Rand Paul Doubles Down on Downplaying Voter ID to Avoid Offending Black Folks
HANNITY: Why are people so offended by this? Anybody offended by the idea that they have to present an identification to show that they are who they say they are… Why is that so offensive to people?
PAUL: Like I say, I think both sides have made mistakes in…this issue. But it’s mainly in presentation and perception, not in reality. In the sense that, if Republicans are going to go around the country and this becomes a central theme and issue, you have to realize, rightly or wrongly, it is being perceived by some — and this is the point I was making and I think it’s still a valid point, that I’m trying to go out and say to African Americans ‘I want your vote and the Republican Party wants your vote’. If they perceive, rightly or wrongly, that showing their ID is an attempt to get them not to vote because they perceive it in the lineage of a time when it truly did happen through poll taxes and questioning to try and prevent people, if they perceive it that way, we have to be aware that the perception is out there and be careful about not so overdoing something that we further alienate a block of people we need to attract.
Dude. They’re not going to vote for you anyway.
So it’s really not necessary to tiptoe around an issue like the integrity of our election system, just to appease a bloc of voters that will never vote for you.
This is the same thinking that goes into amnesty. Sure, there is the small issue of the rule of law — but if we talk about the rule of law too much, we’ll lose votes from people who were never going to vote for us anyway. With amnesty, it’s even worse, because the GOP is hellbent on making voters out of millions of lawbreakers who currently have no right to vote.
There actually is a positive case to be made for free-market principles and how they help all of society, including minorities. Larry Elder has noted how Social Security reform would benefit blacks. School vouchers, eliminating the “war on poverty,” and fighting abortion would help black people far more than any mealy-mouthed garbage about downplaying voter ID laws.
My kingdom for a candidate who could actually make that case.
Note well, potential candidates: my kingdom includes this blog and all the blog fame and riches that come with it!!
Patterico (9c670f) — 5/14/2014 @ 7:39 amI insist that it’s reflexive Libertarian anti-ID ethos. He’s got to be like his father in some ways, it can’t possibly be that he is not. But “I don’t need identification, I know who I am” these days labels you a crank quicker than advocacy of the gold standard. American society has “evolved”. So he’s looking for other ways to rationalize it.
nk (dbc370) — 5/14/2014 @ 7:52 amRand has has been doing a lot of mush mouth, wishy-washy triangulating lately.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:05 amRepublicans like Paul, Romney and McCain think liberal thoughts, trying not to offend liberals. Liberals still won’t vote for you when they can get a full-blown liberal voting for a Democrat. True conservatives won’t vote for you because you’re a RINO. That leaves faux Republicans and the 2% of the population who are independent. You can’t win and you don’t deserve to.
CrustyB (69f730) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:16 amRand Paul is every bit as nutty as his old man, but he’s a lot better at keeping the crazy out of sight.
ropelight (04fb93) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:43 amPhew! I can relax now that I realize that any Voter ID laws would only be imposed on blacks and Hispanics.
in_awe (7c859a) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:53 amI’m so disappointed in Rand Paul over this. Voter ID is the simplest issue up for discussion and after they started finding people that voted multiple times in the last election, Conservatives have firm ground to stand on.
DejectedHead (a094a6) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:55 amAt some point down the line, African-Americans are going to realize that the liberal agenda hasn’t worked for them. They were all Republicans once, still within living memory, and there is always some hope that they will seek market solutions when the statist ones fail yet again.
After all, if The Lightbringer, one of their own, leaves them still at the back of the proverbial bus, maybe it just won’t work.
But of course, if the Republicans continue to be such willing bogeymen, they’ll stay in the misery they know. That’s what Rand is saying. And if anyone might change perceptions of the Republican Party, it is someone like Rand Paul.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:56 amRead what Rand is actually saying, not what the writers are making it be. He’s saying that Voter ID is being advanced to the forefront of GOP policy, when it will only stop minor fraud, and it poses more harm than good for the party. Not that it is wrong, not that it is a bad idea, but that as a major platform issue it’s not very pragmatic.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:00 am“Read what Rand is actually saying, not what the writers are making it be.”
Kevin M. – I did and also what his PAC had to put out to splain what he said, which means it’s a problem.
Total mush mouth, wishy washy triangulation.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:08 amMy only problem with it is that it’s not practical anymore. An anti-ID philosophy. Like swords in an age of machine guns. The world changes. Look at Patterico offering his whole kingdom. The going rate for dragonslaying knights in shining armor used to be half the kingdom and the Princess’s hand in marriage. But those were the good old days.
nk (dbc370) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:14 amhttp://pagesix.com/2014/05/13/alec-baldwin-arrested/
http://nypost.com/2014/05/13/hilaria-can-have-you-alec-baldwin/
http://nypost.com/2014/05/13/biking-with-baldwin/
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:26 amThe ID thing is, in fact, an attempt to stop people from voting and actually promotes voter impersonation fraud (by absentee ballot.)
If not, the onus would not be put on the voter to get and to take ID to the polls, and no investment of time or money would be needed, but the state would investigate every case of claimed citizenship, and go to their homes, if asked, and
provide it for free.
And use verification that didn’t require anything to be brought to the polls, like electronic verification of signatures or a keyboard signature – something that can be and has been used to lock computers and is impossible to forge.
Some backup would be needed in case of people who broke their wrists, or had a stroke, or were disabled. You could use common sense.
But all that costs money.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:33 am7. Comment by DejectedHead (a094a6) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:55 am
Voter ID is the simplest issue up for discussion and after they started finding people that voted multiple times in the last election,
Being registered in two different states – one place voting in person and the other place(s) most likely by absentee ballot, if not both places by absentee ballot.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:35 am“The ID thing is, in fact, an attempt to stop people from voting and actually promotes voter impersonation fraud (by absentee ballot.)”
Sammy – What a load of crap.
It is designed to stop ineligible people from voting. The American people overwhelmingly support it, including minorities.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:37 amComment by Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:00 am
He’s saying that Voter ID is being advanced to the forefront of GOP policy, when it will only stop minor fraud, and it poses more harm than good for the party. Not that it is wrong, not that it is a bad idea, but that as a major platform issue it’s not very pragmatic. <
It really helps boost Democratic turnout, and in most places you need some form ID to register. It should be noted the kind of ID often used does not prove citizenship. Birth certificates, do, but they are now considerd useless for ID, because nobody even knows what a birth certificate is supposed to look like and pre-1980s documents are too easy to forge. For naturalized citizens it used to be naturalization papers, and either one then got you a voter card.
