Patterico's Pontifications

4/9/2012

O’Keefe Team Offered Eric Holder’s Ballot

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:24 am

This is currently the top story on Drudge, with the headline: “White Man Offered Eric Holder’s Ballot”:

In a shocking new video, James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas demonstrates to the Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, just why he should be concerned about lack of voter ID laws – by walking into Holder’s voting precinct and showing the world that anyone can obtain Eric Holder’s ballot. Literally.

The video shows a young man entering a Washington, DC polling place at 3401 Nebraska Avenue, NW, on primary day of this year – April 3, 2012 – and giving Holder’s name and address. The poll worker promptly offers the young man Holder’s ballot to vote.

Wow. You have to admire the sheer testicular fortitude it takes to pull a stunt like this. I don’t know if what they’re doing here is illegal, but I bet there’s a team of lawyers at the Justice Department researching that now. (Probably the same team that drafted Holder’s dishonest letter to the Fifth Circuit, if I don’t miss my guess.)

It should be entertaining to watch the fallout from this.

139 Responses to “O’Keefe Team Offered Eric Holder’s Ballot”

  1. this is one of those things you should click just for so the justice department douchebags know you watched it

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  2. Got my popcorn! This should be better than Bubba Watson’s win yesterday!

    Virtual Insanity (447cb5)

  3. This is better than 60 Minutes.

    AZ Bob (1c9631)

  4. He never says he is in fact, Eric Holder nor does he accept the ballot. I think those are the key points.

    EC (dda60e)

  5. EC–yeah, as far as whether they come after him for impersonating. It’s still obvious they were willing to let him vote as Holder without verifying he was, in fact, Holder.

    Virtual Insanity (447cb5)

  6. Yea, he says “Do you have an ‘Eric Holder'” and “That’s THE name”. He also never takes possession of the ballot.

    I don’t see how they can make a charge of impersonating or voter fraud stick.

    alSeen (c1d6ba)

  7. What’s the point of this? Are people suggesting that this is happening in huge numbers so as to skew election results? As others have noted, he didn’t actually take the ballot. If he did, and later that day, Holder went to vote, then the system would have caught the problem… hence, the system would have caught the fraud.

    So what is the point here?

    Let me put it this way… the only reason to commit voter fraud in the way depicted in this video is to show that voter fraud can be committed in the way it was depicted in this video. Except he didn’t actually DO it. And why would anyone else do it?

    Kman (5576bf)

  8. Kman,

    And, had Holder NOT come ot vote that day? With voter turnout at 50%, do the math.

    Virtual Insanity (447cb5)

  9. Kman, if you don’t see the problem with this, then there is no hope for you.

    EC (dda60e)

  10. Oh, jeez. Kman again.

    The point is simple: turn it around. Imagine if, during the 2000 race, there had been anyone doing this O’Keefe business on the Democrat side.

    Do you honestly think that that would not have been on the evening news for months? Congressional investigations begun? Seriously?

    What you are left with, and this amazes me, is that voter fraud happens, but it’s not a big deal because it’s not common. That is, um, unusual on several levels.

    But you don’t see it that way because you are being partisan. You will say “no,” but darn it, we all had to hear that “every vote must count” over and over again.

    Choose.

    Simon Jester (0bd78b)

  11. ==Are people suggesting that this is happening in huge numbers so as to skew election results?==

    In a word–YES.

    elissa (e23c47)

  12. I changed the headline from “obtains” to “offered.” “Obtains” was inaccurate.

    Patterico (a581c9)

  13. Elissa, I see your point, but I want to bludgeon these people with their “every vote must count” mantra.

    Because if that is true, even minor voter fraud is a travesty.

    I want them to own their words, and choose.

    Because what they really mean is “every democrat vote must count.” And apparently more than once in some cases.

    Simon Jester (0bd78b)

  14. >> Are people suggesting that this is happening in huge numbers so as to skew election results?

    >> In a word–YES.

    But it’s pretty easy to get caught don’t you think? It’s why the O’Keefe guy didn’t actually take the ballot and vote.

    Just think it through. Let’s say I wanted to commit voter fraud. Obviously, the only reason to do it is to change the outcome of an election. So to ensure that, I would have to gather hundreds, if not thousands, of names and addresses. And then do basically what this guy did thousands of times, except to ACTUALLY vote! But the only way I could pull that off is if none of the real voters show up!

    Sounds like a stupid plan. So stupid that nobody would actually do it. There’s no point to doing it.

    Kman (5576bf)

  15. If he did, and later that day, Holder went to vote, then the system would have caught the problem… hence, the system would have caught the fraud.

    How would the poll workers know who the real ‘Eric Holder’ was? Oh yeah, they would ask for ID!

    EC (dda60e)

  16. But the only way I could pull that off is if none of the real voters show up!

    That never happens, right?

    EC (dda60e)

  17. >> How would the poll workers know who the real ‘Eric Holder’ was? Oh yeah, they would ask for ID!

    No, EC. The point is that once an “Eric Holder” has come, his name is already checked off. So when another Eric Holder shows up, and gives his name and address, then the poll workers know there’s been voter fraud. Either the first guy who came through or the second second guy.

    So I ask you, who is going to execute a massive voter fraud plan that leaves telltale signs that a massive voter fraud has taken place?

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Kman (5576bf)

  18. If he did, and later that day, Holder went to vote, then the system would have caught the problem…

    But you wouldn’t have any idea who did it.

    Several points, though:

    1) if this had happened a dozen times during the day, they *would* have found out who did it, either because somebody gave it away, or because they’d investigate. When things are investigated things normally private are not kept private. You could for instance check for fingerprints. Or somebody might just recognize the impersonator.

    2) To do this, you have to know the name and address of a genuine voter and go to the right location. That makes it difficult. And also, to do this on any kind of organized basis requires a conspiracy of dozens of people – even more, if you attempt to recruit voters and planners in the beginning..

    3) He might not have been able to copy the signature closely, but nobody probably would have paid enough attention to stop the secret ballot from being cast.

    4) If you needed ID, a good enough fake ID could have been created, if indeed anybody would have paid attention to it. It worked for the SAT.

    Sammy Finkelman (7509c5)

  19. This is one of those things that can’t be scaled up.

    Sammy Finkelman (7509c5)

  20. Also the individual doesn’t sign the registration which if he did would probably make it a crime

    Peterk (c6cfe1)

  21. He never says he is in fact, Eric Holder nor does he accept the ballot. I think those are the key points.

    Comment by EC — 4/9/2012 @ 7:56 am

    Yeah. If he gets charged with anything,bye goes to trial. And no way a representative jury convicts. That’s my sense. Anyone disagrees?

    He’s definitely not a wilting violet.

    Random (97f484)

  22. *he goes to trial

    Random (97f484)

  23. kman

    Ok, say they did catch that there was a problem. What then? They would have no way of knowing which ballot was cast by the fake Holder.

