O’Keefe Video on Potential for Voter Fraud in Vermont: Surprisingly Hilarious
There’s usually some humor to these videos, but I didn’t realize how funny this one would be.
It’s not just dudes giving volunteers the names of dead people or famous NFL quarterbacks or that kind of thing.
It’s dudes doing that . . . and other dudes going to other places where an ID is typically demanded, like a bar (or hotel) . . . and trying to buy drinks (or check into a room) without an ID . . . and calling the bartender (or hotel clerk) a racist when an ID is demanded.
Funny stuff. Worth your time if you haven’t seen it already.
Racists
No Hannah Giles.
Pass.
EC (dda60e) — 3/15/2012 @ 7:43 amHa! That was good times right there. Too bad most people on the left don’t understand that “because it’s racist!” doesn’t work as a reason why anymore.
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/15/2012 @ 8:25 amYou can’t even share an adult beverage with a lefty anymore, in a public establishment or at home, because that means succumbing to the racist policies of the Man and showing an ID to purchase the beverage.
Feel the oppression!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 8:58 amWe should find out if those racists at planned parenthood force minority girls to show ID…
Ghost (6f9de7) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:01 amThe look on that hotel clerk’s face when she’s told how racist this is…
Priceless.
It’s a great point. The idea that ID requirements are racist is a ridiculous propaganda for keeping our elections rife with fraud.
The only worse bit is the canard that election fraud never takes place, which ignores the dozens of election fraud convictions ACORN employees were convicted of, ignores the many races where there are more votes than eligible voters, and a long list of other proofs. Election fraud is real, and voter ID is one important step that the fraudsters are afraid of.
I would like voter ID, paper ballots, and plenty of sting operations of election workers. That wouldn’t make things perfect, but it would make them pretty good.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:08 amWow, we really need to do something about the fraud potential of absentee ballots. That seems to be where the fraud actually is. In person voting fraud seems to be pretty rare. Maybe there should be a rule that if you want to use an absentee ballot you have to get it notarized?
time123 (03e182) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:09 am“In person voting fraud seems to be pretty rare.”
time123 – It’s a little tougher to detect since people aren’t checking ID’s, wouldn’t you agree? Are you actually suggesting it is not occurring?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:29 amIt is a really good video.
MayBee (081489) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:31 amI hope they come to LA. I saw a poll worker get yelled at by the person in charge for agreeing to glance at an ID the voter insisted on showing.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence as the saying goes. Plus liberals like to ignore the plethora of prosecutions that exist for in person voting fraud or breezily dismiss them with a, well it doesn’t seem to be an organized activity excuse.
Thought experiment – Why not make it harder to cheat in the first place instead of dreaming up lame excuses.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:34 amtime123, I agree that absentee ballots are an issue worth looking at, but as Daley noted, it’s hard to tell how much in person fraud happens.
But it does happen. Voter ID is a common sense reform.
Absentee ballot reform is an additional issue.
I doubt ‘they’ would permit a notary requirement as that costs money. Personally, I think that’s a great idea. I also would like a medical explanation or a set of military orders. I don’t think there are any other valid reasons to vote absentee. If you can’t be bothered to even be in your home town on election day, don’t meddle in the affairs of those who are there.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:35 amI’m glad Texas just decided to sue the DOJ over its ridiculous stance on voter ID. That should make Holder squirm.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:38 amApparently, it’s important to write our laws for the people we imagine can’t get a free id or scrape together $7 for contraception.
MayBee (081489) — 3/15/2012 @ 9:40 amMe too, Daley.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 10:12 am@12 MayBee that was awesome!
Pious Agnostic (7c3d5b) — 3/15/2012 @ 10:15 am“Apparently, it’s important to write our laws for the people we imagine can’t get a free id or scrape together $7 for contraception.”
MayBee – For the chirren!!!!!!!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 10:39 am___________________________________________
Racists
And so non-compassionate, so non-humane, so non-sophisticated, so non-generous too.
The world (ass-backwards) that exists on the other side of the looking glass — thanks to the influence of wonderfully humane, loving, generous, compassionate, sophisticated liberalism — is such an unexpected, unpredictable surprise.
This is analogous to that inverted world mocked by O’Keefe.
