Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Voter suppression and fraud thread

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Oh apparently more smoke from Trump voters

    http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN12S213?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=5813854004d30106e02830a2&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook


  • Options
    #93
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »
    Yes and Democrats believe that making it a requirement disenfranchises minorities
    Actually, Democrats believe (with good reason) that voter ID laws are a transparent strategy to deliberately make it difficult for minorities to vote, with the figleaf excuse that it's necessary to prevent in-person voter fraud, which - to a useful approximation - is non-existent.


  • Options
    #94
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,001 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Gatling wrote: »
    Is it true that some states you don't even need ID to vote

    In Ireland you don't need ID to vote.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Options
    #95
    My name is URL
    Registered Users Posts: 25,067 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    In Ireland you don't need ID to vote.

    You do if you're asked for it


  • Options
    #96
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,001 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Few of the acceptable items count as "ID" and most of them don't have a photo.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Few of the acceptable items count as "ID" and most of them don't have a photo.

    In one situation or two, conservative administrations wanted to allow their states to allow gun permits as ID, but not student IDs. Which given the two party politics of the era, is a bit on the nose..


  • Options
    #98
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/31/politics/naacp-north-carolina-voting-registration-purge/index.html
    The NAACP filed suit in federal court on Monday against the North Carolina State Board of Elections, arguing that state officials in at least three counties have canceled "thousands" of voter registrations.

    Lawyers for the civil rights group say that boards of elections in Beaufort, Moore and Cumberland counties have canceled thousands of voter registrations after a small number of individuals challenged the registration of approximately 4,500 voters based "exclusively on mass mailings that were returned as undeliverable."
    They argue the "en masse" cancellation was done in violation of the National Voter Registration Act that prohibits systemic voter removal programs within 90 days of a federal election and that it disproportionately targeted African-American voters.
    The state claims it held individual hearings for each of the cancellations, which I find a bit incredible: that's a lot of hearings that the "citizen plaintiff" would have to be present for and the defendant not. Unless they used some kind of mass method of doing so, which would raise a legal challenge.
    "A challenge validly entered will trigger a preliminary hearing, written notice to the affected voter and a full hearing on the merits before the appointed members of the county board of elections."
    It will be interesting to see them rassle up proof they held 4,500 preliminary hearings and 4,500 full board hearings.


  • Options
    #99
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Actually, Democrats believe (with good reason) that voter ID laws are a transparent strategy to deliberately make it difficult for minorities to vote, with the figleaf excuse that it's necessary to prevent in-person voter fraud, which - to a useful approximation - is non-existent.

    Yet democrats believe in requiring valid ID in order to get any of their vaulted programs like Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps (which minorities also get), and more. Curiouser and Curiouser. Don’t you see the irony here? I think it’s apparent that voter fraud primarily helps democrats, and that’s the reason why they fight against anything that would help to stop it.

    Funny, for something that doesn’t happen according to democrats, it sure seems to happen enough.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/11/01/stolen-forged-ballots-discovered-florida/


  • Options
    #100
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    Yet democrats believe in requiring valid ID in order to get any of their vaulted programs like social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and more. Curiouser and Curiouser.

    Just about any time of the year you can go down to the SS office, etc. etc. and resolve issues of identity. Voting, which happens for one day every 2 years with hours-long lines and highly contentious political stakes is not the same kind of fruit.


  • Options
    #101
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    Just about any time of the year you can go down to the SS office, etc. etc. and resolve issues of identity. Voting, which happens for one day every 2 years with hours-long lines and highly contentious political stakes is not the same kind of fruit.

    I see. The problem is people don't know an election is ever coming up?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Amerika wrote: »
    I see. The problem is people don't know an election is ever coming up?

    No silly, the fact that any number of technicalities seem to only be caught by election boards against black voters right before the deadlines ahead of critical votes.

    But sure, you know my position: if ID is free and widely and readily accessible I'm OK with it. Most judicial boards are OK with it as long as it actually stops a significant problem. It would mean registrations are largely pointless, and who cares if a PT registration worker signs up Biggus Dickus to vote since he won't have ID when he goes to the poll right?


  • Options
    #103
    vetinari
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭vetinari


    The presumed aim in any self respecting representative democracy is to get as many of the eligible voters to vote as possible.
    Partisan attempts to disenfranchise voters "for the other side" are patently undemocratic.
    It's a disgusting way to try to win an election. These voter ID laws are clearly aimed at stopping certain voters from voting.