People don't understand that just preregistration goes a long way to preventing ringers from voting.
Some of the voters are recognized by the poll workers. There's only one place to vote, and the registration must have bene done days before, so someone has to know the name. If they paid attention to signatures, this would be something that couldn't be forged by strangers because it couldn't be practiced. If someone uses the name of an active voter, without permission this is going to be found out, when they try to vote.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:42 am15. “The ID thing is, in fact, an attempt to stop people from voting and actually promotes voter impersonation fraud (by absentee ballot.)”
Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:37 am
Sammy – What a load of crap.
It is designed to stop ineligible people from voting.
No, it isn’t. If it was, they’d be cracking down on absentee ballots, and seeking some way that the person marking the absentee ballot is the person in whose name the vote is cast.
Furthermore, this doesn’t screen out ineligible voters (voter registration is supposed to be used to do that.)
The American people overwhelmingly support it, including minorities.
It shows you how much something can be sold on, the waqy people can be sold on acts of conservation.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:47 amI finally figured out where our “friend” imdw got his numbers of 300,000 people without IDs in Pennsylvania on the previous thread. The Amish. Graven image stuff. But do they vote in the first place?
How did I figure it out? Listen to this for bureaucratic silliness. Illinois’s FOID law used to exempt Amish from having their pictures taken for their card but now, apparently, it doesn’t. Hey, idiots! If they’re real Amish, they won’t own guns!
nk (dbc370) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:53 am10. Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:08 am
Total mush mouth, wishy washy triangulation.
That;s right. If not, he’d be pointing out that what it seeks to prevent is a non-problem, ecause when someone wants to organize a fraud, they have much better ways and safer ways of doing so.
If they control the elction machinery, it is done after hours. Nobody shwed up at the polls to ast any ballots.
If they don’t control the election machinery, then they will use absentee ballots where they exist.
If there is no or very restricted absentee voting then this is possible, but only where there is no real organzied political opposition.
This will happen in primaries in one party sections, where a group may register imaginary people, or in primaries for 3rd parties, where again people who never would vote in such primaries are voted.
Voter ID does not prevent voter impersonation fraud. It can be done even where there is picture ID. All that is necessary is to borrow ID from real voters and then match the IDs with people who look similiar.
It may not change the election results much, though, because someone had to agree to turn over the ID but this violates the principle of the secret ballot. There is reason proxy voting is illegal.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:55 amSammy, the NYC cops were jerkoffs because Baldwin being Baldwin pissed them off. For going on forty years in Illinois, if a cop stops you and you don’t have your driver’s license on you he’ll call in your name and date of birth, or type it in on his computer, and get all your ID and outstanding warrant information, including your picture on his screen. Don’t tell me New York City doesn’t have that system. Baldwin asked for it and the NYC cops gave it to him.
nk (dbc370) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:04 amAnd while we’re at the great government unfix of what’s broke:
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2014/05/Cost%20of%20Healthcare_1.jpg
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:15 amI’m in favor of getting rid of absentee/early mail-in ballots. Personally I think it goes hand in hand with voting ID.
Sure I use a mail-in ballot now, so I’d be disenfranchising my own laziness…but that is kind of the point. Should voting bend to the laziest among us? Or should it be seen as a serious endeavour that requires at least moderate effort?
DejectedHead (a094a6) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:17 am“No, it isn’t. If it was, they’d be cracking down on absentee ballots, and seeking some way that the person marking the absentee ballot is the person in whose name the vote is cast.”
Sammy – Look, squirrel!
People voting absentee do not go to the polls.
Here is the issue – Fact:The DOJ does not want states to clean up voter rolls as required by law.
The DOJ and Democrats claim voter ID is racist even though I have not seen them prevent a shred of factual evidence that supports that position in court. I may have missed something, but it is pure demagoguery. A theory taken on faith, just like global warming.
Absentee balloting is a separate issue than in person voting and Democrats want to preserve the ability to commit fraud there as well.
Try to keep the issues separate.
People in favor of fair elections want as many eligible voters as possible to vote.
People in favor of voter fraud want as many people, including dead people, people voting in multiple jurisdictions, non-citizens, people impersonating other people to vote.
The distinctions between the two positions is as simple as that. Sammy, you have taken up residence in the latter camp.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:33 am“the GOP is hellbent on making voters out of millions of lawbreakers”
Correction:
Millions of DEMOCRAT/LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE/LEFTIST/SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST VOTING lawbreakers.
jakee308 (f1b953) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:35 am“It is designed to stop ineligible people from voting.
No, it isn’t.”
Sammy – There is no purpose to voter ID then? Is that what you are claiming? Walk in to a polling station, provide a name or register the same day, grab a ballot and vote?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:50 amVoter ID is designed to reduce voter fraud by making sure the name on the ballot matches the name on the ID. It doesn’t do much more than that, but Sammy is right, they need to crack down on Absentee/Mail-In ballots.
That’s probably the bigger issue.
DejectedHead (a094a6) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:55 am“That’s probably the bigger issue.”
DejectedHead – I don’t disagree, but it should not be muddled up as is Sammy’s unique talent to turn the simple into rocket surgery. I see three steps:
1. Purge voter rolls of inelegible voters, as required by law, with federal cooperation and multistate cooperation.
2. Voter ID
3. Absentee voting standards
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:04 amthis person is weird and he has weird priorities
happyfeet (8ce051) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:06 amComment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:50 am
There is no purpose to voter ID then? Is that what you are claiming? Walk in to a polling station, provide a name or register the same day, grab a ballot and vote?
No, in New York you don’t register on the same day. That would spoil the system.
You can only vote without an affidavit if you provide a name that is printed in the book (which also has a signature that is photocopied and printed) in front of people who can recognize half the people in the book maybe.
If you think that system allows a lot of fraud, wait till somebody tries it.
You better make sure that the person you are impersonating didn’t vote yet and won’t come in later and that there is nobody there who will notice, or there is not, some large discrepancy in the signature or the age given in the book.
