and don't set out to disenfranchise voters like many GOP run states do.

It has already been proven that voter fraud is extremely rare.

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

There you go with your gun grabber logic again. We don't know how many mass shooters there are out there just waiting to shoot up a middle school. Better take all the guns...

And yes, participation fell among minorities.

After controlling for all these factors, they found "substantial drops in turnout for minorities under strict voter ID laws." Their analysis suggests that turnout for Latino voters was suppressed by 10.8 points in states with strict photo ID laws, compared to states without them. For multiracial Americans, the drop was 12.8 points.

The laws also increased the participation gap between whites and non-whites. "For Latinos in the general election, the predicted gap from whites doubled from 5.3 points in states without strict photo ID laws to 11.9 in states with strict photo ID laws," the study found. For black voters in the primaries, the strict photo ID laws caused the gap with white voters to almost double to 8.5 points.

The net effect of all this? "Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place." Democrats weren't the only ones affected, either. The data showed that Republican turnout was depressed by 4.6 percentage points too.

New evidence that voter ID laws ‘skew democracy’ in favor of white Republicans​

Seems USGAO has different views.

GAO did not find consistent reductions in turnout among Asian-American or Hispanic registrants compared to White registrants, thus suggesting that the laws did not have larger effects among these subgroups.

Elections: Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws [Reissued on February 27, 2015]

And as far as your link goes, a gap between 1% and 11%, how can you call a study scientific with built in possibilities of error of between 100% and 1,000%?

You didn't read my link. People's with gun grabbing mentality do that...

The findings are notable because they're some of the first using data in elections that took place after some states implemented photo ID requirements to vote. Previous studies on the effects of these laws showed mixed results. A 2014 report by the Government Accountability Office examined 10 of these studies. Five showed no significant effect of voter ID laws on turnout, four found a significant decrease in turnout, and one found, paradoxically, that the laws increased turnout.

But each of these 10 studies was of general elections that took place before 2008. Most of the strictest ID laws were passed after that, so the ability of earlier research to gauge the impact of these laws is extremely limited.

 

[OKTexas]

You claim only dozens, prove that claim. You claim thousands are being disenfranchised, yet voting continues to set records for participation, even in the States that have ID requirements. Show me one example were a States participation has declined due to ID requirements.

Yes, thousands would be disenfranchised if the restrictive types of ID the GOP run states implement we're in place in all states. Fortunately, many states take the right to vote seriously and don't set out to disenfranchise voters like many GOP run states do.

It has already been proven that voter fraud is extremely rare.

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

There you go with your gun grabber logic again. We don't know how many mass shooters there are out there just waiting to shoot up a middle school. Better take all the guns...

And yes, participation fell among minorities.

After controlling for all these factors, they found "substantial drops in turnout for minorities under strict voter ID laws." Their analysis suggests that turnout for Latino voters was suppressed by 10.8 points in states with strict photo ID laws, compared to states without them. For multiracial Americans, the drop was 12.8 points.

The laws also increased the participation gap between whites and non-whites. "For Latinos in the general election, the predicted gap from whites doubled from 5.3 points in states without strict photo ID laws to 11.9 in states with strict photo ID laws," the study found. For black voters in the primaries, the strict photo ID laws caused the gap with white voters to almost double to 8.5 points.

The net effect of all this? "Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place." Democrats weren't the only ones affected, either. The data showed that Republican turnout was depressed by 4.6 percentage points too.

New evidence that voter ID laws ‘skew democracy’ in favor of white Republicans​

Seems USGAO has different views.

GAO did not find consistent reductions in turnout among Asian-American or Hispanic registrants compared to White registrants, thus suggesting that the laws did not have larger effects among these subgroups.

Elections: Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws [Reissued on February 27, 2015]

And as far as your link goes, a gap between 1% and 11%, how can you call a study scientific with built in possibilities of error of between 100% and 1,000%?

You didn't read my link. People's with gun grabbing mentality do that...

The findings are notable because they're some of the first using data in elections that took place after some states implemented photo ID requirements to vote. Previous studies on the effects of these laws showed mixed results. A 2014 report by the Government Accountability Office examined 10 of these studies. Five showed no significant effect of voter ID laws on turnout, four found a significant decrease in turnout, and one found, paradoxically, that the laws increased turnout.

But each of these 10 studies was of general elections that took place before 2008. Most of the strictest ID laws were passed after that, so the ability of earlier research to gauge the impact of these laws is extremely limited.