Mark (411533) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:14 amAfter the ’96 Miami Mayoral election, the scrub lists were development to weed out ineligible voters, many counties didn’t use them, so about 2,000 of those voted in 2000, between that and
narciso (186b54) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:15 amthe chads, the turn was made to electronic voters, then Brad and company, including RFK jr, started
with the ‘black box’ paranoia,
Comment by daleyrocks — 3/15/2012 @ 8:58 am
You can’t even share an adult beverage with a lefty anymore, in a public establishment or at home, because that means succumbing to the racist policies of the Man and showing an ID to purchase the beverage.
Only if it plausible that the person buying a drink might be under age 21.
The ID requiremenmt, by the way, is not a real obstacle.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:27 amAbsentee Ballots present the greatest avenue for fraud when done in conjunction with group residences where “assistance” can be rendered to the voter, and the ballots are “bundled” to an aggregator (ACORN, anyone?), who of course would check to see that all of the neccessary info has been entered.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:46 amComment by Dustin — 3/15/2012 @ 9:08 am
The idea that ID requirements are racist is a ridiculous propaganda for keeping our elections rife with fraud.
No, it’s ridiculous propaganda for making it easy to vote, so that people who don’t care very much about voting can be urged to go to the polls and vote Democratic. The racist angle is there for legal, not polemical, reasons.
There is also of course the poll tax angle. Also really there for legal reasons. (24th Amendment)
It’s an outrage actually that ID’s cost money. This isn’t done with Social Security cards.
In the Dominican Republic they have really learned to profit from this. Birth certificates are needed for many things, but birth certificates are only good for 90 days from the date of issue and must continually be repurchased.
Of course that means it always possible to get false information into it as one or two baseball players and other athletes did.
Recently the government changed its citizenship law and declared that children of illegal immigrants (meaning Haitians) were no longer citizens and this has created a lot of controversy. People who have lived all their lives in the Dominican Republic are not about to petition for Haitian citizenship and go to Haiti.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/25/world/americas/25dominican.html?_r=1&sq=&st=cse&%2334;=&scp=3&%2334;refugees%20international=&pagewanted=all
While the case was in process, the government changed its migration law in 2004 to specifically exclude the offspring of Haitian migrants from citizenship. The Dominican Constitution grants citizenship to those born on Dominican soil, except the children of diplomats and those “in transit.” That has long meant that the children of immigrants, no matter their legal status, gained Dominican citizenship.
After the international court ruled against the Dominican government in 2005, ordering that damages be paid to the two children, the Dominican Supreme Court said that Haitian workers were considered “in transit” and that their children were therefore Haitian, not Dominican.
Last spring, the government agency in charge of identity documents, the Joint Electoral Council, issued a memorandum telling its employees to watch for the offspring of foreigners trying to identify themselves as Dominican. It now hangs at every clerk’s office and is shown to people thought to have Haitian blood.
http://refugeesinternational.org/blog/baseball-players-and-birth-certificates
http://refugeesinternational.org/blog/dominican-republic-baseball-players-and-migration-laws
Some Republicans perhaps might want to imitate the Dominican Republic, at least as far as birth right citizenship is concerned, including the retroactive provision.
Using IDs as a way of financing the government, probably not yet, but nobody wants to just eliminate all these fees altogether, as they should be if these IDs are considered necessary.
If not, why not charge $500, $1,000 or even $5,000? Maybe they will in time.
Right now, states that require ID for voting will make an exception if somebody claims they need an ID in order to vote.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:51 am“Only if it plausible that the person buying a drink might be under age 21.”
Sammy – Wrong. You still have to adhere to the racist policy of showing ID to legally buy the beverage. What was unclear about that?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:56 ami> The only worse bit is the canard that election fraud never takes place, which ignores the dozens of election fraud convictions ACORN employees were convicted of,
How many of these involved in-person voter impersonation?
For this to even make sense, the people who arecommitting the fraud must have no control over the election machinery (or else they would just stuff the ballots and falsify records) and there must be no easy absentee voting (or else they would submit filled out absentee ballots) and there must be no political competition or poll watching in areas in which this done (or else they’d get caught and stopped very soon)
ignores the many races where there are more votes than eligible voters, and a long list of other proofs.
More votes than voters obviously is done by some method other than Election Day impersonation of registered voters!!
Election fraud is real, and voter ID is one important step that the fraudsters are afraid of.
Actually, I think fraudsters would like it, because it would make absentee and advance voting more common.
The people who don’t like it are people who want to increase turnout or who would like to register college students from out of state, which is legal, since people have the right to declare their dormitories their residence.