Even if there is as much as a 70% chance of getting away with casting a vote in someone else’s name, what do you think are the chances of getting away with casting 8 votes that way without getting immediately detected?
.70 to the eighth power is 5.77%.
As the number of impersonated votes rises toward double digits, the odds become astronomical of this scheme not getting detected. By the time you reach 32 votes, it is about one chance in 100,000.
Or if people do it on their own, of it not being a known problem.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:18 amI don’t think you could easily find a poll worker in New York State who ever discovered anyone trying to impersonate another voter even once.
And not because this could never be detected.
Other election law violations are well known (and often allowed to pass) like people voting from an old address. They admit it.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:29 amI guess libertarians are OK with people voting multiple times. It’s all about freedom.
Amphipolis (e01538) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:29 am“I don’t think you could easily find a poll worker in New York State who ever discovered anyone trying to impersonate another voter even once.”
Sammy – You had a ring of people busted for driving from poll to poll around NYC doing just that about 10 years ago, but it doesn’t even matter.
If people are not looking for something, why the hell should they find it? D’oh!
Remember the Project Veritas video where one of James O’Keefe’s operatives walked into the Washington D.C. precinct where Eric Holder lived? He asked for the ballot for Eric Holder, was not required to show any ID, was handed the ballot. Rather than voting it, the operative just left it and walked out. It’s just that easy. O’Keefe embarrassed election officials in several states by showing that. He had operative pretending to be dead people walking up and getting ballots, so what you say anecdotally about NY is completely irrelevant.
There is no reasonable argument against voter ID. You certainly have not presented one on this thread.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:39 amDidn’t some one try to vote in Holder’s place, in DC, in one of O’Keefe’s stunts,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:39 am“… potential candidates: my kingdom includes this blog and all the blog fame and riches that come with it!!”
And your incredibly brilliant commenters too!!!!!
Ipso Fatso (10964d) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:51 am“At some point down the line, African-Americans are going to realize that the liberal agenda hasn’t worked for them.”
Kevin M, no they won’t and never will and here’s why. There are 2 main groups of blacks: 1) those that live at or below poverty which make up about 1/3 their number and 2) the middle class which make up about 40 to 50%. The poor will never vote R and you and I know why, so no need to go over that again. The black middle class will not either and here is why based on my observation of how and where blacks are employed in Chicago and figuring that it is a good proxy for the rest of the country.
My estimate is that about 75% of the black middle class is employed either directly or indirectly by government at the federal, state or local level. Think: Post Office, Social Security, Housing and Urban Development, Teachers, Police, City Hall, Street & Sanitation, Mass Transit or indirectly like the Woodlawn Housing Association, etc. So, guys like you and me come along and say “Let’s cut government spending!!!! And your average black middle class guy is going to say, Hey they are talking about getting rid of me, my wife, brother, etc. It will never fly as government has become the breadwinner of the black middle class and D’s know it. I don’t see much of a why beyond that, maybe you do.
Ipso Fatso (10964d) — 5/14/2014 @ 12:08 pmLast sentence should read: much of a way beyond that. My bad.
Ipso Fatso (10964d) — 5/14/2014 @ 12:10 pmGovernment employment is a very good point Ipso Fatso. I know it is definitely the case in places like Philadelphia…where, coincidentally I’m sure, certain wards vote 100% Democratic.
DejectedHead (a094a6) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:08 pmVoter ID does nothing to prevent systemic fraud. If the officials are in on it, IDs won’t matter. They only prevent retail fraud — extra votes here or there which, while illegal and insulting, are unlikely to change the election statistics.
The real fraud, such as ballot box stuffing or entirely fraudulent precinct returns, such as happened in 1960 Chicago or is alleged more recently in inner-city precincts, does not turn on Voter ID.
Even if large numbers of non-citizens are encouraged to go to the polls, it will only work if the poll-watchers allow it. Voter ID will only stop small-scale fraud.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:11 pmSammy – Here is a very recent story about in person voter fraud in New York City:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/368234/voter-fraud-weve-got-proof-its-easy-john-fund
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:12 pm“The real fraud, such as ballot box stuffing or entirely fraudulent precinct returns, such as happened in 1960 Chicago or is alleged more recently in inner-city precincts, does not turn on Voter ID.
Even if large numbers of non-citizens are encouraged to go to the polls, it will only work if the poll-watchers allow it. Voter ID will only stop small-scale fraud.”
Kevin M. – You need a combination of both the Voter ID and poll watchers. There are still a lot of places which try to intimidate Republican poll watchers out of polling places or into signing off on shady practices. You saw that with True the Vote. You see it in certain areas of Chicago and you saw it in Wisconsin.
Those stuffing the ballot box practices are one of the reasons I think Democrats hate the idea of electronic voting. It makes it a lot tougher to “discover” an uncounted bag of completed ballots in the trunk of somebody’s car after the polls have closed, a la the Stuart Smalley election.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:21 pmIpso–I think you have explained it well and accurately for Kevin M. and I agree with your comment and your conclusions re: the black middle class holding government jobs. Though some readers may view it as a generalization, what you describe is very much what I’ve also observed in the city and environs with respect to the black middle class economy. While we here know government bloat is bad for the health of the country as a whole, (and maybe some of them realize it too) it’s completely logical and hard to fault these workers for wanting to hang onto those jobs. They believe their government jobs are safer under democrat regimes. (They’re probably right.)
I’ll further add that a great number of more highly educated and well paid black men and women (lawyers, academics, doctors, managers, etc) also work directly for a form of government, for government agencies, or tangentially in jobs which are primarily funded through government grants, etc. So–same story for them.
elissa (43c1fb) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:21 pmThe hypocrisy from Dems is requires a willing suspension of disbelief to swallow. They are perfectly fine mandating everybody in the country purchase or sign up for health care coverage, a much more intrusive and time consuming process than obtaining a state issued ID.
The idea of requiring an ID if somebody wants to exercise their right to vote, even though a very small fraction of voters does not already possess such an ID – Jim Crow, racist, discrimination, disenfranchisement.
Total BS
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:26 pmRaise our taxes!
Raise our taxes!
Raise our taxes!