Fuck you and your intellectually dishonest gun grabber bullshit. I did read your stupid link, I seriously doubt you read mine. If you had you would have seen that it was updated last year. Now why don't you address the inconsistent results of your link and their wide ranging percentages.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, thousands would be disenfranchised if the restrictive types of ID the GOP run states implement we're in place in all states. Fortunately, many states take the right to vote seriously and don't set out to disenfranchise voters like many GOP run states do.

It has already been proven that voter fraud is extremely rare.

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

There you go with your gun grabber logic again. We don't know how many mass shooters there are out there just waiting to shoot up a middle school. Better take all the guns...

And yes, participation fell among minorities.

After controlling for all these factors, they found "substantial drops in turnout for minorities under strict voter ID laws." Their analysis suggests that turnout for Latino voters was suppressed by 10.8 points in states with strict photo ID laws, compared to states without them. For multiracial Americans, the drop was 12.8 points.

The laws also increased the participation gap between whites and non-whites. "For Latinos in the general election, the predicted gap from whites doubled from 5.3 points in states without strict photo ID laws to 11.9 in states with strict photo ID laws," the study found. For black voters in the primaries, the strict photo ID laws caused the gap with white voters to almost double to 8.5 points.

The net effect of all this? "Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place." Democrats weren't the only ones affected, either. The data showed that Republican turnout was depressed by 4.6 percentage points too.

New evidence that voter ID laws ‘skew democracy’ in favor of white Republicans​

Seems USGAO has different views.

GAO did not find consistent reductions in turnout among Asian-American or Hispanic registrants compared to White registrants, thus suggesting that the laws did not have larger effects among these subgroups.

Elections: Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws [Reissued on February 27, 2015]

And as far as your link goes, a gap between 1% and 11%, how can you call a study scientific with built in possibilities of error of between 100% and 1,000%?

You didn't read my link. People's with gun grabbing mentality do that...

The findings are notable because they're some of the first using data in elections that took place after some states implemented photo ID requirements to vote. Previous studies on the effects of these laws showed mixed results. A 2014 report by the Government Accountability Office examined 10 of these studies. Five showed no significant effect of voter ID laws on turnout, four found a significant decrease in turnout, and one found, paradoxically, that the laws increased turnout.

But each of these 10 studies was of general elections that took place before 2008. Most of the strictest ID laws were passed after that, so the ability of earlier research to gauge the impact of these laws is extremely limited.

Fuck you and your intellectually dishonest gun grabber bullshit. I did read your stupid link, I seriously doubt you read mine. If you had you would have seen that it was updated last year. Now why don't you address the inconsistent results of your link and their wide ranging percentages.

There is no inconsistency. There are a far greater number of people disenfranchised by these laws than there are people stopped from committing fraud by them.

If you don't like being told you're using gun grabber logic, stop using it.

 

[OKTexas]

No you've proven people getting caught is extremely rare, not that fraud is. So you can't name a single State were voter participation fell after ID laws were implemented? Didn't think so.

There you go with your gun grabber logic again. We don't know how many mass shooters there are out there just waiting to shoot up a middle school. Better take all the guns...

And yes, participation fell among minorities.

After controlling for all these factors, they found "substantial drops in turnout for minorities under strict voter ID laws." Their analysis suggests that turnout for Latino voters was suppressed by 10.8 points in states with strict photo ID laws, compared to states without them. For multiracial Americans, the drop was 12.8 points.

The laws also increased the participation gap between whites and non-whites. "For Latinos in the general election, the predicted gap from whites doubled from 5.3 points in states without strict photo ID laws to 11.9 in states with strict photo ID laws," the study found. For black voters in the primaries, the strict photo ID laws caused the gap with white voters to almost double to 8.5 points.

The net effect of all this? "Democratic turnout drops by an estimated 7.7 percentage points in general elections when strict photo identification laws are in place." Democrats weren't the only ones affected, either. The data showed that Republican turnout was depressed by 4.6 percentage points too.

New evidence that voter ID laws ‘skew democracy’ in favor of white Republicans​

Seems USGAO has different views.

GAO did not find consistent reductions in turnout among Asian-American or Hispanic registrants compared to White registrants, thus suggesting that the laws did not have larger effects among these subgroups.

Elections: Issues Related to State Voter Identification Laws [Reissued on February 27, 2015]

And as far as your link goes, a gap between 1% and 11%, how can you call a study scientific with built in possibilities of error of between 100% and 1,000%?