The fact of registration, the requirement to vote only at the locationb where registered, the need to deliver mail to the voter, and the signature, is a great protection against fake voters. The ID requirement is not for the right ID to prove citizenship, nor does it exclude anybody made ineligible by state law. It giartds against a tyope of fraud that might have been done 1000 years ago, except that 100 years ago nobody had these IDs and they used other methods.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:57 am* 100 years ago. 1912.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 11:58 amComment by Dustin — 3/15/2012 @ 9:35 am
it’s hard to tell how much in person fraud happens.
It’s easy to tell. It can only happen really with the consent of the voter. Any other way it will be detected if it hapepns a dozen times.
But it does happen. Voter ID is a common sense reform.
It sounds like it makes sense. It doesn’t mnake sense. A signature is actually better than any other kind of IDs because it can’t easily be be forged especiually if you’ve never looked at the signature before. It’s better computer security than a password. Now – they could automate that, determine electronically if a signature matched, and offer several other options if it didn’t. But that would cost money. It also would not benefit any particular political party. (of course the Democrats would say what about illiterate voters -literacy teswts were outlawed in 1964 – or disabled people but yuou could accommodate them.)
The Democrats actually don’t care about every vote being counted. In places where Democrats conmtrol the election machinery so often they had systenms that lose votes. Chads. Voting machines ehere if made the mistake of pushing the l;ever both ways you lost your vote.
Absentee ballot reform is an additional issue. <
It's a real issue unlike the other one.
I doubt ‘they’ would permit a notary requirement as that costs money. Personally, I think that’s a great idea. I also would like a medical explanation or a set of military orders. I don’t think there are any other valid reasons to vote absentee.
The Republican party, in general, likes absentee voting. Theer are also people in hospitals.
What happens also in the case of permanent absentee votinmg is that family members (family members because the ballot is mailed and delievered) cast the votes for people who are absentee, especially after they are dead.
If you can’t be bothered to even be in your home town on election day, don’t meddle in the affairs of those who are there
The state of Israel has that kind of rule (for “Zionist” reasons, and it has ID and yet there was a case of voter fraud – neve rinmvestigated apparently. The case did meet the requirement of no political competitirs carung enough. A religious party in 1999 ararnged for people to give up their IDs for a day then recruited voters to vote several times. Somebody matched faces to the IS cards and made sure that before anyone went to a polling place he memorized the ID number.
Picture IDs aren’t all that they are cracked up to be. Otherwise states wouldn’t have a rule that a person could not have more than one copy of a Driver’s license at a time.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:11 pmDidn’t cancel the last italics.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:11 pm“It giartds against a tyope of fraud that might have been done 1000 years ago, except that 100 years ago nobody had these IDs and they used other methods.”
Sammy – Would it have guarded against that voter fraud ring that was busted near New York City just a few years ago that had been busing people around from polling place to polling place to record multiple votes? I think so.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:15 pm“It’s easy to tell. It can only happen really with the consent of the voter. Any other way it will be detected if it hapepns a dozen times.”
Sammy – How do dead people consent?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:18 pm“The Democrats actually don’t care about every vote being counted.”
Sammy – Very true. In Chicago they want to know how many votes are needed. Where they come from is something everybody knows not to ask.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:21 pmA signature is actually better than any other kind of IDs because it can’t easily be be forged especiually if you’ve never looked at the signature before.
In my voting place, nobody looks at what my signature is supposed to look like. I suppose if I ever challenged a vote made in my name, I could make them look at the signature.
MayBee (081489) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:22 pmBesides, I’m betting someone could register to vote using an X. When my son registered to vote, he could draw a map to show where he often slept if he was homeless.
Don’t agree, Sammy.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:23 pmMaybee is so right.
Once you’ve voted, they can’t just pull your vote out when they realize your signature doesn’t match.
Let’s go ahead and have voter IDs. It’s not hurting anything to check ID. We all have ID. They can compare your signature to the signature on your ID. There, everyone’s happy except the fraudsters.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:28 pmI think everybody should have a bar code tattooed on his or her wrist that identifies him in a national database for access to all activities, including financial. Voter fraud is likely a much smaller thing than identity theft for financial fraud and not to mention tax evasion. The U.S. mint would likely have to lay off a lot of printers and the “plastic” manufacturers would suffer but overall it would be a good thing.
nk (dec503) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:42 pmnk – I vote for microchip implants.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:50 pmI’m thinking of the cost. We would be paying a surgeon a lot more than a tattooist.