    Finding voter fraud after the fact is useless if you care about the actual election. You have to stop it before it happens.

    alSeen (c1d6ba)

  24. I believe O’K & Co. pulled this stuff in New England by using dead people. They won’t show up later, unless more than one person is using their names. Hey… I wonder….
    Thing is, they used Holder’s name to show how ridiculously simple it is to cheat. They weren’t planning on replacing his vote.
    It’s a tour de force. Gets your attention.
    If you think about scaling this up to the national level, that’s one thing. It’s clearly possible to use these techniques to screw with local elections.
    Even governor and senate elections are vulnerable, see WA and Al Franken.
    But when electoral votes are tipped by a few hundred votes–presuming any are–you don’t need to scale very large in any one locality. You just need to do it small and discreet in enough places.

    Richard Aubrey (a75643)

  25. I don’t see how they can make a charge of impersonating or voter fraud stick.

    He’s Republican, so it does go against the natural order of things.

    Random (97f484)

  26. Simon–I don’t think you read my comment the way I intended it.

    My point was that KMan is full of it and that yes there is, and has been massive voter fraud (especially where I come from) which has in fact altered elections. The “but in the end he didn’t get away with it” defense from Kman is cute but is merely a dishonest diversion which I suspect even Kman is a little embarrassed to put forward. O’Keefe’s guy *chose* not to “get away with it” because he didn’t ever intend to actually vote as Holder–he wanted to make the point how easily he could have voted as Holder.

    The anonymous non-videoed people who do get away with it have no such filter and know exactly which not-famous anonymous person’s name they are supposed to use to vote, because it has been assigned to them. (If Mr. so and so hadn’t died unexpectedly in 2010 he sure would have wanted to vote for X in 2012. The poor little old lady down the block can’t make it to the polls any more and has lost her marbles, so you’ll really be doing everybody a favor to vote for her. And here’s a little token for your trouble.)

    elissa (e23c47)

  27. “I’ll be back faster than you can say ‘furious'”.

    I didn’t catch that on my first viewing.

    aunursa (63ca70)

  28. ______________________________________________

    This is currently the top story on Drudge

    In terms of actual physical placement on that website, the following is situated above even the story on how easy it is to scam the election process. But it pertains to another form of sleight-of-hand and rigging the system:

    Thehill.com: The Obama administration is quietly diverting roughly $500 million to the IRS to help implement the president’s healthcare law.

    The money is only part of the IRS’s total implementation spending, and it is being provided outside the normal appropriations process. The tax agency is responsible for several key provisions of the new law, including the unpopular individual mandate.

    [S]ignificant transfers to the IRS and other agencies leave less money for [the Department of Health and Human Services], and the department needs to draw on the $1 billion fund for some of its biggest tasks.

    ^ I’ve long said the biggest beneficiary of Obamacare would be the IRS. I’ve also mused that if my or other people’s goal in life is to become an agent at the IRS — particularly in this time of high unemployment — we should relish Obama’s idiotic law.

    Mark (411533)

  29. I don’t think we disagree, elissa. I just hate the hypocrisy of “every vote should count” and “vote fraud is rare, so no big deal.”

    Simon Jester (0bd78b)

  30. I agree with Elissa that it’s not sensible to note O’Keefe’s guy didn’t get away with something he obviously had no intention of getting away with.

    The exposes on the need for Voter ID are powerful. There is a huge gap in the accuracy of our elections. And knowing we don’t have accurate elections destabilizes our society.

    It seems well proven that the benefit of Voter ID outweighs the rather miniscule cost.

    They say it’s racist, but it’s not racist to make sure every one of these mythical minorities without ID actually has an ID now. You probably need ID to get a job, checking account, firearm, to drive. These folks who don’t have an ID are really benefiting from getting one.

    And the people who can’t… such as the ones in Texas that Holder is saying can’t get an ID… I strongly suspect most of them are not eligible to vote or even citizens.

    The real bigotry is on those who, like Holder, assume Texas is racist and thus subject to scrutiny and vetoes over sensible election laws.

    We need voter ID and then we need to start reducing absentee ballots to only those who swear out an affidavit to a short list of reasons (and just being out of town is not good enough, IMO).

    I also think we need paper ballots and stings on polling stations to ensure the lists are used and the rules followed. We should pay polling workers for their trouble, but also hold them accountable. Every ballot box should be on a webcam and also counted on that webcam so anyone who wishes can watch.

    And they should take their sweet time counting them. This crap about racing to announce results, or various districts always being last to report… that needs to end.

    Dustin (330eed)

  31. elissa, it is impossible to embarrass KMart.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  32. Actually it can be scaled up, and HAS been here in Houston in CD18 (Sheila Jackson Lee’s district.) it requires a little forethought and preparation but it happens every year.

    Step 1: Generate large numbers of fraudulent voter registrations at vacant lots and businesses with the voter registration mailing addresses sent to P.O. boxes in the names of people with no history of ever voting before, using their DL# or SSN as proof of eligibility.

    Step 2: collect all of those fraudulent voter I.D.’s when sent out (remember they don’t have pictures on them, and no Photo I.D. can legally be requested) and then close the P.O. boxes.

    Step 3: round up a group of homeless or union organizers and put them on a bus. drive from early voting location to early voting location handing out a different set of “id” to each person as they step off the bus at each stop.

    Step 4: lather rinse repeat for all of the two weeks of early voting with a new group each day.

    Step 5: watch your preferred candidate skate to a huge victory.

    Rorschach (c5574d)

  33. ====Just think it through. Let’s say I wanted to commit voter fraud. Obviously, the only reason to do it is to change the outcome of an election. So to ensure that, I would have to gather hundreds, if not thousands, of names and addresses. And then do basically what this guy did thousands of times, except to ACTUALLY vote! But the only way I could pull that off is if none of the real voters show up! Sounds like a stupid plan. So stupid that nobody would actually do it. There’s no point to doing it==

    No, you need to think it through. The people fighting against voter ID surely have. The “hundreds if not thousands” of names and addresses are on each ward committeeman’s desk from Chicago to Philly, to Boston to LA. They know who is going to show up and who is not. They know which dead people have “accidentally” not been removed from the voter rolls. They know who has moved to another state but still is showing up as living in the precinct.

    elissa (e23c47)

  34. Comment by Rorschach — 4/9/2012 @ 9:20 am

    See: Sanchez – Dornan; 2002!
    and Hermandad Mexicana Nacional.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  35. Sanchez – Dornan; 2002

    Oops, should be 1996!

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  36. Elissa writes:

    “he wanted to make the point how easily he could have voted as Holder.”

    Sure. So it is easy to “punk” an individual, assuming someone wants to do this. But — as Sammy Finkelstein says better (comments #18, #19) than I did — shenanigans of this sort can’t be scaled up to result in massive voter fraud.

    Not only would you would need the names and addresses of hundreds of voters, but you would have to arrive at the polls before they did. And even then, your scheme is revealed when several of them start showing up at the polls.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Kman (5576bf)

  37. Elissa:

    The “hundreds if not thousands” of names and addresses are on each ward committeeman’s desk from Chicago to Philly, to Boston to LA. They know who is going to show up and who is not. They know which dead people have “accidentally” not been removed from the voter rolls. They know who has moved to another state but still is showing up as living in the precinct.

    How do “they” — the people intending to commit massive voter fraud — know all this?