  • Options
    #104
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Overheal wrote: »
    No silly, the fact that any number of technicalities seem to only be caught by election boards against black voters right before the deadlines ahead of critical votes.

    But sure, you know my position: if ID is free and widely and readily accessible I'm OK with it. Most judicial boards are OK with it as long as it actually stops a significant problem. It would mean registrations are largely pointless, and who cares if a PT registration worker signs up Biggus Dickus to vote since he won't have ID when he goes to the poll right?
    Is ID free to obtain Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, Medicaid and Food Stamps (ignoring illegal aliens who seem to get a pass on ID requirements to receive some of they programs)?


  • Options
    #105
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    vetinari wrote: »
    The presumed aim in any self respecting representative democracy is to get as many of the eligible voters to vote as possible.
    Partisan attempts to disenfranchise voters "for the other side" are patently undemocratic.
    It's a disgusting way to try to win an election. These voter ID laws are clearly aimed at stopping certain voters from voting.

    I agree. Voter ID laws are aimed at stopping those who wish to commit voter fraud.


  • Options
    #106
    vetinari
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭vetinari


    Way to deliberately misinterpret my comment, it's aimed at stopping large amounts of eligible votes from voting


  • Options
    #107
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Amerika wrote: »
    I think it’s apparent that voter fraud primarily helps democrats...

    That's because you've carefully ignored the oft-repeated fact that voter fraud, to a useful approximation, doesn't exist.

    There is only one reason that voter ID laws keep being introduced by Republican administrations, and that those laws are carefully targeted at minorities: they are explicitly designed to suppress lawful votes that would likely go against those same Republican administrations.

    The idea of a government selectively disenfranchising people who are likely to vote for its opponents is disgraceful to anyone who claims to have a shred of respect for democracy. The fact that GOP supporters keep repeating lies about voter fraud demonstrates that they only respect democracy when it works in their favour - which is to say, they have no respect for democracy.


  • Options
    #108
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That's because you've carefully ignored the oft-repeated fact that voter fraud, to a useful approximation, doesn't exist.

    There is only one reason that voter ID laws keep being introduced by Republican administrations, and that those laws are carefully targeted at minorities: they are explicitly designed to suppress lawful votes that would likely go against those same Republican administrations.

    The idea of a government selectively disenfranchising people who are likely to vote for its opponents is disgraceful to anyone who claims to have a shred of respect for democracy. The fact that GOP supporters keep repeating lies about voter fraud demonstrates that they only respect democracy when it works in their favour - which is to say, they have no respect for democracy.

    You need a valid ID to prove your identity in order to vote? Shock, horror! Oh, those evil republicans?

    There is an endless range of activities for which a photo ID is required.

    Has anyone here ever considered it seems extremely unlikely that there are tons of people who honestly cannot get government IDs AND vote in elections? Then consider... Okay, if you can’t even go through the simple process of getting yourself some form of government ID, WHAT wherewithal do you have in order to go register a few months before an election, and HOW do you then go to your local polling place and vote on election day?

    Come on people... use your heads... the argument against Voter ID is simply ridiculous.


  • Options
    #109
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,048 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Voter ID is fine , but it's the silly buggers played by certain state/county level administrations that people rightly rail against- and often the only Federal level solution is to remove the requirement for ID at all , which is to a certain extent cutting off the leg to cure a broken toe..

    A new study by the Brennan Center provides a comprehensive look at the difficulties faced by individuals who lack the proper government photo identification to cast a ballot in ten different states: Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin.

    Those of us who have become habituated to having to show our papers in order to complete the most mundane everyday tasks, such as entering a building, may find it hard to believe that there are many individuals who lack such identification. Yet this is the case for no less than 11% of eligible voters.

    Among certain demographics, the percentage is even higher. According to the Brennan Center study, 25% of African Americans, 16% of Hispanics and 18% of senior citizens lack government issued photo identification.

    It stands to reason that individuals who do not have a photo ID such as a driver’s license probably also do not have a car, making it much more difficult and time-consuming to make one’s way to a government ID-issuing office.

    In the ten states considered by the study, it was found that more than 10 million eligible voters, including 1.2 million below the poverty line, live more than ten miles from the nearest government office that issues identification. Of these individuals, nearly 500,000 do not have access to their own vehicle, forcing them to rely on others or on public transportation to visit a government office to obtain their photo identification.

