Four Republican House Staffers From Michigan Indicted For Election Fraud, Naturally

[can you hear me now!]

I'm not convinced photo IDs are the answer to voter fraud. It potentially could make things worse. IDs can be faked and to my knowledge there are no checks and balances for people at the voting stations to determine whether IDs are legit or not. Is every person who is going to work at these voting stations across the nation, specially trained in photo ID verification?

Voter ID also could be abused. Say, if someone at the voting precinct sees a voter who presents an ID. That someone questions the ID, not because it is fake, but that person thinks that person will not vote for the right candidate. That voter gets turned away. The next person has a questionable photo ID but is passed on because he will vote for the "right" candidate.

Another thing, what if I went to vote and forgot my ID? I usually vote in the morning as soon as its open and go to work (an hour away) and comeback home in the evening.

any system can be abused, that's what so amusing about watching people stumble all over themselves when this issue comes up....the system worked well until the demographics of the country began to change...

here's the perfect technological solution....every baby born in this country gets a microchip implanted...use current scanning technology to confirm the identity....begin a national program to microchip all US citizens over the next 3 years beginning Jan 1, 2013....send out team like the govt does when it does the census....this is the only way to avoid the .000000000000000001% of fraud that takes place...

[songfourone]

Yes, I will.

Since you felt strongly to put "Republican" in the thread title with "vote fraud" - Why do you ignore the vote fraud when Democrats are charged or indicted?

Isn't vote fraud bad, regardless of which side is perpetuating it? You seem all giddy and lubricated at the prospect of voter fraud being prosecuted when allegedly advanced by one side, but you ignore the other side's deeds completely.

Can you point to a thread or post you have made where you have "exposed" a liberal or Democrat?

No need to answer, as we already know.

Yeah, noticed you did not initiate this thread....

No need to answer, we already know..

Rolling of eyes, right back at ya...

[EmDot]

Complete bs.

Give a legitimate reason why anyone in PA would be prevented from voting by requiring to show they are a legal voter.

I can guarantee that every reason you list can be countered with a solution that not only prevents illegal voters from participating, but also ensures that no legal voter is denied.

There are people all over the country who will have a problam voting. One case in PA is a 90+ year-old Black woman who has voted every year. Because "Negroes" were no account when she was born, her birth wasn't registered. Her purse was stolen about 4 years ago with all her ID in it. How is she to prove she's a citizen? Women who have been married several times, may have to purchase several marriage and divorce records if, for some reason, they can't show a clear path to their current name.

The fact that OH has extended voting in the counties it thinks will lean Republican and doesn't have extended voting in counties leaning Democrat.

He noted that Paul Weyrich, the extremist founder of ALEC, once stated, "I don't want everybody to vote...our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

Former Florida GOP Chairman Jim Greer (currently under indictment for stealing party funds) stated in a deposition released in July that a 2009 party meeting included discussion of "voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting."

I don't know how you can say it's not about voter suppression when Republican officials are coming out and saying it is.

[EmDot]

I can guarantee that every reason you list can be countered with a solution that not only prevents illegal voters from participating, but also ensures that no legal voter is denied.

I see you've been on the board and posted a time or two since my post. How's that guarantee coming along?

[Jeebus]

I see you've been on the board and posted a time or two since my post. How's that guarantee coming along?

Glad to respond.

Just as this 90-yo woman can do at the passport office, she can follow the exact same rules to prove her citizenship. It's called "Secondary Evidence of US Citizenship" and it should be followed in such a rare and unique situation.

It isn't rocket science, just identifying legal voters.

[NCBirdfan]

Glad to respond.

Just as this 90-yo woman can do at the passport office, she can follow the exact same rules to prove her citizenship. It's called "Secondary Evidence of US Citizenship" and it should be followed in such a rare and unique situation.

It isn't rocket science, just identifying legal voters.

Passports are required for security reasons. Voting registrations are not.

[EmDot]

Glad to respond.

Just as this 90-yo woman can do at the passport office, she can follow the exact same rules to prove her citizenship. It's called "Secondary Evidence of US Citizenship" and it should be followed in such a rare and unique situation.

It isn't rocket science, just identifying legal voters.

Where does it say that PA would accept that? Or does she have to spend money (= to a poll tax, IMO) and get a passport? And if she's been married, would she have to have those records indicating a name change?

And you didn't address the other links I posted.

[jtowne-swim]

Nobody is saying it does not exist. Election fraud has existed since the Greeks had elections. So, the question never was, does fraud exist? The main question is, do we want to stop many legitimate voters from voting in an attempt to stop a few fraudsters? Isn't the current system catching those fraudsters already?

Plus it is funy the rampent area for fraud is absentee ballots and no one seems to be in a rush to fix that!

[jtowne-swim]

The hurricane example was meant only as an analogy. But the point stands. As technology allows, so should the process. When I first registered to vote, I needed to go to the post office, fill out the form and wait for the voter card to come by mail. I used to have to show that card in order to vote. The last time I voted, I didn't show id or voter card, just had to give my name. We require a photo id to drive a car and to buy alcohol or cigarettes. Yet no id is required to cast a vote in a democracy where the choices affect everyone in the country. I would like the assurance that every vote being cast is from the registered voter who is the person he/she claims they are, and is only cast once. I have a hard time believing that with all the money spent on voter turnout by both parties, that they wouldn't bend over backwards to insure that anyone who might have trouble getting that voter id wouldn't be taken care of. I don't see where requiring a voter id that needs to be presented at the polls and verified will prevent anyone who really wants to vote from doing so.

Since you want that assurance how would you stop fraudulent absentee ballotts?