    Actually, how do YOU know that they “know” all this?

    This is getting into tinfoil hat territory.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Kman (5576bf)

  38. Even the organizations that are pushing for No-ID’s when voting require Photo ID to enter their buildings.

    But if you’re planning to visit Holder’s office in Washington, D.C., you better bring a photo ID. The Department of Justice has two armed guards stationed outside its headquarters to check IDs of anyone who wants to enter — employees and visitors.

    Holder’s politically motivated crusade against voter ID laws has the support of liberal advocacy organizations ranging from the Center for American Progress and Media Matters to the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and the Advancement Project.

    Each of these organizations has criticized photo identification for voting, yet they require it to enter their Washington, D.C., offices as well. There’s even a sign in the building of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law: “ALL VISITORS MUST SHOW ID.”

    BfC (fd87e7)

  39. Rorschach:

    Actually it can be scaled up, and HAS been here in Houston in CD18 (Sheila Jackson Lee’s district.) it requires a little forethought and preparation but it happens every year.

    Except that voter fraud didn’t happen in Sheila Jackson Lee’s district because the registration anomalies were caught. That’s why we know about it; that’s why you’re able to reference it. And no voter fraud took place.

    It doesn’t happen every year. You’re going to have to give me evidence that hundreds of homeless and/or union people go to the ballots during early voting, each time voting as a different non-existent person. Otherwise, it’s just a fanciful elaborate conspiracy theory.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Kman (5576bf)

  40. He didn’t claim to be Holder, and he didn’t take the ballot. I’m not sure what laws he broke.

    Jim Treacher (30ee2f)

  41. And yet calling for the murder of “white crackers” will get no attention from Holder’s Team.

    dfbaskwill (ca54bb)

  42. Looks like Insty’s implication is dangerously wrong on his headline about Holder’s ballot. I hope somebody knows how to reach him to fix it.

    elissa (5d253b)

  43. 33. Comment by Rorschach — 4/9/2012 @ 9:20 am

    Actually it can be scaled up, and HAS been here in Houston in CD18 (Sheila Jackson Lee’s district.) it requires a little forethought and preparation but it happens every year.

    A lot of fake registrations.

    But it seems like the people involved control the voting machinery:

    From the Townhall article:

    The media began to focus on the findings from the Harris County tax assessor’s office and True the Vote. Shortly after the August 24 press conference announcing the results of the office’s investigation, a fire of unknown origins burned down the warehouse containing all of Harris County’s voting equipment. In total, the fire claimed 10,000 voting machines, which was
    approximately $30,000,000 worth of equipment.

    Now you see. Was it just voting equipment that was destroyed? Or some kinds of records?

    When I said it can’t be scaled up, I was speaking about when the people involved don’t control the voting machinery. But if they do, they don’t need very much in person voting.

    Step 1: Generate large numbers of fraudulent voter registrations at vacant lots and businesses with the voter registration mailing addresses sent to P.O. boxes in the names of people with no history of ever voting before, using their DL# or SSN as proof of eligibility.

    So they are real people, just not real voters.

    Step 2: collect all of those fraudulent voter I.D.’s when sent out (remember they don’t have pictures on them, and no Photo I.D. can legally be requested) and then close the P.O. boxes.

    Step 3: round up a group of homeless or union organizers and put them on a bus. drive from early voting location to early voting location handing out a different set of “id” to each person as they step off the bus at each stop.

    They weren’t using IDs even.

    Step 4: lather rinse repeat for all of the two weeks of early voting with a new group each day.

    Step 5: watch your preferred candidate skate to a huge victory.

    And with the picture ID requirement, the poll workers are suddenly going to notice they’re not presenting them? When they didn’t notice they were not presenting the easier ID? And are all the votes being cast by actual voters anyway? The machines you see might show how many votes were actually cast.

    Maybe you should put in a requirement that the ID be photographed.

    Sammy Finkelman (82409c)

  44. It has similarly been testified that every time you hear of polls being ‘held open’ after hours, it’s so additional votes can be registered using the names and addresses of people who did not vote during proper hours.

    Every time.

    Requires help from the judiciary of course. Also part of the machine.

    luagha (5cbe06)

  45. When you fill out a 4473 to purchase a firearm, in most jurisdictions (here in CA for one) you are required to leave an imprint of your right thumb to forestall any claim that the form was not filled out by you, the convicted felon who cannot legally purchase a firearm.

    Perhaps we need to borrow the purple ink from the Iraqi’s: Dip your thumb, and leave a print on the voter roll.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  46. I think the purple ink originated in India.

    Sammy Finkelman (82409c)

  47. Picky, picky, picky!

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  48. I think the people allowed to vote in Harris County without showing anything were probably genuine voters whom the machine just didn’t want to bother with getting things ready and taking anything to the polls with them for fear that would discourage them from voting – or they’d lose the voter if the voter had to go back home.

    None of these volunteers (albeit maybe they weren’t in the right place) reported seeing any groups of voters brought in. It would be obvious, and people could talk, and they also might not cast their ballots successfully.

    The fake registrations, if used for votes, were used before or after the polls were open and nobody actually signed in and voted in front of witnesses. That would be why the voting machinery was destroyed, because they could probably be checked to see how many votes were actually cast using those machines, and the records of votes cast showed more than actually happened.

    I don’t know what kinds of machines they used, of course, and whether or not it kept any independent records. But even flash drives would show something that they hadn’t taken care to doctor, or couldn’t.

    Sammy Finkelman (82409c)

  49. Those of you who are so sure that this can’t be “scaled up” you’re wrong. Most counties now offer voter logs on disc in an excel-format going back years. Imagine finding a large group of names and addresses for people who only voted in a Presidential election and never in a primary (they exists, I’ve done similar research in my county for campaigns), then you have a good idea that you and a few hundred people can impersonate these folks without the likelihood of being caught. There is no guessing required for this kind of fraud, just a group of unethical (i.e. Liberal) individuals and a few bucks spent at the county courthouse.

    Sean (2db082)

  50. Let me put it this way… the only reason to commit voter fraud in the way depicted in this video is to show that voter fraud can be committed in the way it was depicted in this video. Except he didn’t actually DO it. And why would anyone else do it?
    Comment by Kman — 4/9/2012 @ 8:11 am

    — Kman’s comments are for demonstration purposes only.

    Icy (428765)

  51. WE ARE ALL ERIC HOLDER!!!!

    That means we are all now Holders people!!!

    Gus (36e9a7)

  52. Actually it was he Republicans who in general controlled the voting machinery but I have o read more.

    The fire happened on August 27, 2010.

    The controversy was about registrations that had just been submitted. Not about anybody using them.

    I can’t seem to find anything past September 2010.

    There’s nothing very logical about using the fire, the fire seemed to originate in the electrical system, and nothing about false counting. Other places have it.

    Sammy Finkelman (82409c)

  53. He didn’t claim to be Holder, and he didn’t take the ballot. I’m not sure what laws he broke.
    Comment by Jim Treacher — 4/9/2012 @ 11:10 am

    — Nobody said that he has broken any laws (lotta people missing the point on this one).