And then there’s the fact that we’re in a global economy. Maybe it should be an international database, administered by the UN. No paper passports, no paper visas, no money laundering, no criminals coming across our borders?
nk (dec503) — 3/15/2012 @ 12:57 pmnk – The U.N. always does an excellent job.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:10 pmtattoos are very stylish.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:17 pm“tattoos are very stylish.”
Dustin – Big honking multi-colored neck ones especially.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:20 pmTramp stamps are out.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:21 pmDustin – the problem with tattoos is that many folk remember them as camp, *not* “stylish” …
‘Nuff said ?
Alasdair (e7cb73) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:21 pmMaybe there should be a rule that if you want to use an absentee ballot you have to get it notarized?
Comment by time123 — 3/15/2012 @ 9:09 am
— And what, ah say wut, is the requirement for a-gettin’ sumthin’ notarized? Why, you have to show the notary your ID! Pay attention when I’m talkin’ to ya, boy!
Icy (02b509) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:22 pmComment by MayBee — 3/15/2012 @ 12:22 pm
Nobody looks at signatures anymore, not even banks. I wonder if maybe some lawyer in some a lawsuit established that nobody is good enough to reject a signature.
A poll watcher actually could challenge a voter on the basis of signature since the voter could be chalelnged on any grounds. With no proof all the voter woujld ahev to do is swear.
You know the Democrats ALWAYS want to keep poll watchers out of black neighborhoods. If you are used to seeing 90% of the vote or more go the same way extra votes won’t be noticeable I suppose.
It rarely happens but sometimes somebody does vote using a signature that doesn’t look good.
I saw it years ago. This person may have voted many times and is recignized. Possibly it was a registration from somebody else, like his son with the same name and they got the registrations mixed up and removed the wrong one (it has to be something like that)
Besides, I’m betting someone could register to vote using an X. When my son registered to vote, he could draw a map to show where he often slept if he was homeless.
I think an X might be legal, but I never saw it.
In other kinds of cases where somebody uses an X a thir dperson has to vouvh for that X. And if a person can’t read,how can they choose the names?
Now of course they have handicpaped accessible machines so that a person with any conceivable handicap can vote independently. Nobody uses them even though they would be useful for anyone who needs reading glasses and doesn’t have them. Because the people ruinning the electuions don’t realize that with paper ballots they now make sense for some people. Before, the voting machine was better.
Addresses, yes that’s true now. But the person however needs a mailing address I think. Maybe not strictly though because maybe they are not required to get any mail. but mail is how they know people moved.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:25 pmComment by MayBee — 3/15/2012 @ 12:22 pm
When my son registered to vote, he could draw a map to show where he often slept if he was homeless.
What – they are so many that they need to tell people that?
I think they need a location in order to determine what precinct to put somebody in, but they still may need a mailing address, like a Post Office Box and even they don’t need it they would probably be asked for one.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:30 pmIf you don’t have ink you’re a loser. And you shouldn’t get to vote.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:31 pmthe potential for fraud here in Lost Angels is quite obvious. all you have to do is go to pages 8-16 of this report on the current redistricting farce and note the census data for each district.
compare and contrast the “voting age” numbers versus the “citizen voting age” population and tell me there aren’t huge numbers of potential illegal voters there waiting to happen, if they are not already.
and, along with ID’s, i want ink stained fingers too.
redc1c4 (403dff) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:39 pmI like the ink stained fingers too, red. It should be a real point of pride to show you did your civic duty.
Dustin (401f3a) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:45 pm“I think everybody should have a bar code tattooed on his or her wrist that identifies him in a national database for access to all activities…”
Well, that’s how the statists see it. They believe that we ought to be forced to produce identification and even stand for a search before we’re allowed into one of their sacred places (like courtrooms), but, they don’t feel that way about voting booths.
That’s on account of they do take their personal safety very seriously, but they don’t take democracy very seriously, despite a lot of lip service to the concept.
This is especially true of so-called liberals.
Dave Surls (46b08c) — 3/15/2012 @ 1:58 pmThis is disgustingly racist
JD (d246fe) — 3/15/2012 @ 3:58 pm“…allowed into one of their sacred places (like courtrooms)…”
Comment by Dave Surls — 3/15/2012 @ 1:58 pm
…or the Department of Justice in Washington DC!
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 3/15/2012 @ 4:28 pmIt’s disgusting how incompetent those against voter i.d. believe minorities to be. Why, I think it’s even racist. Why do they think so lowly of the poor and downtrodden?
