PDA

View Full Version : Yep, no need for voter ID laws


JustRalph
04-09-2012, 11:47 AM
O'keefe proves again that voter ID laws are needed. Using Eric Holders name :bang:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/08/DC-Polling-Place-Holder-Ballot

Below is the video
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/04/09/Okeefe-Holder

mostpost
04-09-2012, 12:04 PM
O'keefe proves again that voter ID laws are needed. Using Eric Holders name :bang:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/08/DC-Polling-Place-Holder-Ballot

Below is the video
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/04/09/Okeefe-Holder

Meaningless. Yes the poll worker should know who Eric Holder is, but this is basically meaningless in terms of affecting an election.
Here is what is wrong with using this method to influence an election.

You need to have one person to impersonate each voter. You need to be sure the person you are impersonating would be voting the opposite of the way you would vote for him. (or you need to know he would not be voting at all.
You need to be sure that person hasn't already voted, because if he has you could be arrested and charged with voter fraud. All in all it's a lot of work for just a few votes.

The problems of voter fraud do not come from the folks in front of the table, they come from those behind the table. Those folks can miscount ballots, the can lose ballots, they can hold back ballots until needed, they can forge ballots. The guy who steps in the voting booth can only change one vote. The guys that count the ballots can change thousands.

ArlJim78
04-09-2012, 12:08 PM
if you want fair elections you should not get a ballot without ID.
of course democrats don't want fair elections so they fight tooth and nail every voter ID law put into place.

bigmack
04-09-2012, 12:08 PM
Let's see if Mostie can slap together a cogent argument against requiring ID to vote. He should know all the details by now so it might be a tough position to back.

woodtoo
04-09-2012, 12:22 PM
Meaningless. Yes the poll worker should know who Eric Holder is, but this is basically meaningless in terms of affecting an election.
Here is what is wrong with using this method to influence an election.

You need to have one person to impersonate each voter. You need to be sure the person you are impersonating would be voting the opposite of the way you would vote for him. (or you need to know he would not be voting at all.
You need to be sure that person hasn't already voted, because if he has you could be arrested and charged with voter fraud. All in all it's a lot of work for just a few votes.

The problems of voter fraud do not come from the folks in front of the table, they come from those behind the table. Those folks can miscount ballots, the can lose ballots, they can hold back ballots until needed, they can forge ballots. The guy who steps in the voting booth can only change one vote. The guys that count the ballots can change thousands.

So if 1000 people do this at one polling station and win the election by 1 vote,is it still meaningless? Or do they need to win by 1000 to make it
meaningless?

NJ Stinks
04-09-2012, 12:41 PM
Blaming voter fraud because the majority disagrees or at least prefers another option is like me blaming my equipment for not breaking 100 on the golf course.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. When your best chance of winning an election is low voter turnout, there is something inherently wrong with your platform.

mostpost
04-09-2012, 01:06 PM
So if 1000 people do this at one polling station and win the election by 1 vote,is it still meaningless? Or do they need to win by 1000 to make it
meaningless?
The point is that 1000 people are not going to do this at one polling station. Nor is one person going to do it at 1000 polling stations. If you want to steal an election, you need to do it the way Republicans do. You get the voting machine manufacturer to set up the machine in your favor.

Trying to steal an election the way you are proposing just makes no sense. The more people involved in a plot the more likely it is that it will go wrong. One person gets caught and the whole house of cards comes tumbling down. That is if you can even find a thousand people willing to act in your behalf.

Did you watch the video. Did you see what O'keefe did not say and what he did not do. He did not say, "I'm Eric Holder, may I have a ballot?" He said, "Do you have Eric Holder here?" He also did not sign for the ballot when asked to do so. At my polling place you have to sign for the ballot and they compare the signature to the one they have on file.

Of course did this to have plausible deniability if he was challenged. But how do we know that this poll worker wasn't very much aware that OKeefe was not Eric Holder and was just waiting to get the forged signature before calling in security.

bigmack
04-09-2012, 01:17 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again. When your best chance of winning an election is low voter turnout, there is something inherently wrong with your platform.
You keep looking at this with the same glasses on. If anyone who doesn't have an ID can get one FREE OF CHARGE how is there lower voter turnout?

mostpost
04-09-2012, 01:19 PM
Let's see if Mostie can slap together a cogent argument against requiring ID to vote. He should know all the details by now so it might be a tough position to back.

