Voter Fraud Question

[Screaming Eagle]

Acorn or some other communist organizing group just got caught with 30,000 fraudulent voter registrations and then burnt the warehouse down before authorities could move in in Houston.

 

[California Girl]

Acorn or some other communist organizing group just got caught with 30,000 fraudulent voter registrations and then burnt the warehouse down before authorities could move in in Houston.

Should have locked themselves in first.

 

[Cuyo]

I don't trust just one poll. It's why I like Real Clear Politics more.

President Obama Job Approval
RCP Average
Approve
45.0

Disapprove
49.9

Spread -4.9



Congressional Job Approval
RCP Average
Approve
20.5

Disapprove
71.3

Spread -50.8



Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average
Republicans
46.5

Democrats
43.0

Republicans +3.5



Direction of Country
RCP Average
Right Direction
33.6

Wrong Track
60.4

Spread -26.8

So, your ONE poll or my aggregate of polls? Also, neither party is doing fabulous. They're both shedding voters to the independents who have come to understand that neither party gives a shit about them except to tell them pretty lies come election time. But that doesn't change the fact we're trending anti-incumbent/elitist/socialist faster and faster.

RCP has been trending towards the left in the last several weeks. Yes, the republicans are still ahead, but not as far as they were a month ago - In fact not even close. The aggregate has tightened quite a bit.

But that's not an indication of who's registered Republican or Democrat. You're right, they're both shedding people in favor of being "Independents" (Although in my experience, an "Independent" very rarely actually is one). Your post insinuated that Democrats were shedding membership faster than Republicans. There's no evidence of that.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Acorn or some other communist organizing group just got caught with 30,000 fraudulent voter registrations and then burnt the warehouse down before authorities could move in in Houston.

This is what you call "spin".

An organization (that has NOTHING to do with ACORN) was allegedly caught with fraudulent voter registrations.

And the fire was in the warehouse full of voting machines, not the organizations warehouse.

 

[Big Fitz]

RCP has been trending towards the left in the last several weeks. Yes, the republicans are still ahead, but not as far as they were a month ago - In fact not even close. The aggregate has tightened quite a bit.

Stretch much for that silver lining on the dark clouds of pwnage?

 

[Care4all]

Let's say that I'm an SEIU Obamaroid and I registered 23,000 people to vote in my area and then because I'm so considerate, I filled out and mailed in absentee ballots for them.

My friends through the country all do the same, we've already cast millions of votes.

The election takes place and 125 Democrat candidates win by an average by 300 votes.

Then let's say I get caught, what's the remedy?

there is a thread on this already crusader frank....

but here is the answer to your question....

signing people up to register to vote, does NOT equate to them being registered to vote....

the State takes those registrations and vets them...most ALL with the phony addresses, phony names like mickey mouse, or registering under the same name with multiple addresses, are CAUGHT AND REJECTED by the voter registrar's office and these phony people are never legally given the right to vote, with a legal voter's registration card, in the first place.

ALSO, absentee ballots are sent to the legal address they registered under....i seriously doubt you could go to all 23,000 homes of these people and steal the absentee ballot out of their mail boxes IF, A BIG IF, these phonies did get accepted as a legal voter.

the whole thing you presented is just bogus....impossible, as a scenario.

care

 

[Cuyo]

RCP has been trending towards the left in the last several weeks. Yes, the republicans are still ahead, but not as far as they were a month ago - In fact not even close. The aggregate has tightened quite a bit.

Stretch much for that silver lining on the dark clouds of pwnage?

Ummm, no not really. The entire basis of the conversation has been lost, yet you still declare victory.
Let's go to summary judgment here:

1. You said fewer and fewer people were identifying as Democrats.
2. I posted evidence that the opposite is in fact true.
3. You responded to that evidence with evidence that the Democrats were losing in the elections, but nothing related to party membership numbers.
4. I indicated not only that your evidence did not meet the standard of proof for your claim, but that in fact the polls have been trending in favor of Democrats lately.
5. You called it a stretch and declared victory, having never even presented evidence that Democratic party membership was contracting.

Sound about right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Let's say that I'm an SEIU Obamaroid and I registered 23,000 people to vote in my area and then because I'm so considerate, I filled out and mailed in absentee ballots for them.

My friends through the country all do the same, we've already cast millions of votes.

The election takes place and 125 Democrat candidates win by an average by 300 votes.

Then let's say I get caught, what's the remedy?

there is a thread on this already crusader frank....

but here is the answer to your question....

signing people up to register to vote, does NOT equate to them being registered to vote....

the State takes those registrations and vets them...most ALL with the phony addresses, phony names like mickey mouse, or registering under the same name with multiple addresses, are CAUGHT AND REJECTED by the voter registrar's office and these phony people are never legally given the right to vote, with a legal voter's registration card, in the first place.

ALSO, absentee ballots are sent to the legal address they registered under....i seriously doubt you could go to all 23,000 homes of these people and steal the absentee ballot out of their mail boxes IF, A BIG IF, these phonies did get accepted as a legal voter.

the whole thing you presented is just bogus....impossible, as a scenario.

care

People don't register 23,000 voters for fun or because they have too much free time on their hands.