    To obtain that identification, the state office must of course be open. The Brennan Center found that many ID-issuing offices have highly restricted or irregular hours of operation.

    In Wisconsin, Alabama and Mississippi, less than half are open five days a week. No such offices are open on Saturdays in Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, Texas and Wisconsin. And none are open on Sunday in any of the ten states considered in the study.

    The study also found evidence of absurdly “idiosyncratic” hours of operation. The office in Sauk City, Wisconsin, for instance, is only open on the fifth Wednesday of any month, which means that it is only open five days a year. Offices in other states were found to be open just one day a month.

    Supporters of voter ID laws claim such regulations are necessary to protect against widespread voter fraud. In the end, they may do nothing more than protect against widespread voter registration.


  • Options
    #110
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    "Sorry your address on your ID and your registration ID don't match." having to update your address on both can be a hassle when the officiating place to do so is inaccessible 360 days of the year for example. And who might have to move around often? Poor people. I moved 3 times in 2014 for instance.


  • Options
    #111
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Amerika wrote: »
    You need a valid ID to prove your identity in order to vote? Shock, horror! Oh, those evil republicans?

    You're still doing it. You're regurgitating GOP talking points when you should be pissed off that people in a position of power are abusing that power to disenfranchise people.

    For the record: if I heard that a DNC-controlled state legislature was going out of its way to disenfranchise GOP voters, I would decry that behaviour in the strongest terms, because I dislike much of what the GOP stands for, but goddammit, people have the right to vote stupid if that's what they feel the need to do.

    If you're arguing that it's OK to make it more difficult for poor people to vote, quite frankly you need to take a long hard look at yourself.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    FISMA.
    Registered Users Posts: 451 ✭✭FISMA.


    Overheal wrote: »
    ...conservative administrations wanted to allow their states to allow gun permits as ID, but not student IDs.

    Understandable.

    A sample of various State requirements for gun licensees:

    1) Licensees be fingerprinted and have thumbprint on license.
    2) Social security number printed on license.
    3) Federal Agency vetting of the licensee, such as that of the ATF
    4) State Police checks.
    5) Local Police checks.
    6) Mental health checks.
    7) FBI checks, Federal NICS, and state NICS check
    8) Prove good moral character.

    Just to name a few.

    As for College ID's, they pale in comparison to the security of gun licenses.


  • Options
    #113
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    FISMA. wrote: »
    Understandable.

    A sample of various State requirements for gun licensees:

    1) Licensees be fingerprinted and have thumbprint on license.
    2) Social security number printed on license.
    3) Federal Agency vetting of the licensee, such as that of the ATF
    4) State Police checks.
    5) Local Police checks.
    6) Mental health checks.
    7) FBI checks, Federal NICS, and state NICS check
    8) Prove good moral character.

    Just to name a few.

    As for College ID's, they pale in comparison to the security of gun licenses.

    As you said those requirements are various. The primary aim for voting purposes is to verify the identity of the person present. A student ID is produced by an education body when they are enrolled and their identity has been verified.


  • Options
    #114
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,092 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    FISMA. wrote: »
    Understandable.

    A sample of various State requirements for gun licensees:

    1) Licensees be fingerprinted and have thumbprint on license.
    2) Social security number printed on license.
    3) Federal Agency vetting of the licensee, such as that of the ATF
    4) State Police checks.
    5) Local Police checks.
    6) Mental health checks.
    7) FBI checks, Federal NICS, and state NICS check
    8) Prove good moral character.

    Just to name a few.

    As for College ID's, they pale in comparison to the security of gun licenses.
    But unless you can make a case for saying that all that level of scrutiny and security is necessary for voter identification (you're not allowed to vote if you haven't proved "good moral character"? Seriously?), the fact that gun licences are attended with all this scrutiny while student IDs are not is no reason not to accept student IDs.

    If the government is going to make possession of satisfactory ID a condition o voting, then the government has to ensure that a satisfactory ID is readily available to every person entitled to vote - they don't have to pay to get it, they don't have to take time off work to get it, they don't have to travel significant distances to get it, they don't have to queue for hours to get it, they don't have to do absurd and unnecessary things to get it.

    If those who are calling for voter ID to be required are not first of all ensuring that voter ID is readily available not just to the ordinary voter but to every voter, then their claims to be protecting the integrity of the democratic process are nothing but the rankest hypocrisy. Just sayin'.


  • Options
    #115
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    You're still doing it. You're regurgitating GOP talking points when you should be pissed off that people in a position of power are abusing that power to disenfranchise people.