I am opposed to it because it targets a particular demographic, the poor and the elderly. Most middle class people have a car and have a drivers license. An even greater percentage of the well to do possess these items. Even those who do not drive have the wherewithal to obtain these items.

The urban poor frequently use public transportation. The elderly may not drive. Both groups may not have the time or the means to travel to a DMV to obtain an ID. If voting is to be equal for all, then the requirements should be equal. If one group or set of groups suddenly is required to obtain an ID that was not required before and is already possessed by others; that makes for voting inequality. Why not just say that in order to vote you have to be a landowner. Just disenfranchise all renters.

And I haven't even discussed the fact that there are already safeguards against a person voting for someone else; Okeefe's latest phony video notwithstanding.

If I were you guys, I would be embarrassed that I keep falling for this guy. :rolleyes:

johnhannibalsmith
04-09-2012, 01:20 PM
... When your best chance of winning an election is low voter turnout, there is something inherently wrong with your platform.

Probably true, but then again, when your platform relies largely on pie-in-the-sky promises that are clearly designed to appeal to illegal "citizens", there may also be something inherently wrong with the voting system.

mostpost
04-09-2012, 01:28 PM
You keep looking at this with the same glasses on. If anyone who doesn't have an ID can get one FREE OF CHARGE how is there lower voter turnout?

It's not the "Free of Charge", it's can the person travel to the place where the ID's are given out just for the purpose of obtaining an ID that others must make no effort to have.

Would anyone think it fair if we identified a class of voters and told them. Here you are at the polling place. Now everyone else can walk in this door located right here. But you have to walk down that path, through those sprinklers, over that hill and back to the polling place before you can vote.

You cry like a baby anytime anything affects you, but are sorely lacking in empathy.

woodtoo
04-09-2012, 01:29 PM
Sorry,I did not know that ID means a drivers license,something I do not possess.Up here in the true north we can use a number of different ID's.

bigmack
04-09-2012, 01:45 PM
You cry like a baby anytime anything affects you, but are sorely lacking in empathy.
And here I thought you knew the score on this dealio.

Most states will even pick them up and drive them to get the ID. Again, FREE of CHARGE. What's you next excuse for trying to maintain some integrity to an election?

mostpost
04-09-2012, 01:54 PM
Sorry,I did not know that ID means a drivers license,something I do not possess.Up here in the true north we can use a number of different ID's.
I did not mean to imply that only a drivers license would work as an ID. A lot of people do not have any form of photo ID and would have difficulty getting one.

TJDave
04-09-2012, 02:02 PM
Would anyone think it fair if we identified a class of voters and told them. Here you are at the polling place. Now everyone else can walk in this door located right here. But you have to walk down that path, through those sprinklers, over that hill and back to the polling place before you can vote.


Anyone did that to me would make me doubly determined to vote.

mostpost
04-09-2012, 02:16 PM
And here I thought you knew the score on this dealio.

Most states will even pick them up and drive them to get the ID. Again, FREE of CHARGE. What's you next excuse for trying to maintain some integrity to an election?

I think you made that up. Considering the economic climate in a lot of states, I can't see them spending a lot of money running a taxi service for indigent voters.

bigmack
04-09-2012, 02:17 PM
Know why the Feds require ID to get on a plane? Discriminate against the poor.

Know why you have to show ID to get cigs & booze? Discriminate against the poor.

Don't you get it? It's a conspiracy
I think you made that up. Considering the economic climate in a lot of states, I can't see them spending a lot of money running a taxi service for indigent voters.
Like I said, I thought you knew your stuff. Look it up. It's fact.

Don't tell me you don't want to look it up?

Here's one state: http://www.scdmvonline.com/DMVNew/default.aspx?n=State_Identification_Card_Day

Go find more. It's fun.

BlueShoe
04-09-2012, 02:32 PM
When your best chance of winning an election is low voter turnout, there is something inherently wrong with your platform.
When your best chance of winning an election is fraudulent voter turnout, there is something inherently wrong with your platform.