Raise our taxes!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:30 pmdaley, go easy on Sammy, I hear he’s got a Hauling Permit for Hazardous Waste from the EPA, so it’s all good.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:01 pmaskeptic – Maybe I should start talking about Benghazi?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:24 pmdon’t u dare!
elissa (43c1fb) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:26 pmSay, when is Eric Holder going to prosecute a bank, an airline, a rental car agency, a hotel, the leasing agent at an apartment complex, or a library for violating the civil rights of a black person by demanding photo ID in order to conduct a business transaction with them ?
Never mind.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:29 pm“I don’t think you could easily find a poll worker in New York State who ever discovered anyone trying to impersonate another voter even once.”
Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:39 am
Sammy – You had a ring of people busted for driving from poll to poll around NYC doing just that about 10 years ago, but it doesn’t even matter.
This was actually in the 1980s and earlier.
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/19/opinion/l-clean-up-new-york-s-scandalous-voting-mess-505988.html
Also see:
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/09/05/nyregion/brooklyn-grand-jury-finds-fraud-in-8-primaries.html
I said you couldn’t easily find one.
And what happened there was not voter impersonation – it was registering fictitious people. They did not impersonate legitimate people.
And that happened because there was no organized political opposition there. Nobody to challenge anything.
AND there was no no-excuses absentee voting (or else they would have done that using absentee ballots, as is done in other states.)
AND they didn’t control the election machinery, positions being required to be split between Democrats and (at least nominal) Republicans, or they wouldn’t have bothered with actual voting.
One of the instances in the earlier article was when they did control the voting machinery, and this was what they did:
They pretended people had been prevented from voting. This scheme didn’t involve any voting at all – just court action.
A similar scheme – court action based upon claims of people being denied the right to vote – has been tried in states like Missouri in Presidential elections and used to keep the polls open later.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:34 pmIf people are not looking for something, why the hell should they find it? D’oh!
The kind of scheme you envision would be discovered withouyt anyone lookinmg for it. The bogus voting involved bogus registrations first.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:36 pmRemember the Project Veritas video where one of James O’Keefe’s operatives walked into the Washington D.C. precinct where Eric Holder lived? He asked for the ballot for Eric Holder, was not required to show any ID, was handed the ballot. Rather than voting it, the operative just left it and walked out. It’s just that easy.
How any times did he fail???
How many times was he turned down?
James O’Keefe showed only the successes, not the failures, and the failures would destroy the successes in real life.
A. If he had a success rate of 50%, even 85%, the scheme as a whole would fail and the organizer would stand a nice chance of going to jail.
B. And this doesn’t count what happens when the real Eric Holder comes in to vote.
O’Keefe embarrassed election officials in several states by showing that.
Yes, but what this doesn’t take into account is that this could never work in real life.
Because to work, to make a difference, he’d have to cast not one, not ten, but a number of votes say equal to 25% or so of the vote cast.
And he’d have to not get stopped, not 50% of the time, or even 90% of the time, but 99.5% of the time.
He had operative pretending to be dead people walking up and getting ballots, so what you say anecdotally about NY is completely irrelevant.
Dead people are easier of course, since they don’t attempt to vote, but first you have to find the dead people. And then you have to make sure nobody knows them.
There is no reasonable argument against voter ID. You certainly have not presented one on this thread.
Not everybody has ID. Wallets get lost and stolen.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:43 pmSammy, everyone has ID.
As I mentioned, the Left never has made a big fuss about photo ID being required at the bank, airport, hotel, rental car agency, library, etc.
Their fake outrage is reserved explicitly for voting.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:54 pm39. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/368234/voter-fraud-weve-got-proof-its-easy-john-fund
Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 1:12 pm
Sammy – Here is a very recent story about in person voter fraud in New York City
Could this be scaled up? Could this work to affect an election?
The New York City Department of Investigations obtained the names of 63 voters of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail and were registered to vote.
How much research did that take?? They had to know where people were registered and that the chances of them coming to the polls were close to 0%.
Didn’t they have a much easier time doing that research than someone not in DOI?
And maybe they took some other precautions, like only using names of people who hadn’t voted in some time.
And they tried only one vote per polling place.
They succeeded 61 out of 63 times. That’s almost 97%. But it is still not good enough.
While in one case that was caught a poll worker walked outside with the undercover agent (who apparently gave a story that the reason he had done this was that he had moved) and told the “voter” to go to the polling place near where he used to live and “play dumb” in order to vote.
In the second case, the investigator was stopped from voting because the felon whose name he was using was the son of the election official at the polling place.
Had there been a real candidate doing this thing, this – or say he talked himself out of it – make it 5 times the number – would have caused the whole thing to be discovered and come unglued.
Try to steal 100 votes that way, and you are in big trouble.
And had this not been DOI, it wouldn’t be so easy to get people not to talk.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:09 pm51. Comment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 2:54 pm
Sammy, everyone has ID.
Not true. I know an 87 year who couldn’t get it because the place that had his birth certificate birned down. During World War II, his circumcision certificate was accepted, but now these things are not good enough.
This stuff has only been needed in the last 15 to 20 years.
As I mentioned, the Left never has made a big fuss about photo ID being required at the bank,
It is not needed at the bank most of the time. An ATM card will do.
airport, hotel, rental car agency,
They’ve been pushing it.
But all these thinsg they don’t mind if people get excluded.
library, etc.
It’s happening with libraries too.
Their fake outrage is reserved explicitly for voting.
Because it increases turnout.
Also there may be some oractical difficulties, like college students, who have bene allowed since about 1972, to register any place, but requiring state ID or a passport might make that diffiocult.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:15 pm26. Comment by DejectedHead (a094a6) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:55 am
It doesn’t do much more than that, but Sammy is right, they need to crack down on Absentee/Mail-In ballots.
That’s probably the bigger issue.
This is discovered any time they do a recount.
There are not so any absentee ballots in New York State, but there are some, especially when somebody becomes disabled.
They keep on getting mailed after someone has died, and delivered if family members still live theer, and cast.
Signatures don’t match.
This is all besides going to people and filling out absentee ballots for them.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:19 pmSammy,
Are you Jay Carney ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:19 pmThe point is, this is a possible danger to individual votes but the voter registration system prevents this from being used on a massive scale because this can’t be scaled up without collapsing on the heads of the people doing it.