    Icy (428765)

  54. During the 2008 election I had sort of the opposite of this problem, so to speak. I live in a heavily left-liberal district, and I went to my polling station early, before work: wearing a suit and looking very Straight, White and Uptight.

    The very lefty-looking poll workers made a big fuss of not being able to find my name on the rolls: “we’re very sorry, it looks like you won’t be able to vote.” Luckily I had suspected something fishy would happen so I had taken the precaution of bringing along my voter instruction booklet, with my name, address and assigned station printed on it. I showed this to them and demanded they check again. Magically they suddenly found my name on the list — in the center of the page, in plain sight. I couldn’t prove they were trying to deny me my vote, but I certainly smelled a rat.

    This election is going to be a Museum of Dirty Tricks. I advise everybody to plan ahead.

    d. in c. (17012e)

  55. …then you have a good idea that you and a few hundred people can impersonate these folks without the likelihood of being caught.

    Sure. A conspiracy involving a few hundred people within the same county. What could possibly go wrong?

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Kman (5576bf)

  56. It doesn’t appear to be illegal.

    If my man Patterico had actually done a tiny bit of investigation into what O’Keefe did, he would have learned that the transcript reveals that O’Keefe’s cohort was very careful not to impersonate Eric Holder.

    All he did was walk up and say to the poll worker, “Do you have a listing for Eric Holder ?”

    So, no, he did not impersonate Eric Holder.

    In fact, he asked the poll worker if he needed to see his ID, and the poll worker said it’s not necessary.

    But he excused himself to go back to the car to “get his ID,” anyhow.

    And then did not return.

    It’s all on film.

    Band Aid (0ae97d)

  57. (i.e. Liberal)

    Sean, please, Thomas Jefferson was a “Liberal”, these folks are Progressives.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  58. Well, he lied when he said he’ll be back “Faster than you can say Furious”.

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  59. LOL “I’ll be back faster than you can say furious!.”

    Noodles (3681c4)

  60. When the left-wing MSM and blogosphere are done with this, the election judge will be a victim and O’Keefe will be Al Capone.

    CrustyB (69f730)

  61. Noodles–yeah. That line is absolutely the best part of all! But 99% of the media won’t even “get it” because that major Holder/DOJ scandal is not even on their radar screens.

    elissa (e23c47)

  62. “band aid” is kind of a dlck

    JD (34d969)

  63. Kman, please stop defending the indefensible. I am Italian, where everybody has to show a Photo-ID at the election place; the same holds in every other European country. What’s the problem with you?

    You are making a lot of fuss for an absolutely normal and reasonable practice, accepted in every civilized country, one that allows to make a reasonable check before the vote is cast in the ballot.

    Your claim that it’s useless because the fraud would be caught anyway is hilarious: others tried to explain to you various ways your current checks could be circumvented but you seem rather deaf. Apparently for you frauds are always discovered and punished.

    Voting fraud, unfortunately, always happened and happens – inform yourself – which is all the more important in these days when elections are often decided on a handful of votes; even if it were not “massive” it’s still illegal and immoral because it cancels the votes of the single persons (tens, hundreds, thousands) who can legitimately cast only one vote: then a state has all the right to require this kind of laws, in order to protect every citizen’s voting power.

    To be honest, this absurd dispute gives the impression that your party is colluded in voting fraud, otherwise it wouldn’t jump so heavily on these perfectly sensible laws.

    Paolo, Varese
    Italy

    Paolo Pagliaro (24f71c)

  64. Nobody said that he has broken any laws (lotta people missing the point on this one).

    I’m replying to:

    “I don’t know if what they’re doing here is illegal, but I bet there’s a team of lawyers at the Justice Department researching that now.”

    Jim Treacher (30ee2f)

  65. Post of the day:

    “…To be honest, this absurd dispute gives the impression that your party is colluded in voting fraud, otherwise it wouldn’t jump so heavily on these perfectly sensible laws….”

    Yup. It sure sounds that away.

    Especially after the consistent repetition of “every vote should be counted.” Apparently, only from one party, and often more than once.

    Simon Jester (2708f4)

  66. Voter ID also polls pretty well with the public, I believe. Pretty much the only folks opposed seem to be the Democrat Party.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  67. funny! that would have
    been the first decent vote that
    “Holder” ever cast

    Colonel Haiku (7efa05)

  68. we as voters should
    insist that we show valid
    identification

    Colonel Haiku (7efa05)

  69. let’s show them who is
    honest, law-abiding WE
    got nothing to hide!

    Colonel Haiku (7efa05)

  70. Had a boss who immigrated from India–His first election (about a decade ago) he asked me what documents he needed when voting (asking about passport, green card, naturalization papers, etc.).

    He was absolutely shocked when I told him to just walk in and give them his name and address.

    BfC (fd87e7)

  71. The funny thing is that if James O’Keefe wanted to meet with Eric Holder at the Injustice Department, O’Keefe would have to provide a PHOTO ID in order to enter the building !

    Band Aid (0ae97d)

  72. Why are Democrats against the social integration of the underclass?

    Recently California addressed the drivers licenses for illegals issue. One of the arguments in favor: getting illegals licenses was a good thing socially, bringing them officially into society. Given the benefits to the poor (the income sector a large share of illegals fall into), why wouldn’t the Democrats want to create a mechanism for getting IDs into the hands of more of the poor? Why isn’t the media, aren’t they supposed to be champions of the poor?, asking the Democrats to explain this?

    East Bay Jay (19f566)

  73. Unlike Holder, O’Keefe can state nobody was killed during one of his undercover operations.

    Paul (db0515)

  74. Kman, at 7: the trouble is – and I speak here from experience as a poll worker where someone *did* come into my precinct and discover that someone else had already signed the book in his name – that at that point, you’ve detected the fraud, but:

    (a) the real person is not allowed to vote
    (b) there’s no way to catch the fraudulent voter
    (c) there’s no way to tell which vote came from the fraudulent voter.

    I’ve said before that I think this is more of a theoretical problem than it is a practical problem, in part because it would be extremely difficult to do this on a large scale. But when it happens, it’s an unfixable problem

    aphrael (bb82ea)

  75. Haiku, I live in a city where the city authorities have taken out large poster ads on the side of bus stations trying to convince young men who grew up in the ghetto, don’t have jobs, and don’t drive, that it would be worthwhile to get identification.

    Requiring them to provide identification they don’t have – and don’t see much of a reason to have, given that the city is having to exhort them to get it – would disenfranchise them.

    aphrael (bb82ea)

  76. East Bay Jay – see my last comment. Apparently in NYC there’s an advertising program, at least, designed to convince people to get IDs. I ave no clue how successful it is – or, for that matter, how perfunctory it is.

    aphrael (bb82ea)

  77. D.in.C: i’ve had numerous instances of people who show up in the polling place *with their registration card* and yet aren’t in the book. I’ve always presumed it was incompetence on the part of the county election people.

    aphrael (bb82ea)

  78. Requiring them to provide identification they don’t have – and don’t see much of a reason to have, given that the city is having to exhort them to get it – would disenfranchise them.
    Comment by aphrael — 4/10/2012 @ 6:29 am

    aphrael,

    I would suggest that they are disenfranchising themselves. If they want to vote, they should see that as a reason to have identification. If they don’t care to get it, maybe the reason they don’t want it is stronger than their desire to vote. I don’t know what the reason might be and would not speculate.

