Democrats' criminal vote fraud and manipulation

Zakharra · Post by **Zakharra** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 5:53 pm

MorbidKate wrote:
ç i p h é r wrote:I agree with you Kate, but every time this sort of measure is proposed, somebody screams the D word - Disenfranchised!
I fail to see how being asked to identify yourself in the US could be seen as that. Maybe it's time the US took a page from the Iraqi elections and dip American fingers in ink on election day to minimize actual voter fraud.

Kate

Because not everyone can get to as government agency to get the ID. A East coast state, South Carolina I think, offered to have officials to go to the peoples' houses to get then the ID and the Democratic party objected with reasons that the people would be afraid of the officials, might be missed and a bunch of excuses. For some reason the Democratic party does not want voter ID as a requirement.

MorbidKate · Post by **MorbidKate** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 6:14 pm

Zakharra wrote:Because not everyone can get to as government agency to get the ID. A East coast state, South Carolina I think, offered to have officials to go to the peoples' houses to get then the ID and the Democratic party objected with reasons that the people would be afraid of the officials, might be missed and a bunch of excuses. For some reason the Democratic party does not want voter ID as a requirement.

I call utter BS on one specific party not wanting voter ID. Of course you’re welcome to provide a source outside of Fox News

In Canada all that's required is one photo ID showing name and current address. Still there are 3 options:

1. Driver's license
2. Health card & a Hydro/Phone bill
3. Swear an oath and be vouched for by a neighbour or roommate with some form of ID.

The only people really affected by our last snap election were University students who just started classes and didn't yet have an up to date address.

It's just strange to see a world leader be so backwards and archaic in its own election process.

Kate

Electryc · Post by **Electryc** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 6:59 pm

I say its high time we really let the truely disenfranchised vote.

http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/ ... prisoners/

I wonder what party they will be voting for???

Zakharra · Post by **Zakharra** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:01 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/washi ... us.html?hp

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/03carter.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01743.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington ... ourt_N.htm

These are a few I found on a quick search. The ones that are fairly consistently opposing the voter ID are Democrates. If that party is for fair elections, they should step up to the plate and make sure their constituents are legally and properly registered and IDed if the law requires.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 7:17 pm

There have already been numerous lawsuits filed by the state Republican Parties challenging thousands of newly registered voters, most of whom are Democrats. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday against a GOP lawsuit trying to disqualify 200,000 new voters in Ohio whose voter registration data does not agree with other state data bases (like the examples above). In a Montana case, a federal judge ruled that the Republicans had filed the case "with the express intent to disenfranchise voters." In some cases it is the Democrats going to court to prevent a (usually Republican) secretary of state from purging eligible voters. In other words, attempting to disenfranchise voters has become just another campaign tactic. It is virtually always the Republicans trying to purge (new) voters because the new voters are so heavily weighted towards the Democrats. If they can eliminate 100,000 voters, they will probably get rid of 80,000 Democrats and 20,000 Republicans, which is clearly worth the effort.

Zakharra · Post by **Zakharra** » Sat Oct 18, 2008 8:35 pm

And in how many of the cases being brought into court are argued that way? From what I am seeing it is mostly Democratic party agencies and affiliates that are fighting the best way to reduce voter fraud.

Why do they do it? The easiest answer is it makes it harder for them to cheat. I dislike both parties. They should both be sh**canned. A voter ID should be standard and it can be done. Will it cover everyone? No, but that is no reason to not do it. Those who slip through the system can be gotten into it and it enforces a privilege for the US citizen, the right to vote.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:18 pm

Funny how electronic voting machine errors always seem to favor the Republican candidate.

dergon darkhelm · Post by **dergon darkhelm** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:47 pm

As a moderate deomcrat I will step forward and admit that it is generally the democratic party in the US who more strongly opposes voter ID requirements.

People who don't have an ID have a high correllation with other attributes that make them more likely democratic voters. I do not think the intention of the deomcratic party in having less tight voter ID requirments is to enable cheating, it is because the poor, the homeless, the transiently dislocated, the mentally ill and the poorly educated (all folks statistically less likely to hold ID) are all more likely to vote democrat than republican.

It *is* about votes, but it is *not* about getting illegal votes......just my perspective on it.

MorbidKate · Post by **MorbidKate** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:01 pm

Zakharra wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/washi ... us.html?hp

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/opinion/03carter.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01743.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington ... ourt_N.htm

These are a few I found on a quick search. The ones that are fairly consistently opposing the voter ID are Democrates. If that party is for fair elections, they should step up to the plate and make sure their constituents are legally and properly registered and IDed if the law requires.

When I read those articles I noticed that the Dems were against excessive voter ID requirements, like in Indiana. Need a passport to get an ID if you don't drive? LOL! Less than 20% of Americans have a passport.

Kate

MorbidKate · Post by **MorbidKate** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:03 pm

dergon darkhelm wrote:As a moderate deomcrat I will step forward and admit that it is generally the democratic party in the US who more strongly opposes voter ID requirements.

People who don't have an ID have a high correllation with other attributes that make them more likely democratic voters. I do not think the intention of the deomcratic party in having less tight voter ID requirments is to enable cheating, it is because the poor, the homeless, the transiently dislocated, the mentally ill and the poorly educated (all folks statistically less likely to hold ID) are all more likely to vote democrat than republican.

It *is* about votes, but it is *not* about getting illegal votes......just my perspective on it.

I think your exactly right about that.

Kate

Burt · Post by **Burt** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:24 pm

Less than 20% of Americans have a passport.

What the shit.

MorbidKate · Post by **MorbidKate** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:50 pm

Burt wrote:
Less than 20% of Americans have a passport.
What the sh*t.

I shit you not.

Swift · Post by **Swift** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:23 pm

That roughly matches the percentage of Americans that actually know there are other countries in the world outside their own

Mizbiz · Post by **Mizbiz** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:22 am

The Acorn scandal blew up and. and have gotten folks in both parties. Senator McCain funds YPM, which was engaged in "slamming", registering voters are republicans without their knowlege. The person who is running this operation is Steve Poisner, based in AZ and, and is the California co chairman of the McCain Campaign.

Sources: The LA times, and the Ventura County Star. Arrests have been made.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domestic ... A120081021

The McCain campaign has quietly dropped the stump speeches about ACORN.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:11 pm

D'Oh.