YOU ARE NOT TAKING THIS INTO ACCOUNT.
There is reason this has not happened since about the 1880s. why wasn’t this rampant in 1960? It wasn’t, and people didn’t carry ID around.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:32 pmSammy,
You need a photo ID to do a lot of things in society. It is funny how we never hear about the inherent “racism” that Enterprise Rent A Car or Marriott or Bank of America or Chicago O’Hare Airport exhibits when they require a photo ID.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:37 pmOff topic: In aN.C. Cong primary, Clay Aiken’s main primary rival, businessman Keith Crisco, died unexpectedly Monday from injuries sustained in an accidental fall at his home.
This is not often accounted for as a side effect of blood pressure medication, but it can kill people that way.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:38 pmrand paul knows trying to stop minorities from voting is counter productive. If someone tried to stop you from voting would you just give up or do everything you could to vote? In 2012 more republicans gave up rather than stand in long lines then democrats! in 2014 the republicans will try to deal with this problem by taking voting machines out of minority districts and put them in republican districts so only minorities have to wait in even longer lines as the kleons say revenge is a dish best eaten cold! Rand paul does not want that revenge in 2016 on him and his family! Re-education camps are not a lot of fun!
voter (7989fc) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:43 pmComment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:37 pm
You need a photo ID to do a lot of things in society. It is funny how we never hear about the inherent “racism” that Enterprise Rent A Car or Marriott or Bank of America or Chicago O’Hare Airport exhibits when they require a photo ID.
These are acts of discrimination against poor people, which they may not care so much about, and which people really want to do, like they might not care about voting. (a problemn for politicians)
It’s OK to place the burden on the consumer for someone renting a hotel room. But here there is the element of a poll tax, which is strictly illegal and unconstitutional, even if not racially motivated, and if not racially motivated, this is politically motivated, and it backfires.
In one state it got thrown out because it was adding a voting requirement.
If the intention is purely to authenticate the voters and teh voting you make sure if someone has a complaint, they get authenticated at the government’s expense, if their complaint is valid.
You don’t place the burden on the voter. At least any more than has hoiistiorcally been the practice.
Other changes have been made in the direction of limiting turnout of people ikely to vote Democrat.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:50 pmInteresting news. Congressman John Conyers signatures on his petitions just got thrown out.
he had double the number but some were not of voters or of imaginary people, and some were collected by people who weren’t registered voters themselves, and the last factor may have pulled him below 1,000.
His aides suspect perhaps there was sabotage. Or they are saying so. (this did happen to everybody not Romney and not Ron Paul in Virginia in 2012)
He now may go into court and get some of the election rules for candidates thrown out, (the rule requiring a collector of signatures to be aregistered voter) or try a write-in campaign.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:52 pm59.. Comment by voter (7989fc) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:43 pm
in 2014 the republicans will try to deal with this problem by taking voting machines out of minority districts and put them in republican districts
Not quite that, but in Ohio they don’t hire enough poll workers.
They are also trying to lower early voting which may actually be a reasonable thing to do, because black churches were taking people en masse to the polls two Sundays before the election.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 3:55 pm“Even if large numbers of non-citizens are encouraged to go to the polls, it will only work if the poll-watchers allow it. Voter ID will only stop small-scale fraud.”
Here we have another problem. Democrats have made a big issue of poll watchers (some of whom anyway maybe have no idea what to do)
They made a big complaint about Rehnquist being a poll watcher in Arizona many years before he was nominated for the supreme Courtm,, both in 1971 and when he was nominated for Chief Justice in 1985.
Except maybe they were lying about what Rehnquist did anyway.
http://www.nytimes.com/1986/08/04/us/rehnquist-in-arizona-a-militant-conservative-in-60-s-politics.html
Literacy tests were still legal, but they may have made up stories about Rehnquist taking pictures of everybody, or personally challenging voters (which he had not done – he said he directed the poll watching program in 1969, 1962 and 1964)
There was another person who wss involved in an incident in 1962 and they may have tried to make it about him, or used it as the basis for made up story.
The more general complaint is why are they going only to black precincts.
Of course overwhelmingly one party precincnts is where cheating can most plausibly be done.
But complaints about the idea of poll watching goes on. In some places, precisely where it is needed.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:07 pmSammy,
Are you reading from Jesse Jackson’s notes ?
A photo ID is not a “tax.”
It merely requires a person to prove that they are the person they claim to be. There are tons of governmental agencies which require a photo ID in order to do X, Y, or Z.
When Eric Holder’s Justice Dept requires a photo ID at the front desk of the Justice Dept, is he “taxing” poor people who merely wish to enter the building ?
Otherwise, without photo ID, any jerk can show up to a poll and claim to be “Joe Jones.”
We want to avoid a scenario where the real Joe Jones shows up at the poll three hours later,and the poll worker tells him, “Sorry, sir, but it appears you already voted three hours ago.”
Voting is serious. That’s why the integrity must be protected. But then again, integrity is not of particular importance to Democrats.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:08 pm* 1960, 1962 and 1964. Challenges apparently on the basis of possible illiteracy.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:09 pm“Try to steal 100 votes that way, and you are in big trouble.”
Sammy – Only if you get caught. If nobody is looking, why would you get caught?
It’s easy to cross match a list of registered voters with death notices.
Your denial is unbelievably strong.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:09 pmComment by Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:08 pm
A photo ID is not a “tax.”
It merely requires a person to prove that they are the person they claim to be.
Is it free, like a Social security card? Not normally.
Are getting copies of the underlying documents free?
Is transportation free?
You seriously want this, you give people $25 for obtaining ID.
There are tons of governmental agencies which require a photo ID in order to do X, Y, or Z.
Rather stupidly.
When Eric Holder’s Justice Dept requires a photo ID at the front desk of the Justice Dept, is he “taxing” poor people who merely wish to enter the building ?
No, usually a state is.
Otherwise, without photo ID, any jerk can show up to a poll and claim to be “Joe Jones.”
He has to know that “Joe jones” is supposed to vote there. He has to know that the real “Joe Jones” won’t show up there. He has to hope that nobody knows “Joe Jones.”