You didn't read my link. People's with gun grabbing mentality do that...

The findings are notable because they're some of the first using data in elections that took place after some states implemented photo ID requirements to vote. Previous studies on the effects of these laws showed mixed results. A 2014 report by the Government Accountability Office examined 10 of these studies. Five showed no significant effect of voter ID laws on turnout, four found a significant decrease in turnout, and one found, paradoxically, that the laws increased turnout.

But each of these 10 studies was of general elections that took place before 2008. Most of the strictest ID laws were passed after that, so the ability of earlier research to gauge the impact of these laws is extremely limited.

Fuck you and your intellectually dishonest gun grabber bullshit. I did read your stupid link, I seriously doubt you read mine. If you had you would have seen that it was updated last year. Now why don't you address the inconsistent results of your link and their wide ranging percentages.

There is no inconsistency. There are a far greater number of people disenfranchised by these laws than there are people stopped from committing fraud by them.

If you don't like being told you're using gun grabber logic, stop using it.

I'm not using gun grabber logic, you are. You're the one making assumptions you can't back up.

 

[Ame®icano]

Nobody said anything about "letting it happen". What they are saying is that you don't disenfranchise thousands to stop dozens. And it's not the ID that is the problem, it's the narrow and restrictive nature of the ID required that disenfranchises people.

If the law is the same for everyone, nobody is getting disfranchised.

What's narrow and restrictive about having ID?

Only US citizens should have US ID. Foreigners can use their passports for their ID. They can drive with international DL.

 

[Ame®icano]

Its happening.

Rigged voting machine

 

[thereisnospoon]

Here are a few examples of KNOWN voter fraud-

Dead People Registering? Examples of Voter Fraud in Key Swing States

In Harrisonburg, Virginia, the FBI and local authorities are investigating after 20 dead people re-registered to vote this year.

Also, a study found more than 1,000 non-citizens in Virginia are registered to vote. Riddell pointed out that the study did not even include Fairfax County and Arlington County, areas of northern Virginia which drive Democrat votes.

In Pennsylvania, Riddell said more than 43,000 voters may be registered twice while the secretary of state there said more than 700 Pennsylvania voters might have cast two ballots in recent elections.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/10/heres-what-voter-fraud-looks-like-in-23-
states-2/

Report: Suspected Mall Gunman, a Non-Citizen, Voted in 3 Elections in Washington

It does make one wonder how often it happens and is not discovered. I hear some very silly people suggest that there is no evidence that voter fraud has ever altered the outcome of an election and therefore is not a real issue or concern. Any reasonable person would never take such an obviously failed position, because taking to the logical conclusion attempted murder would never be prosecuted. Afterall, if you tried but didn't kill, then no harm, no foul. Right? Voter fraud exist an should carry extreme punishment, not to mention torture in my opinion.

Your first link is a spam factory and the 2nd is not in person fraud.

So your opinion is there is no voter fraud. I'll bet you sung a different tune when GW Bush got the hanging chad vote in Florida.

Nope, didn't say there was none, just rare...so rare you can't find any instances of in person fraud.

Oh right, except my state has prosecuted and convicted two, they were just the ones that were caught.

So link to these two convictions of in person voting fraud.

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

 

[thereisnospoon]

Isn't Charlie a tuna? Also have you checked the instructions for people who claim not to have an ID?

https://www.eac.gov/assets/1/Documents/Federal Voter Registration_6-25-14_ENG.pdf

Yes, and? Read the NVRA. Voters who don't provide ID at the time of registration are asked to show ID when they vote.

Funny, in my link, the instructions say if you don't have ID you will be given a unique voter identification number, the is no mention of requiring ID to vote.

And I told you those requirements are in the NVRA. The form you linked to is a NATIONAL form. ID requirements vary from state to state.

Do I need to show proof of identification when I vote if I registered using the National Form?

If you are voting for the first time in your state and are registering by mail, Federal law may require you to show proof of identification the first time you vote. This proof of identification includes the following (or if voting by mail, a COPY of the following):

• A current and valid photo identification; OR
  
  
• A current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or government document that shows your name and address.

Federal law does not require you to show proof of identification at the polling place or when voting by mail if (1) you provided COPIES of the above with your National Mail Voter Registration Form; (2) your voter registration form has been verified by an election official; or (3) you are entitled by federal law to vote by absentee ballot. Please note that individual states may have additional voter identification requirements.