    Stashiu3 (cd7afe)

  79. I’m not surprised to see that left wing outlets like the NY Times and CNN are still ignoring this story. I am, however, surprised and disappointed to see that foxnews.com has not covered it yet.

    Ryan (1a35cb)

  80. #55 I can identify with that. I live in the infamous liberal-designed butterfly ballot/Jews voting for Buchanan by mistake land. Still getting lectured on how the SCOTUS stole election for algore by not allowing more of the selective recounts.
    Anyway, I went to vote in the Dubya vs sKerry election. They said they had no record of me on the rolls. I showed them my voting registration card and photo ID. Sat around for quite some time while various drones conferred. Eventually was given a “provisional” ballot. Don’t know if it was ever even counted though.
    Regarding two or more people trying to vote under the same registration: If two MILLION deceased remain on the rolls and many continue to vote, who will bother to question said voting? Or the stories of 3 million people being registered in more than one state? I know dems go to nursing homes here and assist the elderly (some senile) in their voting. I’m sure we’re all well aware of the vote fraud in Chicago in the Kennedy-Nixon election, as one example that meant the actual election actually turned on it. Ok, maybe those confused NYC transplants actually intended to vote for Gore. Then again, maybe some people said screw it why bother to vote in the Florida Panhandle Central time zone, when the election has already been called for Gore?

    Calypso Louis Farrakhan (d32e4c)

  81. How can someone be disenfranchised if they voluntarily choose to not comply with the requirements?

    JD (34d969)

  82. I’m sorry, aphrael, but I just don’t get this point of view from you.

    There are any number of everyday things that require ID in our culture. You can say you don’t like it, but that’s how it is.

    Getting a beer. Renting a room. Renting a car. Opening a checking account. Entering Federal buildings.

    Are those racist, too?

    I would simply suggest that clinging to this idea makes it appear as if the clinger doesn’t mind voting fraud.

    Which is why folks like Kman come back with “so what if there is a small amount of voting fraud.” Except we had to hear “count every vote” over and over again since 2000.

    Best wishes to you, but honestly: if it is racist to require ID to vote, it’s racist to require ID for anything. And surely you don’t want to go there.

    How much better to spend time and energy helping folks without ID to get it…

    Simon Jester (436b6f)

  83. Never claimed explicitly to be Holder, never touched the proffered ballot.

    No crime.

    Suck on it, Eric.

    mojo (8096f2)

  84. this “sting” is pulled off pretty carefully to avoid claims they violated the law. of course the poll worker assumed the guy was Eric Holder, but that’s just because of the situation. i would be interested to know what percentage of the population actually knows who Eric Holder is.

    milowent (bc04ac)

  85. Still think Weinergate was a hoax, Milo.

    narciso (5fca68)

  86. “Are those racist, too?”

    I don’t think I mentioned the word *racism*. I don’t actually think that race has anything to do with it. Something can have a negative consequence without that consequence being intended, and without there being nefarious motives behind it.

    Stashiu3, my speculation would be this: IDs cost money, and getting them can be a hassle, and if you’re living a certain kind of life, they don’t seem relevant to you.

    JD: making something a requirement which is not currently a requirement can have the effect of disenfranchising people who are currently not in compliance with the new requirement.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  87. Calypso, at 81:

    given that your name wasn’t in the book, what did you *want* the poll workers to do?

    They can:

    (a) not let you vote; your name isn’t in the book, and procedurally, the book is the official list of who is allowed to vote in that precinct.

    (b) let you vote based on this document you’re waving in their face which (i) isn’t proper procedure and (ii) could be forged without their knowledge.

    (c) give you a provisional ballot and let the determination be made later by the people responsible for maintaining the list.

    I think (c) is the obviously correct approach at that point. You *may* have an issue with the people who caused your name to not be on the ballot; I don’t think you have a legitimate beef with the ‘drones’ you are complaining about.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  88. Less of a hassle than voting, Aphrael, and if it’s just ID, not a driver’s license, the fee is waived on the grounds of poverty.

    nk (52d02a)

  89. narciso – wtf are you talking about? unlike Ron Brynaert and you, my Weinergate interest is fairly minimal now, unless you wish to identify who the socks were with real evidence.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    milowent (bc04ac)

  90. “Stashiu3, my speculation would be this: IDs cost money, and getting them can be a hassle, and if you’re living a certain kind of life, they don’t seem relevant to you.

    JD: making something a requirement which is not currently a requirement can have the effect of disenfranchising people who are currently not in compliance with the new requirement.”

    aphrael – The problem I see is that most people objecting to voter ID laws claim that they will disenfranchise people purely based on hypothetical scenarios, while there is actual evidence of voter fraud occurring.

    ID is required for a job, drivers license, etc., these days. Most voter ID proposals with which I am familiar include state offers to provide the ID at no or nominal cost, making the objections against such proposals look lamer and lamer by the moment.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  91. Aphrael,

    What if they pay you ten bucks to get an ID (but fingerprint you when you get one and make sure you only have one)?

    Considering all the crap I have to pay, I think I could spring ten bucks per ID if it was ensured there was only one ID per citizen.

    I’d also love for the ID to be shut off if a person is deceased. It seems like it wouldn’t be that hard to have a scanner where you can swipe the card and it pops up with the name and the validity of the ID. This would be handy in a million places.

    Of course it wouldn’t be so handy if you’re lying about who you are.

    Dustin (330eed)

  92. And nk has a point.

    Dustin (330eed)

  93. JD#82: I once had a very nice lady tell me that the lottery was an involuntary tax on the poor. It was a choice, I contended.

    She finally admitted that those poor people didn’t know better. They needed smarter people to make those decisions for them. Like her.

    Aphrael did NOT say that, but that is how I feel about voter ID. It’s not difficult to get photo ID, and so much of everyday life requires it. The energy spent fighting it could be more profitably expended on helping such people get the ID that they generally need (and have) in most cases.

    Simon Jester (f16f89)

  94. Hell, have a polling place for people without ID. Direct voters lacking ID to this polling place. Have them go through the process of getting a state ID, including photo and fingerprint, then give them their ballot right there after they have their ID.

    Dustin (330eed)

  95. Dustin, as a theoretical matter, i’m content with giving away ID for free.

    But I have some technical problems, both with ID in general and with your proposal.

    How do you deal, in your one-ID-per-citizen world, with lost wallets? Or, worse, stolen ones?

    In general, how do you deal with people who can’t prove their identity because, say, the records containing their original birth certificate were destroyed?

    These are edge cases, to be sure. But the edge cases are where all the interesting problems are, in general.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  96. Simon: the thing that I find most interesting about this debate is the repeated refrain that ‘so much of every day life requires ID’.

    That’s true for most people. But there *is* a culture where, no, it isn’t true. If you aren’t driving and are unemployed and don’t have a checking account, really, you can go indefinitely without ID.