We want to avoid a scenario where the real Joe Jones shows up at the poll three hours later,and the poll worker tells him, “Sorry, sir, but it appears you already voted three hours ago.”
Yes. but there are conseuqwneces when that happens, so it won;t happen much.
It’s like using a credit card to buy something less than $25.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:14 pm“The point is, this is a possible danger to individual votes but the voter registration system prevents this from being used on a massive scale because this can’t be scaled up without collapsing on the heads of the people doing it.”
Sammy – It doesn’t need to be done on a massive scale. How many people do you think voted in both New York and Florida in 2000? How many votes decided the election, 537?
“why wasn’t this rampant in 1960?”
Who can claim voter fraud did not exist in 1960, except the same Democrats who claim it does not exist today.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:18 pmSammy,
Are you being paid to read Jesse Jackson’s talking points ? You are saying stuff that is a bit kooky. Next thing we know, you’re going to say that the IRS is imposing a tax tax by requiring taxpayers to pay !!!!!!!1!!1!!! for a stamp and an envelope.
Your lack of regard for integrity in government transactions/interactions is mind-boggling.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:31 pmSammy,
The Democrats would never go along in issuing even FREE photo ID to any poor person who needs one, simply because by ultimately solving this alleged problem of poor people not having a photo ID, it thereby takes away the excuse that poor people don’t have a photo ID.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:42 pmI’ve been showing my ID at the Ward for sometime.
No one asks me what I’m doing.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 4:50 pmThere are still a lot of places which try to intimidate Republican poll watchers out of polling places or into signing off on shady practices. You saw that with True the Vote. You see it in certain areas of Chicago and you saw it in Wisconsin.
Daley, yes. My point actually. If there are no poll watchers who care, IDs won’t matter. IF the poll watchers are there, there may be some fraud but not a lot because “a lot” gets obvious.
The precincts that turned in 111% of registered voters voting did not due so because there were no IDs.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:04 pmAnd sure, there is fraud. BUt without the connivance of officialdom, it is a tiny fraction of the vote. Not something to distract you from the many REAL problems at issue. The budget, entitlements, pensions, foreign policy, scandals, etc are far more important than beating this marginally live horse.
Let the courts deal with the laws that are there, passing more won’t help until they do anyway.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:08 pm#61: the rule requiring a collector of signatures to be a registered voter
Federal courts have tossed this requirement before so many times that I think he’ll prevail. Those laws are walking dead.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:13 pmwhy wasn’t this rampant in 1960?
Sammy, it was, at least in Chicago. After the networks had declared Nixon the victor, Mayor Daley released numbers from Cook COunty that were so heavilty in favor of Kennedy that his huge loss outside of Chicago was wiped out.
From Wikipedia, that bastion of rightwing thought:
Texas, too, was believed stolen in similar fashion, especially by LBJ’s machine in the Rio Grande Valley.
So, it was rampant enough. Had Nixon won Texas and Illinois, he would have been elected.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:22 pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960#Controversies
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:23 pmAnd Landslide Lyndon, is suspicious on that as well, per the ’48 race,
remember how Raw Story, the Huffington Post tried to undermine the vote in 2002 and 2004, turning Diebold into a swear word,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:27 pmjust a little nudge;
http://therightscoop.com/new-judicial-watch-emails-reveal-washington-dc-office-directed-targeting-of-tea-party-groups/
narciso (3fec35) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:29 pmPsssst, hey Sammy….
Benghazi !
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 5:55 pmThe big drawback to Rand’s towing the RNC line is that he’ll inherit their electorate.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 6:02 pmDemocratic party has suggested free photo I.D. social security card for voters Guess who opposes this because this would only stop illegal aliens from voting not democrats!!! By the way the republicans finally caught a voter fraud in arizona! Unfortunetly it was not an illegal alien ;but a republican woman who voted for mitt romney in arizona and nevada because as she said the republicans needed all the votes they can get the republican governor is under pressure to pardon her by the state republican party.
voter (7989fc) — 5/14/2014 @ 6:11 pmDear “Voter,” #81
Does your parole officer know you’re trolling the interwebs ? And please don’t tell people I was your English and Composition tutor—I have a reputation to protect.
Thanks.
Signed,
Your former remedial English and Composition tutor
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/14/2014 @ 6:23 pmWell, that’s one.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/05/tea-party-candidate-wins-nebraska-senate-primary/
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 6:55 pmBottom line, if Republicans actually governed Conservative and promoted it to blacks and Hispanics …… enough of them would become swing votes.
But most Reps come off as double talking turds. Rand does so on this issue.
Rodney King's Spirit (ca9e04) — 5/14/2014 @ 6:59 pm“Voter” also has posted under Republicans are Evil, which is one of the many aliases of Perry.
JD (2d7b3f) — 5/14/2014 @ 7:13 pmCertain topics never fail to get Perry hepped up.
elissa (c82132) — 5/14/2014 @ 7:19 pmRequiring ID to vote makes as much sense as requiring ID to purchase a firearm.
Michael Ejercito (becea5) — 5/14/2014 @ 7:50 pmAt some point down the line, African-Americans are going to realize that the liberal agenda hasn’t worked for them.
Regrettably, I don’t see that day arriving any time soon. The liberalism embedded in black America is both monolithic and profoundly intractable and corrosive.
I’ve had discussions with one black guy who’s a senior citizen and who mentioned to me on one occasion how dysfunctional and dangerous the urban street is in today’s era compared with when he was growing up. He’s not a raving leftist by any means and in general tries to sound rational and rather practical or realistic. Yet when I delved a bit deeper into what makes him tick, if you will, a surprising amount of leftist bias oozed out.
So it would take a miracle or act of God for him or those similar to him (ie, probably over 80 to 90 percent of black America) to vote for a non-liberal, for even a centrist Republican, much less a staunch rightist. Therefore, truly conservative people — either Democrat (if right-leaning versions of them even exist) or Republican — need not apply.
That’s why communities and societies of the left become so corrupt and debased, or are prone to that. Simply put, liberalism is treated by people living in the paradigm that is the city of Detroit or the paradigm that is Venezuela or Argentina as though it’s a sacred starting point, and everything and anything else — not matter how bad, dishonest or deviant — bows before that liberalism.