It says federal law MAY require, and a utility bill as identification, REALLY? Virtually every illegal in the country pays utility bills of some nature, that's not proof of citizenship.

No, they aren't usually on the bills. In order to get a public utility you have to go through a credit check which requires providing a social security number and having your credit checked. People here illegally aren't going around establishing credit.

People who are here illegally are not registering to vote on purpose. They do, on occasion, register accidentally. In my ten years as a registrar I've had to send two letters to Immigration in San Francisco for two individual registered to vote in my county who were trying to get their citizenship. The first man got registered through no fault of his own. He actually said "no" to the question "are you a citizen" but it was missed by the registration staff. He never voted in the 6 years he was registered to vote. The 2nd young man came here as a child and registered during a drive in his High School. He also never voted.

Let me ask you a question. How many people are you willing to disenfranchise to stop one person from casting a vote they are not entitled to cast? We know that restrictive voter ID laws disenfranchise minorities, the poor and the elderly. Anywhere from 1% to 12% of voters don't have the type of ID required to vote in some states and yet voter fraud is closer to 0% than 1%. Why are you willing to disenfranchise thousands of voters in order to stop one case of fraud? (and not even one case, more like one quarter of one case)

Do these words:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged"

mean something different when passed through your filter? What do they mean to you?

They don't mean much without "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude".

Thank you for supplying the entire sentence of the 15th amendment, Americano sneaky ain't they ;-)

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

Just a minute.. Are you implying the right to vote is absolute?
"We know that restrictive voter ID laws disenfranchise minorities, the poor and the elderly."
That is nothing more than a left wing narrative. A narrative created to make sure there would be little chance of voter ID laws being enacted....
BTW who is "we"?
You claimed some kind of status as a poll worker. I submit that as a stern hardline partisan, you and anyone no matter their affiliation who holds extreme views in their politics should be barred from the process. Partisans cannot be trusted. Left or right...
I have been approached to work our local polling place. I declined. While I believe I can set aside my political views, I believe it is best to cast my vote, support the candidates of my choosing and move on.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes, and? Read the NVRA. Voters who don't provide ID at the time of registration are asked to show ID when they vote.

Funny, in my link, the instructions say if you don't have ID you will be given a unique voter identification number, the is no mention of requiring ID to vote.

And I told you those requirements are in the NVRA. The form you linked to is a NATIONAL form. ID requirements vary from state to state.

Do I need to show proof of identification when I vote if I registered using the National Form?

If you are voting for the first time in your state and are registering by mail, Federal law may require you to show proof of identification the first time you vote. This proof of identification includes the following (or if voting by mail, a COPY of the following):

• A current and valid photo identification; OR
  
  
• A current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or government document that shows your name and address.

Federal law does not require you to show proof of identification at the polling place or when voting by mail if (1) you provided COPIES of the above with your National Mail Voter Registration Form; (2) your voter registration form has been verified by an election official; or (3) you are entitled by federal law to vote by absentee ballot. Please note that individual states may have additional voter identification requirements.

It says federal law MAY require, and a utility bill as identification, REALLY? Virtually every illegal in the country pays utility bills of some nature, that's not proof of citizenship.

No, they aren't usually on the bills. In order to get a public utility you have to go through a credit check which requires providing a social security number and having your credit checked. People here illegally aren't going around establishing credit.

People who are here illegally are not registering to vote on purpose. They do, on occasion, register accidentally. In my ten years as a registrar I've had to send two letters to Immigration in San Francisco for two individual registered to vote in my county who were trying to get their citizenship. The first man got registered through no fault of his own. He actually said "no" to the question "are you a citizen" but it was missed by the registration staff. He never voted in the 6 years he was registered to vote. The 2nd young man came here as a child and registered during a drive in his High School. He also never voted.

Let me ask you a question. How many people are you willing to disenfranchise to stop one person from casting a vote they are not entitled to cast? We know that restrictive voter ID laws disenfranchise minorities, the poor and the elderly. Anywhere from 1% to 12% of voters don't have the type of ID required to vote in some states and yet voter fraud is closer to 0% than 1%. Why are you willing to disenfranchise thousands of voters in order to stop one case of fraud? (and not even one case, more like one quarter of one case)

Do these words:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged"

mean something different when passed through your filter? What do they mean to you?

They don't mean much without "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude".