ArlJim78
04-09-2012, 03:10 PM
I did not mean to imply that only a drivers license would work as an ID. A lot of people do not have any form of photo ID and would have difficulty getting one.
How is it difficult to get a photo ID? if it's too difficult for someone to arrange to get to the state office to get an ID, then how are they going to handle the complex task of getting to the voting precinct?

there is simply no valid excuse for not requiring an ID for voting while there are numerous examples of fraud taking place.

mostpost
04-09-2012, 03:32 PM
Know why the Feds require ID to get on a plane? Discriminate against the poor.

Know why you have to show ID to get cigs & booze? Discriminate against the poor.

Don't you get it? It's a conspiracy

Like I said, I thought you knew your stuff. Look it up. It's fact.

Don't tell me you don't want to look it up?

Here's one state: http://www.scdmvonline.com/DMVNew/default.aspx?n=State_Identification_Card_Day

Go find more. It's fun.

We have one state which is providing rides on one day. That day is a Wednesday. Wednesday is a work day for many. Where did you find this information? On your computer. Many people still do not have a computer. They would know nothing about this service, which is only one day.
And you are required to have a birth certificate, Social Security card and proof of residence. I believe that obtaining a copy of your birth certificate costs money.

Flying on a plane is not a right, voting is.
Buying cigarettes and booze is not a right, voting is.

bigmack
04-09-2012, 03:36 PM
Flying on a plane is not a right, voting is.
Buying cigarettes and booze is not a right, voting is.
Providing you can prove you have that right. Let me guess, you believe by showing up at the polling booth that's enough? :lol:

How many undocumented people are in this country? Is it 15 or 20 million now?

You remain as dishonest as ever in debate. Rachel has taught you well.

BlueShoe
04-09-2012, 04:45 PM
Flying on a plane is not a right, voting is.
Buying cigarettes and booze is not a right, voting is.

Not automatically. A person must be of legal age, a citizen of the United States, must not have been convicted of a felony, and must not have been certified as being insane. It is easier to fly on a plane, or buy cigaretttes or booze, with fewer qualifications, than it is to be certified as being eligible to vote. Sorry Mosty, but you got it wrong again.

boxcar
04-09-2012, 04:54 PM
Flying on a plane is not a right, voting is.
Buying cigarettes and booze is not a right, voting is.

So, is owning a gun. Try buying one and registering it without I.D.

Boxcar

ArlJim78
04-09-2012, 05:40 PM
the problem is that accurate roles are not maintained, names are not being taken off the lists so if you have access to those lists you can game the system.

just like how Obama takes credit card donations without any identity verification in order to skirt campaign finance laws. its a crime.

and what good is your right to vote if there are not adequate safegaurds in place to make sure that the voting is fair?

Robert Goren
04-09-2012, 05:54 PM
I would feel lot better about the voter id laws if the states passing them did not have a history denying people the right to vote because of their skin color. When the people who in past were discriminated (or their descendants) against start wanting voter id laws, I will feel comfortable with them. Right now the only people want have never been denied their right to vote because of the color of their skin. After the debacle in Florida in 2000 when people were denied their right to vote because they had a similar name to a convicted felon( it some how only happened in predominantly black precincts), I want guarantees that this is not a thinly veiled attempt to keep blacks from voting. Considering that politicians pushing these laws do not get very many black votes, I am really sceptical that is not what is happening.

NJ Stinks
04-09-2012, 06:26 PM
Probably true, but then again, when your platform relies largely on pie-in-the-sky promises that are clearly designed to appeal to illegal "citizens", there may also be something inherently wrong with the voting system.

Take immigration off the table and Dems still romp almost everywhere there are a lot of people.

Dems can't make it in rural areas that don't want to pay squat for anything (i.e. mass transit). Places that deny a connection between the number and types of guns available and murder. Places that think their religious beliefs must be reflected in our country's laws.

TJDave
04-09-2012, 06:32 PM
Considering that politicians pushing these laws do not get very many black votes, I am really sceptical that is not what is happening.