    For the record: if I heard that a DNC-controlled state legislature was going out of its way to disenfranchise GOP voters, I would decry that behaviour in the strongest terms, because I dislike much of what the GOP stands for, but goddammit, people have the right to vote stupid if that's what they feel the need to do.

    If you're arguing that it's OK to make it more difficult for poor people to vote, quite frankly you need to take a long hard look at yourself.

    I look rather well, thank you very much. The majority of people in my state voted to require valid ID’s in order to vote. I remember with the lead-up to the vote a number of high ranking Republicans made the public offer that if anyone was unable to get somewhere to get a valid ID in order to vote they could contact their offices and their staff would assist them, free-of-charge, to get what they needed. I think you can count on one hand the number of people who responded to accept the offer. Some idiotic Commonwealth court judge then defied the will of the people and ruled the Pennsylvania voter ID law violates the state constitution by imposing an unreasonable burden on voters. That judge smartly decided to retire when his tenure was up. The state GOP did not appeal the decision, and that failure was in part to blame why voters didn’t reelect the GOP governor. I think, once all the voter fraud reports again come out of Philadelphia this election the call for an appeal to the ruling will heat up again.


  • Options
    #116
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    NC's Jim Crow laws now under federal scruitny

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/03/federal_judge_slams_north_carolina_voter_purge.html

    also this:
    Garry Terry, the chairman of the Republican Party for North Carolina’s First Congressional District, sent an email on Aug. 13 to elections board members in his region, reminding them to act "in the best interest of the Republican Party" by opposing Sunday voting and restricting early voting to one location.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-northcarolina-insight-idUSKBN12Y0ZY


  • Options
    #117
    FISMA.
    Registered Users Posts: 451 ✭✭FISMA.


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    (you're not allowed to vote if you haven't proved "good moral character"? Seriously?),

    Did you read the post? Please try reading the post as your assertions are unfounded.
    Overheal wrote: »
    ...conservative administrations wanted to allow their states to allow gun permits as ID, but not student IDs. Which given the two party politics of the era, is a bit on the nose..

    I understand why a gun permit would be acceptable but a College ID would not and disagree with Overheal's "party politics" conclusion.

    Most importantly, millions of people that go to college are not entitled to vote: foreign students, green card holders, and illegal immigrants for example.
    Overheal wrote: »
    In one situation or two, conservative administrations..


    If Overheal would care to make known either of the "situations" quoted, we could have more clarity on the details of the matter.


  • Options
    #118
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,753 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Oregon Trail remake for the Jim Crow era

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/01/opinion/voting-suppression-videogame.html?_r=1


  • Options
    #119
    dwayneshintzy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,343 ✭✭✭dwayneshintzy


    Amerika wrote: »
    I think, once all the voter fraud reports again come out of Philadelphia this election the call for an appeal to the ruling will heat up again.
    And if (once again) there is no proof of voter fraud being committed, will you admit that it most likely didn't happen? And never has?

    Or will it simply be a cover up?


  • Options
    #120
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭Amerika


    dwayneshintzy wrote: »
    And if (once again) there is no proof of voter fraud being committed, will you admit that it most likely didn't happen? And never has?

    Or will it simply be a cover up?

    Remember the New Black Panther voter intimidation incident in Philadelphia, that Obama's DOJ refused to prosecute? Remember in 59 Philadelphia voting divisions where Mitt Romney got zero votes?

    It did happen and I predict it will happen again.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Amerika wrote: »
    Remember the New Black Panther voter intimidation incident in Philadelphia, that Obama's DOJ refused to prosecute? Remember in 59 Philadelphia voting divisions where Mitt Romney got zero votes?

    It did happen and I predict it will happen again.

    On the 59 divisions: http://www.politifact.com/pennsylvania/statements/2016/aug/12/viral-image/internet-philly-rigged-2012-presidential-election-/
    after Sean Hannity reiterated that 59 divisions with all-Obama votes showed signs of election rigging, a West Philadelphia elections inspector took to Twitter to debunk it. The key nugget in his explanation was this: Votes cannot be subtracted from Philadelphia voting machines. Republican City Commissioner Al Schmidt confirmed that was indeed the case. So, if anyone had voted Romney, there’s no way that vote could’ve been removed from the tally, which means if fraud had occurred, it would’ve had to have happened before the vote button was pushed.

    It (voter fraud) didn't happen.


Advertisement