Getting back to the case of Rand Paul, the problem with people like him is they don’t really understand ideological biases, perhaps their own and certainly those of others. So his grasp of the issue of voter ID and the black voter strikes me as no less naive as that of Karl Rove and his assumption that the reason so many Latino voters lean left is because Republicans aren’t squishy enough about illegal immigration (ie, “oh, so much of the Mexican electorate thinks and votes like urban America because of the hot potato topic of illegal immigration throughout Mexico??!!”).
Mark (99b8fd) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:04 pmAnnnnnnd Rand Paul firms up his “even lower than Rubio” position on my voting preference list.
Mitch (bfd5cd) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:07 pm“They’re not going to vote for you anyway.”
Thus, the vote suppression
cbuund (74098c) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:07 pm90. Cats, dogs and farm animals disenfranchised.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:16 pmthey do find a way to disenfranchise veterans, and use the weirding module on Christians, libertarians, et al
narciso (3fec35) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:28 pmA black person who votes republican is like a jew voting for hitler!
voter (7989fc) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:39 pmPerry and imdw. How special.
JD (2d7b3f) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:46 pmWell Rand is rapidly running out of feck, he was wishy washy on the shutdown, blanc mange on amnesty,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:47 pmand naive on the reasons for, and consequences of the impact of narcotics,
A vile and utterly sick comment left by Perry. I assume that Patterico will see fit to make it– and Perry –disappear from this blog (again).
elissa (b0eb09) — 5/14/2014 @ 8:54 pmPerry is just a racist old coot.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:11 pmElissa – they project their own hatred onto others.
JD (2d7b3f) — 5/14/2014 @ 9:46 pmI’m from MN, what do progs do once spring arrives?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:13 pmThey crawl out of the mud and begin croaking. Or so we hear.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/14/2014 @ 10:37 pmI was amazed when I went in for my physical this year: NOT ONLY fork over the insurance card, write the check for the co-pay, and fill out pages of medical history (which hasn’t changed over the 20 years I’ve been seeing Doctor X – I STILL had my tonsils out at age 5 and it should STILL be in the files, duh), but THIS time I had to hand the receptionist my driver’s license to photocopy as well.
Shall I accuse them of racism? “Dang, it’s too hard to give you the one extra piece of plastic, you must be hatin’ on me just ’cause I’m white!!!”
A_Nonny_Mouse (0123ed) — 5/14/2014 @ 11:41 pmI think the Democrats are sensitive about any barrier to voting, considering all the schemes they used for a hundred years. They just assume that any condition to voting is from the same bigoted place that theirs were.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:30 am79. I’ll have more on Benghazi later.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/15/2014 @ 11:42 amKevin M @ 75 (Cook County and Texas 1960) and narciso @77 (Duval County Texas 1948)
These frauds involved votes cast after hours and forged signatures, but did not involve any impersonation.
What was not rampant, was people going to the polls and voting in the name of people who were previously registered.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/15/2014 @ 11:47 am“These frauds involved votes cast after hours and forged signatures, but did not involve any impersonation.”
So it’s all good.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:06 pm“These frauds involved votes cast after hours and forged signatures, but did not involve any impersonation.”
Could voter ID have mitigated these frauds? Absolutely!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:13 pmComment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:13 pm
Could voter ID have mitigated these frauds? Absolutely!
No, because then you limit the possibility that someone might attempt to steal votes that way, and attempted voter impersonation is a way to get caught in the act.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:18 pmVoter ID also tends to push people to vote in advance (where that is possible) and to vote by absentee ballot, both of which make undetected fraud more likely.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:25 pmYou could also ask:
Isn’t J. P. Morgan Chase crazy?
They are telling people they can take a picture of a check and deposit it?
Couldn’t they then take the same check and go to another bank, and deposit it as well??
Well, not so easy.
They might even get both of the checks cleared, but there’ll be a problem later.
Voter impersonation, even if it is well organized, will trip people up.
The system is more secure than you might think. Even if people are careless.
There are reasons this was not a problem before.
They did use to have people have (easily counterfeited if anyone wanted to) Voter Registration cards that people had to carry with them to the polls.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/15/2014 @ 12:32 pmSammy’s right when he says that Voter ID would not have helped, since the frauds were of whole cloth, made up by the ID checkers.
Whether he’s right that this is what he was talking about is, as with many of his posts, less clear.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/15/2014 @ 8:41 pm“No, because then you limit the possibility that someone might attempt to steal votes that way”
Sammy and Kevin M – You have no imagination. Polls close, ballots collected, voter registers closed.
Call comes later – We need 3,500 more votes for JFK, spread them around between 5 precincts. It’s easy to create the extra paper ballots and take them to where they are being counted and claim you just found them in the trunk of somebody’s car, but how do you indicate in the voter registers which have been locked away that ID has been checked by poll workers from both parties?
Voter ID also tends to push people to vote in advance
Early voting at least in Illinois requires ID even though there is no Voter ID law, so that argument doesn’t hold water in this state and I’m sure others.
Sammy – What is your real objection to Voter ID? Absentee voting fraud is a completely separate issue. You have no argument that Voter ID will disenfranchise people and no argument that in person voter fraud exists which could be prevented, so what is your real beef?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 9:29 pmComment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 9:29 pm
Sammy – What is your real objection to Voter ID?
It will make it more difficult to vote, and therefore will disenfranchise people. Althouygh if someone wants to vote badly enough, they will probably be able to vote, although maybe in the same election where they encountered the problem.
And there are already too many things that require ID.
And the more you carry ID around, the more likely you are to lose it, or have it stolen. Make the qualifying ID something other than a driver’s license, and you’ll soon see how the proponents would complain.
Absentee voting fraud is a completely separate issue.
What that goes to is the motive. The motive cannot be to stop voter fraud, because if that was the motive, the proponents would try to do something about it.
You have no argument that Voter ID will disenfranchise people
What do you mean there’s no argument? The lawyers who could not find people without ID or without the ability to get ID, are really stuid or incompetent.
Now the thing is, somebody missing documents, but actually a citizen or permanent resident of the United states, can, with legal help, get ID. They maybe couldn’t find anyone who could be in that situation without it being able to be resolved once attention was called to it. Maybe they were embarrassed by the type oof people they would find.