    The people living in that world have every bit as much right to vote as you and I do.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  97. > Hell, have a polling place for people without ID. Direct voters lacking ID to this polling place

    How many of these are you willing to pay to have? How far do the people without ID have to travel to get to it? (Bearing in mind that, being ID-less, they’re not going to be able to drive there).

    On the one hand, this is probably practical in a place like NYC. On the other hand, it’s going to be totally impractical in much of the countryside. On the other other hand, being IDless is probably more common in big cities than in the countryside, because of the difficulty involved in not being able to drive in rural areas. So maybe it could work.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  98. Oh, come on, Aphrael. Everyone has lost ID and replaced it. How many people lose ID every year and jump through hoops to replace it? This is getting silly. The dangers of voter fraud are real, and the resistance shown is odd for a fair minded person like yourself.

    Simon Jester (f16f89)

  99. But I have some technical problems, both with ID in general and with your proposal.

    How do you deal, in your one-ID-per-citizen world, with lost wallets? Or, worse, stolen ones?

    Yes, there are certainly cases like that.

    My inability to come up with a solution that eliminates them doesn’t mean that voter ID requirements aren’t perfectly reasonable, though. I think there are probably some technical solutions to them, for example, the ID being replaceable and the old one rendered invalid in the scanning system I pulled out of imaginationland.

    In general, how do you deal with people who can’t prove their identity because, say, the records containing their original birth certificate were destroyed?

    There’s no perfect solution to this, but I think fingerprinting them and giving them an ID at least ensures they only have the one ID. There are ways to document a person, in cases where documentation has been destroyed. This could take time in each instance, but it seems strongly in the citizen’s interest to get this done instead of wandering around unable to have a bank account or even drive a car.

    So here’s an idea: show up to the ‘no ID polling station’, have your fingerprint scanned and photo taken. Tell them your address and other essential info. If you don’t know the info then it’s not entered. You get a temporary, but printed with photo, ID, with a scannable barcode. They mail you a permanent ID as soon as possible, and the barcode is rendered invalid a few days after the mailing.

    Those who are lying about their identity would now have strong evidence against them, such as a photo and a fingerprint. While their ballot is counted, it’s probably only counted once and they can easily be prosecuted. One of the problems with our current system is that a lot of fraud is undetected and certainly not associated with the criminal vote fraudster.

    There’s no way to eliminate all problems, but this solution would help voters without ID fix their problem and it would help citizens know there is a more accountable election process.

    Dustin (330eed)

  100. How many of these are you willing to pay to have?

    About ten thousand.

    Dustin (330eed)

  101. They could put these polling stations in police stations. We have a lot of those, and they already have the equipment needed, so the expense isn’t that high.

    In fact, let’s just make it so you can vote without ID by going to the nearest police station, which provides you with that ID and the vote.

    Dustin (330eed)

  102. How can someone be disenfranchised if they voluntarily choose to not comply with the requirements?
    Comment by JD — 4/10/2012 @ 7:12 am

    — B-b-b-because it’s just SO difficult to obtain an ID. Stand in line, show your birth certificate and/or social security card. And never mind that those are the same things you need to show in order to get a job; don’t you oppress the unemployed! They have a hard enough time as it is . . . standing in line at the welfare office (we force people to stand in too many g-d lines!) and having to prove who they are in order to get their government handouts. *sniff* Does not your heart just bleed all over the place for these poor people?

    Icy (fbdc08)

  103. I’m replying to:
    “I don’t know if what they’re doing here is illegal, but I bet there’s a team of lawyers at the Justice Department researching that now.”
    Comment by Jim Treacher — 4/9/2012 @ 5:08 pm

    — Yeah, I know.

    Icy (fbdc08)

  104. btw, I don’t think you’re being insane or anything, Aphrael.

    But this is a real problem. It’s a huge problem that must be solved. The solution being less than absolute and perfect is not a good reason to fail to solve this huge problem.

    Our elections need to be more accurate. Our country is showing many warning signs of instability. The military is many times more popular than our popularly elected congress, showing deep pessimism. Our economic situation is unstable. Our currency is probably failing. There are areas with severe unemployment.

    In our lifetimes we will see this country tested, and some of these sources of instability need to be addressed. It’s annoying (not you, but generally) that democrats implicitly realize that truing the vote will harm their prospects. I don’t think this is because of minorities. This is because voter fraud is a lot easier in cities, and democrat machines run most of the big cities.

    If republicans ran the cities instead, they would probably be fighting the idea of voter ID. Sorry, but I have no respect for the GOP’s honor after the VA primary.

    This stuff needs to be fixed, or alternatively, it’s time for Texas to go ahead and get out of this broken country.

    Dustin (330eed)

  105. Thank Allah nobody was on anti depressants.

    Aphrael – I think that disenfransized should not include those that choose to not comply with fundamentally basic requirements.

    Comment by JD — 4/10/2012 @ 11:34 am

    Oops, posted in wrong thread.

    JD (ace8c4)

  106. Why are Democrats against the social integration of the underclass?
    Comment by East Bay Jay — 4/9/2012 @ 8:14 pm

    — You can’t use government money and authority to help someone that has already helped themselves. [“Not fair! No fun!”]

    Icy (fbdc08)

  107. I think what we have here, obviously, is a difference in world view. Most of us cannot conceive how a person can do much of anything nowadays without photo ID. Aphrael—as always polite and civil—insists that many folks are in precisely that situation. If memory serves, he once stated it was possible to open a bank/checking account without photo ID.

    Not at the three banks I called at the time, asking that question.

    I would really like some genuine statistics on this. In the latest exchange, there was a serious point raised about “losing ID.” ??? You replace it, like most people do.

    What if the people in question lose their apartment or housekeys? We need to balance how difficult it is to replace a key, with the costs of leaving your house open for robbery. Which brings us back to a collision of world views.

    It sounds more and more like a pursuit of perfection argument: in essence, even if one person cannot get photo ID, it is a terrible thing for the entire system.

    Me, I think that people who don’t know very basic concepts about government should not vote (and that is not code for “agree with me”). I’m talking “name your two Senators and Representative.” “Name the three branches of government.” The kind of thing, though much simpler, that we ask folks asking to become citizens of our nation.

    But there are many people who think that *any* vote is a wonderful thing. After all the Jim Crow poll-test nonsense the Democrats pulled in the South, we cannot have poll tests. I understand that. The old Leo Szilard quote about voting comes to mind.

    Still…the least a person can do, if she or he wishes to vote, is get a blinking ID. The ID that they would need to rent a room or a car, to open a bank account, and so forth.

    I think the issue here is that voting purists need to confront voter fraud. Some say it doesn’t happen, even in the face of documentation. Then they say that it doesn’t happen much. So it isn’t relevant.

    I disagree. And if I change the situation slightly, so do the voting purists.

    In close elections, every vote counts. Isn’t that what voting purists think anyway? What does Al Gore think about charges of Republican voter fraud, for example?

    A voter ID is a simple solution. And again, the energy spent opposing it could be more profitably used to help the folks who cannot get ID.

    I just do not understand this argument, other than a purist sort of debate. I’m much more concerned with keeping voting honest.