Thank you for supplying the entire sentence of the 15th amendment, Americano sneaky ain't they ;-)

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

Just a minute.. Are you implying the right to vote is absolute?
"We know that restrictive voter ID laws disenfranchise minorities, the poor and the elderly."
That is nothing more than a left wing narrative. A narrative created to make sure there would be little chance of voter ID laws being enacted....
BTW who is "we"?
You claimed some kind of status as a poll worker. I submit that as a stern hardline partisan, you and anyone no matter their affiliation who holds extreme views in their politics should be barred from the process. Partisans cannot be trusted. Left or right...
I have been approached to work our local polling place. I declined. While I believe I can set aside my political views, I believe it is best to cast my vote, support the candidates of my choosing and move on.

No right is "absolute".

I'm not a poll-worker, I work full time at a registrars office and I'm a registered no party preference voter.

I treat ALL my voters equally. If you asked the party chairs in my county, of both parties, who they believe has the most integrity in my office and who they like best dealing with, it would be me.

 

[Seawytch]

Your first link is a spam factory and the 2nd is not in person fraud.

So your opinion is there is no voter fraud. I'll bet you sung a different tune when GW Bush got the hanging chad vote in Florida.

Nope, didn't say there was none, just rare...so rare you can't find any instances of in person fraud.

Oh right, except my state has prosecuted and convicted two, they were just the ones that were caught.

So link to these two convictions of in person voting fraud.

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

 

[OKTexas]

So your opinion is there is no voter fraud. I'll bet you sung a different tune when GW Bush got the hanging chad vote in Florida.

Nope, didn't say there was none, just rare...so rare you can't find any instances of in person fraud.

Oh right, except my state has prosecuted and convicted two, they were just the ones that were caught.

So link to these two convictions of in person voting fraud.

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

I must have missed your request for a link of impersonation fraud in TX. I found I was wrong about the 2 convictions, it was 5. My B/U

By our count, 46 of the prosecutions ended with a conviction, guilty plea, no-contest plea or guilty plea as part of deferred adjudication. Of those, 18 cases appeared to involve fraud committed by individual voters: 12 cases with ineligible voters, five cases of voter impersonation and one case of voting more than once.

Voter fraud occurs in Texas, though convictions and guilty pleas are rare

 

[Seawytch]

Nope, didn't say there was none, just rare...so rare you can't find any instances of in person fraud.

Oh right, except my state has prosecuted and convicted two, they were just the ones that were caught.

So link to these two convictions of in person voting fraud.

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

I must have missed your request for a link of impersonation fraud in TX. I found I was wrong about the 2 convictions, it was 5. My B/U

By our count, 46 of the prosecutions ended with a conviction, guilty plea, no-contest plea or guilty plea as part of deferred adjudication. Of those, 18 cases appeared to involve fraud committed by individual voters: 12 cases with ineligible voters, five cases of voter impersonation and one case of voting more than once.

Voter fraud occurs in Texas, though convictions and guilty pleas are rare

Voter impersonation is not in person voter fraud that would be stopped with restrictive, state issued, current photo ID. That's the designation most often given when someone tries to cast a vote by mail ballot for another person.

 

[OKTexas]

Oh right, except my state has prosecuted and convicted two, they were just the ones that were caught.

So link to these two convictions of in person voting fraud.

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

I must have missed your request for a link of impersonation fraud in TX. I found I was wrong about the 2 convictions, it was 5. My B/U

By our count, 46 of the prosecutions ended with a conviction, guilty plea, no-contest plea or guilty plea as part of deferred adjudication. Of those, 18 cases appeared to involve fraud committed by individual voters: 12 cases with ineligible voters, five cases of voter impersonation and one case of voting more than once.

Voter fraud occurs in Texas, though convictions and guilty pleas are rare

Voter impersonation is not in person voter fraud that would be stopped with restrictive, state issued, current photo ID. That's the designation most often given when someone tries to cast a vote by mail ballot for another person.

Once again you're making assumptions that you can't prove. Then there were the dozen ineligibles that voted, how about you tell us, how many more are there that haven't been caught yet? You folks keep talking about national elections, why is there no concern for all the small towns across the country where many elections are decided by less than 10 votes. I've seen one in my county that was decided by 1 vote, it turned out two were fraudulent. Take those 2 away and the other side wins by 1.

 

[Seawytch]

So link to these two convictions of in person voting fraud.