Dana (4eca6e) — 3/15/2012 @ 5:11 pmIt is a bit patronizing, Dana, no? The soft bigotry of low expectations, on steroids.
JD (d246fe) — 3/15/2012 @ 5:13 pmDustin –
I also would like a medical explanation or a set of military orders. I don’t think there are any other valid reasons to vote absentee. If you can’t be bothered to even be in your home town on election day, don’t meddle in the affairs of those who are there.
As someone who’s going to be on a different continent this November, I have to disagree with you on this one. There are other employers besides the military whose employees (and their families) end up living overseas for months, or years, at a time. I’d rather not be disenfranchised just because I’m with a private employer rather than the U.S. military.
Now, I certainly wouldn’t be opposed to some kind of absentee-voting reform — it’s certainly too easy to cheat the way we currently do it. Maybe there could be a requirement to go to some U.S. government office in the town/country where you’re living and show ID there before getting handed your absentee ballot, for example. But absentee voting should not be limited to the military only.
Robin Munn (a7f1bb) — 3/15/2012 @ 5:29 pmThe difference between that requirement and a notary requirement being, of course, that there would be no fees involved for the voting.
Or the notary requirement that time123 mentioned could be implemented, with the added wrinkle that the U.S. government pays the notary fees. The simplest way to do it would be to have the notary give you a receipt with the notation that this was fees paid for absentee voting, which you then mail to the appropriate government office to be reimbursed for your expenses. Of course, that’s too sensible and the actual way it would be implemented (if it ever was) would involve many more layers of bureaucracy… but there you go, one way to make a notary requirement Constitutional.
Robin Munn (a7f1bb) — 3/15/2012 @ 5:35 pm“but there you go, one way to make a notary requirement Constitutional.”
Robin – If voter of the ballot the notary is being asked to notarize does not have any ID, what do you do then?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/15/2012 @ 5:49 pmI stopped voting absentee in California. In the 2000 presidential election, there where about 1 million absentee ballot that were not counted because they could not affect the outcome of the Electoral College vote in California… (about 10% of the total vote in California).
Of course, this fed into the whole meme that Bush lost the popular vote. The difference between Gore v Bush was 543,895 votes (and, it appears that there may have been as many as 1.5 million absentee votes not counted nationwide). In general, Democrats fought counting absentee ballots thinking that they tended to skew conservative (at least in that election).
I vowed that I would never again give the state a right over whether or not to count my vote.
BfC (fd87e7) — 3/15/2012 @ 5:50 pmKARZAI: GET OUT!
Afghan president wants U.S. troops out of villages…
U.S. moves massacre soldier to Kuwait; Afghans furious…
Thousands protest, chant anti-American slogans…
Taliban suspends ‘peace talks’…
http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/qHU6gEAgFGq48IxNqFdEhA–/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD00MDI7cT04NTt3PTUxMg–/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/741340b75cabd707090f6a70670014b4.jpg
Colonel Haiku (677459) — 3/15/2012 @ 6:03 pmdaleyrocks –
Is this supposed to be a difficult question? The point of a notary requirement, as I understand it, is to require ID for absentee voting, in a way that would be practical and use existing societal mechanisms (notaries public) to enforce the requirement.
So if the voter doesn’t have valid ID, the notary should refuse to notarize the ballot, just as s/he would refuse to notarize any other legal document in the absence of ID.
If there’s something else behind your question, some problem with that scenario I’m failing to get, please enlighten me.
Robin Munn (a7f1bb) — 3/15/2012 @ 6:18 pmP.S. I’m assuming, in my discussion of notary requirements, that that sort of law would be passed alongside, or after, a law requiring photo ID to vote in person. Because otherwise the notary requirement would add a burden not imposed on in-person voters, which might make it unConstitutional.
And, of course, if the liars and fraudsters have their way, an in-person photo ID requirement might still be found unConstitutional. Such a thing would be a travesty of justice, but it has happened before. In which case the notary requirement would fail the same test.
But in the hypothetical scenario I was thinking of, where common sense has finally triumphed and photo IDs are required at the polls, the notary requirement’s only problem would be the monetary cost (thereby making it a de facto poll tax, which has already been ruled unConstitutional). In which case removing the cost would be enough.
Robin Munn (a7f1bb) — 3/15/2012 @ 6:23 pmBlack babies are disproportionately aborted. These babies are future voters.
Abortion suppresses the Black vote, and is threfore unconstitutional.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 3/17/2012 @ 11:38 am