    Simon Jester (f16f89)

  108. “In general, how do you deal with people who can’t prove their identity because, say, the records containing their original birth certificate were destroyed?”

    aphrael – Again, back to the hypotheticals.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  109. Simon: the question about ‘losing ID’ was posed in the context of a system designed to ensure that every citizen had only one ID.

    How do you do that? If, for example, you lose your passport, it’s a royal pain to get it replaced; the state department has a very high threshold of proof for that. Do we use a similar threshold for Dustin’s one-ID-per-customer ID? That seems unrealistic, but as soon as you lower the threshold, a lot of the benefits Dustin is imagining disappear.

    As for the bank/checking account question: when I opened my account with Wells Fargo Bank, 21 years ago, I did not have a photo ID. But I opened the account. Perhaps the rules have changed; perhaps someone bent the rules in my favor. I don’t know.

    > In close elections, every vote counts. Isn’t that what voting purists think anyway?

    I don’t speak for “voting purists”, but my opinion is this: any system we design will have a margin of error. That margin is a result of the error margin in counting votes (either by hand or by machine), plus the error margin in identifying voters. Any result which is within the margin of error is in effect indeterminate.

    This is why I’ve *never* been with my friends on the left in complaining about the outcome of the 2000 election: the result was clearly within the margin of error of the Florida voting system, so the ‘actual’ result is indeterminate; we don’t know who won, we *can never* know who won. It was a tie, because it was within the margin of error.

    My view of voter fraud is that there’s no evidence that it’s large-scale enough to be a more important contributor to the margin of error than the contribution from the counting system. That is, there’s no evidence that it’s statistically significant. So, while i acknowledge that it exists, i’m not bothered by it.

    I am, on the other hand, substantially more concerned with the effect of telling someone that they can’t vote because they haven’t jumped through some procedural hoop which – as far as they can tell – exists *only* as a procedural hoop to make it more difficult for them to vote.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  110. Dustin – since a lot of the people who are ID-less also live in communities with an intense distrust of the police, i’d have a problem with the police as a venue for that. On the other hand, post offices would work well. Or, for that matter, churches. :)

    I think this sort of system – we’ll make it easy and convenient to get iD, we’ll provide you with temporary ID for free, and if there’s a documentation/proof problem, we’ll shift the onus of researching onto the state – could be workable. I also think it bears very little resemblance to the systems actually being discussed in most jurisdictions.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  111. aphrael needed photo id and a fingerprint to take both the LSAT and the bar exam. He is playing devil’s advocate. Be nice.

    nk (52d02a)

  112. NK: I didn’t need a fingerprint to take the LSAT, just the bar exam. I did need a photo ID for both.

    But … the percentage of people taking the bar exam is fairly small, and the fact that needing ID is normal in the world of people who are taking the bar exam in no way negates the fact that, in the world of the people whom the city of NY is unsuccessfully advertising the importance of ID to, there are lots of people who get through daily life with no ID being required.

    IOW: the bar exam is a red herring.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  113. Dustin – since a lot of the people who are ID-less also live in communities with an intense distrust of the police, i’d have a problem with the police as a venue for that

    Yeah, I was being tongue in cheek.

    On the other hand, post offices would work well.

    That’s an intelligent and constructive improvement.

    I also think it bears very little resemblance to the systems actually being discussed in most jurisdictions.

    Comment by aphrae

    True. One reason for this is that the true-the-vote side of the debate is (justifiably) so certain of the merits of their movement that they interpret any objection as bad faith, So they are unwilling to consider and respond and improve the proposal. Especially on a widespread level.

    But I really think we could fix this issue for the most part.

    Dustin (330eed)

  114. Dustin: to be fair, many of the people on my side of the debate *also* interpret any discussion of voter ID as being implicitly in bad faith. There’s a terrible tendency to presume that the unpleasant side-effects we forsee are the *intended* result.

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  115. Fair enough aphrael:

    “…My view of voter fraud is that there’s no evidence that it’s large-scale enough to be a more important contributor to the margin of error than the contribution from the counting system. That is, there’s no evidence that it’s statistically significant. So, while i acknowledge that it exists, i’m not bothered by it….”

    Respectfully, that was 300% on the Irony Scale. My view on people who can’t be bothered to get ID in order to vote is that there is, in your words “...no evidence that it’s large-scale enough to be a more important contributor to the margin of error than the contribution from the counting system.

    If you don’t agree, why not? Do you have data?

    Simon Jester (f16f89)

  116. And nk, unlike many people, you actually know the origins of the term “Devil’s Advocate.” Aphrael is a fine person, and merits respect, whether or not another person agrees or disagrees. Which is your point, of course.

    Simon Jester (f16f89)

  117. In general, how do you deal with people who can’t prove their identity because, say, the records containing their original birth certificate were destroyed?

    — Yeah, life kinda sucks for them, because you know that they NEVER get a drivers license, NEVER open a bank account, NEVER obtain medical services, NEVER work a day in their life, NEVER fly on a commercial airplane, NEVER purchase prescription drugs at a pharmacy, NEVER buy cigarettes or alcohol, or a house, or a car, AND are ALWAYS turned away when they attempt to obtain an ID . . . Right?

    Icy (fbdc08)

  118. “Haiku, I live in a city where the city authorities have taken out large poster ads on the side of bus stations trying to convince young men who grew up in the ghetto, don’t have jobs, and don’t drive, that it would be worthwhile to get identification.”

    aphrael – I am not familiar with NYC’s ad campaign or its purpose. The rules have changed substantially from 21 years ago concerning opening bank accounts and beginning a job. ID is required.

    I can fully understand not having a drivers license in NYC, but is the purpose of the ad campaign to mainstream the individuals it is directed at? Did Nanny Bloomberg put out a press release about it?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  119. My feelings are hurt at the liquor store, aphrael, when the thirty-year old in front of me is asked for ID and I’m not. ‘)

    I think ID is the opposite side of privacy. If I’m not known, there’s got to be a way people need to know who I am.

    I’ve posted before about the time I asked permission in advance to go to a country without fear of being arrested, and the passport officer just gave my passport back to me without even opening it because I had been tracked all the way. Could we do that with every voter? In a small community, yes. In a concrete jungle, like O’Keefe showed, no.

    nk (52d02a)

  120. Daleyrocks, I suspect that’s the purpose, yes.

    http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/eo/eo_150.pdf isn’t quite a press release, though, and it doesn’t describe what i’m seeing (which is basically poster ads on bus shelters, inside busses, and inside subways – but then, i’m not part of the target population, so I’m only going to see advertising which is broad in scope rather than being targeted).

    aphrael (e0cdc9)

  121. when I opened my account with Wells Fargo Bank, 21 years ago, I did not have a photo ID. But I opened the account. Perhaps the rules have changed;

    The rules have changed

    JD (ace8c4)

  122. Why do the “no ID” proponents seem not to grasp that each time the “no ID” situation allows people to vote erroneously (whether via purposeful impersonation, innocent poll worker error, dead people, non existent people, not citizens) it effectively disenfranchises us all–every one of us who did vote properly. It seems to me that as citizens, and quite apart from partisan politics, we should be loudly and uniformly demanding that our election system be as perfect– and as free from corruption or manipulation or mistakes as is humanly possible given our advanced technology. Lawful voters are supposed to be real people of proper age, be citizens, be previously registered and have a verifiable address within the precinct at the time of every election. A picture ID to help verify all of the aforementioned information is somehow a bridge too far?