But there are a few cases. Every once in a while you read about somebody who had to sue.
and no argument that in person voter fraud exists which could be prevented,
More legitimate voters would be prevented from being able to vote than impersonaters prevented from impersonating people.
And you could also crack down on the possibility of impersonation, if you were willing to spend some money, in a way that would not inconvenience anyone more than they are already inconvenienced by having to register in advance.
so what is your real beef?
This is one more thing that tends to mandate ID, and once you have that, then people could be deprived of their ID by court order, to enforce court orders, or it it could be mad emore difficult to get, and they wouldn’t care if 2$ or 3% of the population was stuck.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/16/2014 @ 6:37 amSammy – What is your real objection to Voter ID?
“And there are already too many things that require ID.”
Which makes Voter ID easier and reduces the number of people without ID.
“What that goes to is the motive. The motive cannot be to stop voter fraud, because if that was the motive, the proponents would try to do something about it.”
If you ignore the ease of in person voter fraud and the instances of in person voter fraud noted in the thread, the proponents and majority of the population must surely have bad motives rather than wanting fair elections, motives which you have been unable yet to uncover, while the opponents we know want to preserve the right to cheat.
“This is one more thing that tends to mandate ID”
It’s a constitutionally protected thing while non-constitutionally protected things already require ID. It should be the reverse. The higher the right, the higher the scrutiny.
Voter fraud disenfranchises voters.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/16/2014 @ 6:53 amSF: Voter ID also tends to push people to vote in advance.
Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 9:29 pm
Early voting at least in Illinois requires ID even though there is no Voter ID law, so that argument doesn’t hold water in this state and I’m sure others.
Did you miss the point?
It doesn’t encourage early voting in Illinois, because it is NOT required for Election Day voting, (which has the protection of there being only one place for a person to vote) but if ID was required in BOTH places, it would encourage early voting.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/16/2014 @ 7:01 am“No, because then you limit the possibility that someone might attempt to steal votes that way”
Comment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/15/2014 @ 9:29 pm
Sammy and Kevin M – You have no imagination. Polls close, ballots collected, voter registers closed.
Call comes later – We need 3,500 more votes for JFK, spread them around between 5 precincts. It’s easy to create the extra paper ballots and take them to where they are being counted and claim you just found them in the trunk of somebody’s car, but how do you indicate in the voter registers which have been locked away that ID has been checked by poll workers from both parties?
The same way you indicate that poll workers of both parties signed them in. It’s the same situation whether ID needs to be checked or not as far as that is concerned.
ID doesn’t add anything to a signature, or even an X, as far as adding to the total number of voters is concerned. if the names of the voters who voted are recorded contemporaneously.
When they want to add to the number of votes cast, they always have to discover absentee ballots, if they want this to be remotely plausible. Or they have to control the election machinery and fake whatever records they need.
In New York State the name of the voter is written on a card (besides being signed in the book) with the number that voter is among the number of voters that day being both written in the book and on the card. You can’t add another voter number 32, if this is going to be checked later. You would have to add the names and numbers to the end of the list.
But in the poll book, the numbers are all mixed up in relationship to alphabetical order.
It would be quite some job to make sure you started with the last number used and didn’t skip any number. AND most of the signatures wouldn’t
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/16/2014 @ 7:12 ameven come close.
Now an ID is more proof. It would be even better if it would be photographed. In 2014, that’s not a complicated thing to do, and storage ic heap enough.
I guess they are afraid people wouldn’t like it.
A signature is actually good enough, and in fact even more secure from impersonation than picture ID, if a system was set up to use it. (a person can use someone else’s picture ID, if you find the right person) but a signature cannot be forged even by an expert without some practice. Note also that good signatgure verification software would look at the speed of the writing and what parts were written first.
You can also offer a variety of methods to prove who you are, such as a tapping numbers into as pad, (people can be identified more or less by their speed of typing) or using things like credit cards or other data – when did you last vote? – as backup.
Credit card companies verify ID over the phone just by asking a bunch of questions, especially if it done from a previously regostered phone number, and it doesn’t seem to cause trouble.
None of these other ideas would involve carrying anything to the polls not permanently with you, (barring illness and accident)
You could even fingerprint voters, and have it verified by a small computer that just had the fingerprints of the voters registered there.
I guess maybe people wouldn’t like it. So maybe some people don’t like the ID business, either?
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/16/2014 @ 7:18 amVoter ID, as proposed, is all snake oil.
The ID they want to use doesn’t even prove eligibility to vote, which they want to claim they are excluding. (even though now there are more safeguards at the time of registration)
What tends to prove eligibility to vote is a birth certificate or citizenship papers. But a birth certificate is no longer considered ID, and not even useful for obtaining ID unless it is a re-issue from after 1980 or so.
Are they trying to prove current residence with the ID? If it is used for that purpose, it could disenfranchise people, as it might take some time and some inconvenience to get new ID.
But it is not used for that purpose, not really, because a passport qualifies as voter ID I think in every place where it is proposed, even though a passport contains no indication of residence.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/16/2014 @ 7:22 amComment by daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 5/16/2014 @ 6:53 am
It’s a constitutionally protected thing while non-constitutionally protected things already require ID. It should be the reverse. The higher the right, the higher the scrutiny.
Is it a right that you are concerned a person might some practical difficulties in exercising, or is it a right where the most important thing is that no person who doesn’t have that right exercises it?
Voter fraud disenfranchises voters.
It dilutes votes, but does not disenfranchise one. There are only very limited circumstances where a candidate might be able to get away with doing this kind of fraud and affect an election and they all involve circumstances where nobody is watching, or nobody cares, because this cannot be done without getting detected.
One vote can be done that way, and almost always by someone who knows that person. Dozens cannot.
Even in that New York City test, where they carefully picked voters who hadn’t voted in several years whom they knew had a near 0% chance of voting, and they didn’t repeat this in the same polling place twice, 2 out of 63 impersonaters got caught. If you suddenly had a dozwn cases in the same election, you’d know something was up.
Jmes O’Keefe was probably caught any number of times in Washington, D.C, but didn’t show that video, and if anyone had actually voted in the name of Eric Holder, the FBI would have been after him and it would be on news that night, and somebody would have informed.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/16/2014 @ 7:32 am