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

I must have missed your request for a link of impersonation fraud in TX. I found I was wrong about the 2 convictions, it was 5. My B/U

By our count, 46 of the prosecutions ended with a conviction, guilty plea, no-contest plea or guilty plea as part of deferred adjudication. Of those, 18 cases appeared to involve fraud committed by individual voters: 12 cases with ineligible voters, five cases of voter impersonation and one case of voting more than once.

Voter fraud occurs in Texas, though convictions and guilty pleas are rare

Voter impersonation is not in person voter fraud that would be stopped with restrictive, state issued, current photo ID. That's the designation most often given when someone tries to cast a vote by mail ballot for another person.

Once again you're making assumptions that you can't prove. Then there were the dozen ineligibles that voted, how about you tell us, how many more are there that haven't been caught yet? You folks keep talking about national elections, why is there no concern for all the small towns across the country where many elections are decided by less than 10 votes. I've seen one in my county that was decided by 1 vote, it turned out two were fraudulent. Take those 2 away and the other side wins by 1.

And once again you're using gun grabber logic. We don't know how many people will use a gun to commit a violent act...so take them all away.

In person Vote fraud is next to nonexistent, especially in those small local elections where people in the polling place KNOW their neighbors. You can't pretend to be Joe Smith when the poll work is Joe's librarian from elementary school.

 

[OKTexas]

Not only are you moving the goal posts. you took them away and hid them...

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

I must have missed your request for a link of impersonation fraud in TX. I found I was wrong about the 2 convictions, it was 5. My B/U

By our count, 46 of the prosecutions ended with a conviction, guilty plea, no-contest plea or guilty plea as part of deferred adjudication. Of those, 18 cases appeared to involve fraud committed by individual voters: 12 cases with ineligible voters, five cases of voter impersonation and one case of voting more than once.

Voter fraud occurs in Texas, though convictions and guilty pleas are rare

Voter impersonation is not in person voter fraud that would be stopped with restrictive, state issued, current photo ID. That's the designation most often given when someone tries to cast a vote by mail ballot for another person.

Once again you're making assumptions that you can't prove. Then there were the dozen ineligibles that voted, how about you tell us, how many more are there that haven't been caught yet? You folks keep talking about national elections, why is there no concern for all the small towns across the country where many elections are decided by less than 10 votes. I've seen one in my county that was decided by 1 vote, it turned out two were fraudulent. Take those 2 away and the other side wins by 1.

And once again you're using gun grabber logic. We don't know how many people will use a gun to commit a violent act...so take them all away.

In person Vote fraud is next to nonexistent, especially in those small local elections where people in the polling place KNOW their neighbors. You can't pretend to be Joe Smith when the poll work is Joe's librarian from elementary school.

And where did I say to stop everyone from voting? That bitch, would be gun grabber logic.

 

[Seawytch]

How so? In person voter fraud is the only kind stopped by ID at the polls. In person voter fraud is more rare than lightning strikes and shark attacks combined.

I must have missed your request for a link of impersonation fraud in TX. I found I was wrong about the 2 convictions, it was 5. My B/U

By our count, 46 of the prosecutions ended with a conviction, guilty plea, no-contest plea or guilty plea as part of deferred adjudication. Of those, 18 cases appeared to involve fraud committed by individual voters: 12 cases with ineligible voters, five cases of voter impersonation and one case of voting more than once.

Voter fraud occurs in Texas, though convictions and guilty pleas are rare

Voter impersonation is not in person voter fraud that would be stopped with restrictive, state issued, current photo ID. That's the designation most often given when someone tries to cast a vote by mail ballot for another person.

Once again you're making assumptions that you can't prove. Then there were the dozen ineligibles that voted, how about you tell us, how many more are there that haven't been caught yet? You folks keep talking about national elections, why is there no concern for all the small towns across the country where many elections are decided by less than 10 votes. I've seen one in my county that was decided by 1 vote, it turned out two were fraudulent. Take those 2 away and the other side wins by 1.

And once again you're using gun grabber logic. We don't know how many people will use a gun to commit a violent act...so take them all away.

In person Vote fraud is next to nonexistent, especially in those small local elections where people in the polling place KNOW their neighbors. You can't pretend to be Joe Smith when the poll work is Joe's librarian from elementary school.

And where did I say to stop everyone from voting? That bitch, would be gun grabber logic.

Don't you also oppose stricter background checks and registration of weapons? Why is it okay to make voters jump through unnecessary hoops but gun owners have to have owning a gun made as easy as possible?