    I certainly don’t want to come across as scoldy but I am another one who is genuinely surprised at Aphrael’s hard line on this. I don’t always agree with Aphrael but I have never considered him to be naive or unwilling to look reality square in the face.

    elissa (126d93)

  123. Well put, elissa. I didn’t mean to snark by putting aphrael’s own words to another situation, but it does smack of a purity issue—even one disenfranchised voter is too many, even if there are ten illegal votes for each.

    I on the other hand find one fraudulent vote to undermine the system. Especially when the rules seem to designed to “wink” at fraudulent voting in one direction only.

    People of good intent can disagree on this.

    Simon Jester (f16f89)

  124. With respect to voter fraud—

    I’d also add that it’s pretty much universally accepted as fact that the Daley machine in the City of Chicago “stole” the election for JFK. This was even covered in the PBS documentary “Daley”. I’m under the impression it’s also mentioned in some history books which kids read in school when they’re learning about the role and influence of big city political bosses and ward heelers. Is “stealing” an election not the end game of voter fraud? Did it happen only just that once in 1960 and then disappear forever after that?

    elissa (126d93)

  125. And, BTW, where I am, they write down my name, address and DL#, off my DL, when I buy OTC allergy and cold medicines containing pseudoephedrine for my daughter.

    nk (52d02a)

  126. I’d also add that it’s pretty much universally accepted as fact that the Daley machine in the City of Chicago “stole” the election for JFK.

    — In 1960 my mom (who was born and raised in Chicago) was in nursing school and living in a small apartment on Chicago’s south side. One day a couple of Democratic precinct officials knocked on her door. They asked her who she was going to vote for, and my mom (who was raised an FDR Democrat) answered “Kennedy”. They thanked her AND THEN told her “if you have any problems with anyone in the neighborhood, just let us know and we’ll take care of it.”

    Icy (fbdc08)

  127. elissa makes a very good point: EVERY TIME a fraudulent vote is cast it negates the will of a legitimate voter.

    Every time.

    Icy (fbdc08)

  128. Comment by aphrael — 4/10/2012 @ 11:17 am

    How do you deal, in your one-ID-per-citizen world, with lost wallets? Or, worse, stolen ones?

    Not well. It’s OK for those with real driver’s licenses – they will be mailed a duplicate promptly. People with state IDs need to go through the whole process all over again.

    Why the attempt to prevent people from having more than one at a time? Obviously because picture IDs aren’t all they are cracked up to be and they can be used by other people!

    People with cars presumably will not let go of them.

    In general, how do you deal with people who can’t prove their identity because, say, the records containing their original birth certificate were destroyed?

    Comment by daleyrocks — 4/10/2012 @ 11:50 am

    aphrael – Again, back to the hypotheticals.

    This is not hypothetical at all. I know an 84 year old in exactly this kind of situation.

    During World War II for the draft board they allowed him to use his circumcision certificate, but they keep on raising standards.

    In general, up to 5% of the poipulation could be in trouble before the system woiuld take notice.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  129. Comment by elissa — 4/10/2012 @ 1:00 pm

    I’d also add that it’s pretty much universally accepted as fact that the Daley machine in the City of Chicago “stole” the election for JFK. This was even covered in the PBS documentary “Daley”.

    This is not the full story. There was also vote stealing in Texas, and both Illinois and Texas were needed.

    Is “stealing” an election not the end game of voter fraud? Did it happen only just that once in 1960 and then disappear forever after that?

    But they didn’t do it with the silly method of having people actually troop out to the polls and cast votes.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  130. Sammy Finkelman #129 – with voter fraud, the honest 90%+ of the population is in trouble …

    As has been suggested more than once, if the effort spent to prevent voter-ID laws from taking effect was spent on getting valid proven IDs for the up to 5% of the population that could be in trouble, it would *already* be much *much* harder to commit voter fraud …

    Alasdair (e7cb73)

  131. I would think showing how easy it would be to steal the vote of the AG of the United States makes the case that voter fraud is an issue is like pouring a glass of water on someone shows that water is wet.

    One can argue if it is possible to do in a large enough scale to make a difference, but as a senate race in MN and a gov race (I think) in WA demonstrated, the difference may not need to be much.

    Maybe if ID for buying alcohol and tobacco was enforced there would be fewer people without ID.

    I think elections need to be credible in not allowing fraud and not promoting disenfranchisement. The main reason not to have riots after an election is if you think it is fair. Once one party believes they can no longer trust the results of an election why would you not expect trouble?

    As far as I am concerned, if someone is going to believe the poster that says “Pull the lever with the D” (as I’ve seen in Philly) or “Pull the lever with the R” can’t obtain an ID when there is minimal hassle, I don’t care if they vote.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  132. aphrael – From the New York State voter registration website instructions for completing a registration form:

    “Verifying your identity
    We’ll try to check your identity before Election Day, through the DMV number (driver’s license number or non-driver ID number), or the last four digits of your social security number, which you’ll fill in below.
    If you do not have a DMV or social security number, you may use a valid photo ID, a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or some other government document that shows your name and address. You may include a copy of one of those types of ID when you mail this form.
    If we are unable to verify your identity before Election Day, you will be asked for ID when you vote for the first time.”

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  133. You have to admire the sheer testicular fortitude it takes to pull a stunt like this.

    Has anyone mentioned being a coward about race yet? If it’s not an original thought I won’t bring it up.

    And, oh yeah, bye the bye, I’m a coward about race. It took Eric Holder getting anointed appointed for me to face the truth. It’s done me a world of good.

    Steve (ac3228)

  134. I meant that if anyone can appreciate testicular fortitude it’s gotta be someone so despicably lacking in such qualities as the racist redneck Eric Holder was picturing in his mind when he uttered those words.

    Steve (ac3228)

  135. – Yeah, I know.

    Comment by Icy — 4/10/2012 @ 11:33 am

    Obviously not.

    Jim Treacher (30ee2f)

  136. “This is not hypothetical at all. I know an 84 year old in exactly this kind of situation.”

    “In general, up to 5% of the poipulation could be in trouble before the system woiuld take notice.”

    Sammy – What kind of ID does your 84 year old friend have? Please elaborate. I provided a link to the New York State registration requirements in #134.

    Your second statement above is purely hypothetical. If you look at the requirements to register to vote, they actually include providing proof of identity. The concept that we have hordes of people living off the grid with no ID who should be able to walk up to a polling place and vote flies in the face of existing voter registration laws.

    Sorry, no sale.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  137. aphrael – Thanks for the link at #121. Bloomberg provides a succinct summary there for you about how rules have changed regarding opening bank accounts and needing ID for other services. Heck, I think if you avoid banks and just use currency exchanges, even they expect you to provide some form of ID.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.0532 secs.