Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll bet if the voter roles were compared between Palm Beach county FL and NYC, they would find many dual voting. Easy to do. When they are spending their winter in Florida, they request a NYC absentee ballot. Vote in two places but Florida will never get cooperation from NYC to compare voter lists.
Actually, we don't know that. The recount was halted by the Supreme Court.
That's not actually an article. It's an opinion piece, based on another opinion piece based on original "research" by partisan amateurs. Somehow it also fails to notice that in Minnesota, being a "convicted felon" doesn't mean you can't vote. The right to vote is automatically reinstated there once the sentence is complete. The right-winger propagandists who compiled the list of "felons who had voted" did not check that detail.
Not in North Carolina, they don't.
1) Those 765 voters (which by the way might also be bad data, given the miserable quality control of the Crosscheck database) represent less than 1 hundredth of 1% of the Registered Voters in North Carolina.
2) We also have no visibility into how they voted. They could very well have split 50-50 Dem/Rep... likely since the tiny number proves that it was not systematic voter fraud in the first place.
3) Romney beat Obama by more than 97,000 votes in NC. Pretending that all 765 voted the same way (an idiotic assumption, but hey... worst case scenario) they swayed the results by 8 tenths of one percent. To have actually made a difference, the "fraud" would have to have been systemic and 127 times larger.
3) North Carolina experiences about 290,000 migrations annually (175,000 in and 115,000 out). To find just over half of those people (156,000) still registered in their old state after one year is neither surprising nor a sign of voter fraud. It usually takes several election cycles for a voter's name to drop off the rolls.
Once again... the actual data looked at critically proves that Republican claims of "massive voter fraud" are false.
I agree up to a point. The numbers are now over 30000, with the 765 having the same names, and birthdates and last 4 of the ssn, duplicated, verified. Which means, those 765 votes took place in NC, AND in a 2nd state. Who's to say, without further data, that those votes didn't make a different in other states.
BTW, whether it's massive or not, fraud is fraud. There is NO percentage where it is acceptable. That's like saying to a car dealer, well, you are only having 1 car a month stolen from you, that's not bad based on the number of cars monthly that you sell.... People talk about voters being "disenfranchised", but voter ID laws, but for every single fraudulent vote, someone's legitimate vote has been disenfranchised. Why is a single vote due to voter ID laws being disenfranchised bad, but due to fraud, it's ok?
Can any of the liberal opponents of voter ID laws explain their staunch opposition to said laws?
It isn't about cost. Nearly all states that have passed voter ID laws have made provisions to provide the requisite ID at no cost.
It isn't about voter suppression, what ever that is supposed to mean. If you think this is the case, then please explain how you think requiring a state ID to vote limits anyone from voting? Get the ID, you can vote. We've all heard time and time again about the success of liberal/progressive get out the vote initiatives. Why not use the same initiative to get the required free IDs for those you are so concerned about being suppressed?
This honestly seems like one of the most baseless issues being bantered back and forth. One side screams voter fraud is rampant. While it does exist, it hasn't been proven to the extent being suggested. The other side screams voter suppression. How does requiring an ID, something required to do just about anything in modern society (cash checks, open bank accounts, receive benefits, drive, get a library card, rent property, seek employment, etc.) exclude a single person, let alone groups of people from participating in the electoral process?
Can any of the liberal opponents of voter ID laws explain their staunch opposition to said laws?
It isn't about cost. Nearly all states that have passed voter ID laws have made provisions to provide the requisite ID at no cost.
It isn't about voter suppression, what ever that is supposed to mean. If you think this is the case, then please explain how you think requiring a state ID to vote limits anyone from voting? Get the ID, you can vote. We've all heard time and time again about the success of liberal/progressive get out the vote initiatives. Why not use the same initiative to get the required free IDs for those you are so concerned about being suppressed?
This honestly seems like one of the most baseless issues being bantered back and forth. One side screams voter fraud is rampant. While it does exist, it hasn't been proven to the extent being suggested. The other side screams voter suppression. How does requiring an ID, something required to do just about anything in modern society (cash checks, open bank accounts, receive benefits, drive, get a library card, rent property, seek employment, etc.) exclude a single person, let alone groups of people from participating in the electoral process?
Why not give the photo ID when someone registers to vote? Heck, if photo IDs are such a requirement, why not just create a federal ID that is mandatory for everyone to have after a certain age point. You could even put a voting microchip in it to prevent people from voting more than once.
Also, how will showing a photo ID prevent a single case of voter fraud that conservatives think is rampant in this country? Yet somehow is unable to prove that voter fraud is rampant.
If you are interested in how voter suppression happens, there is lots of information out there on this topic that you clearly have yet to read, so I highly doubt you will listen to anyone on here tell you why this is voter suppression.
Why not give the photo ID when someone registers to vote? Heck, if photo IDs are such a requirement, why not just create a federal ID that is mandatory for everyone to have after a certain age point. You could even put a voting microchip in it to prevent people from voting more than once.
Also, how will showing a photo ID prevent a single case of voter fraud that conservatives think is rampant in this country? Yet somehow is unable to prove that voter fraud is rampant.
If you are interested in how voter suppression happens, there is lots of information out there on this topic that you clearly have yet to read, so I highly doubt you will listen to anyone on here tell you why this is voter suppression.
Think about the smaller local elections going on at the same time.
It may not effect a national election for president, but state, county and city offices can be greatly effected.
Why not give the photo ID when someone registers to vote? Heck, if photo IDs are such a requirement, why not just create a federal ID that is mandatory for everyone to have after a certain age point. You could even put a voting microchip in it to prevent people from voting more than once.
Also, how will showing a photo ID prevent a single case of voter fraud that conservatives think is rampant in this country? Yet somehow is unable to prove that voter fraud is rampant.
If you are interested in how voter suppression happens, there is lots of information out there on this topic that you clearly have yet to read, so I highly doubt you will listen to anyone on here tell you why this is voter suppression.
I am more than willing to listen. That is sort of why I asked the question. The problem is, anytime the question is asked, the response is exactly like yours. Just the statement that the evidence is out there, go read it. One would think that if it were such a prevalent issue, those claiming it is occurring would be able to describe exactly how it occurring.
Think about the smaller local elections going on at the same time.
It may not effect a national election for president, but state, county and city offices can be greatly effected.
Yet there hasn't been enough proof that shows that, this thread is proof. We have a thread about people with similarities voting in different states, not people voting multiple times in their own state.
If you are worried about local voter fraud, there is a much greater chance it will come from those collecting the votes than it will those casting them. Checking one's signature and verifying one's address is plenty to catch people trying to vote as someone else, because if they seem suspicious you can then ask to see their ID.
I am more than willing to listen. That is sort of why I asked the question. The problem is, anytime the question is asked, the response is exactly like yours. Just the statement that the evidence is out there, go read it. One would think that if it were such a prevalent issue, those claiming it is occurring would be able to describe exactly how it occurring.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