There's something sinister here

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives never lack for excuses as to why they can't win enough elections.

It's not that hard. It's a math problem, cons. There aren't enough of you.

But it's the Democrats that support attempts at voter fraud:

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter-identification law on Monday, declaring that a requirement to produce photo identification is not unconstitutional and that the state has a “valid interest” in improving election procedures as well as deterring fraud.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/washington/28cnd-scotus.html

Atlanta - “The decision by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to deny preclearance of Georgia’s already implemented citizenship verification process shows a shocking disregard for the integrity of our elections. With this decision, DOJ has now barred Georgia from continuing the citizenship verification program that DOJ lawyers helped to craft. DOJ’s decision also nullifies the orders of two federal courts directing Georgia to implement the procedure for the 2008 general election. The decision comes seven months after Georgia requested an expedited review of the preclearance submission.
News Room | Press Release


Democrats say the laws keep poor and elderly voters - meaning their voters - away from the polls because it's hard for those people to get photo IDs. But Republicans say such laws prevent voter fraud. The debate might explain why the voter-ID law in Indiana got all its "yes" votes from Republicans and all its "no" votes from Democrats.
Beer, Cigarettes and Voting: ID, Please : NPR

Using the bogus argument ...

USAToday comes up with the usual Liberal Victimization Thesis:

“Voter ID laws raise ugly memories of poll taxes, literacy tests and other barriers once used to discourage blacks from voting. Critics contend that the laws are a thinly veiled effort to keep people without photo IDs — who tend to be poor, disabled or elderly, and tend to vote Democrat — away from the polls. Indiana's Marion County Board of Elections turned away at least 32 people in municipal elections last year for lack of photo ID.”
Editorials, Debates, and Opinions - USATODAY.com


when in reality:

Although liberal media support the old wives tale of GOP voter suppression by requiring identification, careful analysis shows a quite different reality:

“The findings of this analysis suggest that voter identification requirements, such as requiring non-photo and photo identification, have virtually no suppressive effect on reported voter turnout.
Controlling for factors that influence voter turn¬out, states with stricter voter identification laws largely do not have the claimed negative impact on voter turnout when compared to states with more lenient voter identification laws.
For a thorough statistical analysis of the effect of voter identification requirements:
New Analysis Shows Voter Identification Laws Do Not Reduce Turnout | The Heritage Foundation

 

[Big Fitz]

RCP has been trending towards the left in the last several weeks. Yes, the republicans are still ahead, but not as far as they were a month ago - In fact not even close. The aggregate has tightened quite a bit.

Stretch much for that silver lining on the dark clouds of pwnage?

Ummm, no not really. The entire basis of the conversation has been lost, yet you still declare victory.
Let's go to summary judgment here:

1. You said fewer and fewer people were identifying as Democrats.
2. I posted evidence that the opposite is in fact true.
3. You responded to that evidence with evidence that the Democrats were losing in the elections, but nothing related to party membership numbers.
4. I indicated not only that your evidence did not meet the standard of proof for your claim, but that in fact the polls have been trending in favor of Democrats lately.
5. You called it a stretch and declared victory, having never even presented evidence that Democratic party membership was contracting.

Sound about right?

yeah, my current collection of polls are trumped by your 2 and a half year old poll.\

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In heavily Democrat districts, who is it that monitors voter registration?

 

[MaggieMae]

In heavily Democrat districts, who is it that monitors voter registration?

In heavily Republican districts, who monitors voter registration? In Texas, guys like Tom DeLay monitor all districts and are successful in redrawing the lines even before that's legally supposed to happen!

 

[Cuyo]

Stretch much for that silver lining on the dark clouds of pwnage?

Ummm, no not really. The entire basis of the conversation has been lost, yet you still declare victory.
Let's go to summary judgment here:

1. You said fewer and fewer people were identifying as Democrats.
2. I posted evidence that the opposite is in fact true.
3. You responded to that evidence with evidence that the Democrats were losing in the elections, but nothing related to party membership numbers.
4. I indicated not only that your evidence did not meet the standard of proof for your claim, but that in fact the polls have been trending in favor of Democrats lately.
5. You called it a stretch and declared victory, having never even presented evidence that Democratic party membership was contracting.

Sound about right?

yeah, my current collection of polls are trumped by your 2 and a half year old poll.\

OK, lets go over it again.

1. You said fewer and fewer people were identifying as Democrats.
2. I posted evidence that the opposite is in fact true.
3. You responded to that evidence with evidence that the Democrats were losing in the elections, but nothing related to party membership numbers.
4. I indicated not only that your evidence did not meet the standard of proof for your claim, but that in fact the polls have been trending in favor of Democrats lately.
5. You called it a stretch and declared victory, having never even presented evidence that Democratic party membership was contracting

Are you slow? You can post all the collections of election polls you want. You've provided nothing that addresses the basis of the conversation, which is Democratic vs. Republican membership. Yet, you continue to tout your big collection of polls on the unrelated matter of aggregate elections, and completely dodge the issue at hand.

Give it up, man, your obnoxious pictures aren't impressing anyone.

 

[Dick Tuck]

In heavily Democrat districts, who is it that monitors voter registration?

Usually, the Secretary of State.