Less about blacks then a class of voters...the poor. All States tend to make it as difficult as possible for the poor to express themselves.

Even the liberal ones.

boxcar
04-09-2012, 06:57 PM
Take immigration off the table and Dems still romp almost everywhere there are a lot of people.

Dems can't make it in rural areas that don't want to pay squat for anything (i.e. mass transit). Places that deny a connection between the number and types of guns available and murder. Places that think their religious beliefs must be reflected in our country's laws.

If elections are such a mortal lock for Dems how come they want to suspend the Universal Law of Distrust when it comes to voting. The suspension of this Principle is beyond absurd.

And do you know that no one in this society can function in our economic system without I.D.?

Recently, I went to pick up a prescription that my dentist called in to the druggist. When I went to pick it up at the counter, the druggist asked me for my I.D.! What chutzpah, eh? And they insisted -- even though I had given them all the details they wanted to know about me.

A woman called into to the Rush show today to tell her story about the radiologist requesting I.D. from her before she would perform a mammogram. The patient asked why. The radiologist told her that they have to make sure that she is the one named on the insurance card. In other words, the insurance card itself was not sufficient.

In today's society, one really cannot function without I.D. This is what makes this whole issue incredibly absurd.

Boxcar

Tom
04-09-2012, 10:22 PM
How do you cash your welfare checks without photo ID?
How do you register to vote in the first place without photo ID?

An alternative to this would be to use your fingerprints to identify you.
Place you thumb on an electric scanner and prove you is who says you is.

The plus side is that most dems ar already in the system. :lol:

ElKabong
04-10-2012, 12:11 AM
How do you cash your welfare checks without photo ID?
How do you register to vote in the first place without photo ID?

:

Easy...just tell them you're Eric Holder (back to square one / post one, which trumps mailbagger, stinky, detective et al)

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/08/DC-Polling-Place-Holder-Ballot

mostpost
04-10-2012, 02:18 AM
How do you cash your welfare checks without photo ID?
How do you register to vote in the first place without photo ID?

An alternative to this would be to use your fingerprints to identify you.
Place you thumb on an electric scanner and prove you is who says you is.

The plus side is that most dems ar already in the system. :lol:

I don't know about the welfare checks, but I do know that you do not need a photo ID to register to vote; at least not in New York state. You need to provide your DMV number or the last four digits of your Social Security number and you need to sign an affadavit that you are eligible to vote and live where you say you do. Illinois has similar requirements.

Use of thumbprints at least has the advantage that everyone would have to go and be put in the system.It would be inconvenient for everyone.

A major objection to any of these plans is that they are so unnecessary. I know all you conservatives think there are legions of liberal, illegal, Democrats just lining up to vote in someone else's place. It just ain't so.

O'Keefe knew Holder's address because Holder is a well known person. Of course O''keefe never said he was Holder and scurried away when asked to sign for the ballot. So we will never know if he would have been allowed to vote. Or if the election clerk was not as dumb as you think and was just waiting for him to forge the signature of the Attorney General of the United States. Then we could put the little weasel where he belongs.

Again, you steal elections after the polls have closed.

mostpost
04-10-2012, 02:34 AM
Easy...just tell them you're Eric Holder (back to square one / post one, which trumps mailbagger, stinky, detective et al)

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/08/DC-Polling-Place-Holder-Ballot
Your problem is that you do not understand the difference between empirical evidence and anecdotal evidence. If O'Keefe had sent researches to many polling places and if they had signed for ballots which did not belong to them and if they had voted, then there would be proof that there was a problem.

But he did not do that. He went to a few polling places. He never signed for a ballot. He never voted. All he presented was anecdotal evidence. He took a small number of occurrences and applied it to an entire system. Kind of like the ballplayer who goes four for five on opening day and ends up hitting .217 for the year. A scientist does research to find the answer to a question-whatever that answer might be. O'Keefe has an answer and tailors his research to prove that answer. Tailors is not the right word; the right word is manipulates.

bigmack
04-10-2012, 02:34 AM
Again, you steal elections after the polls have closed.
See there. Guy like Most not only will let ya know how to REALLY steal an election, he'll also tell there's nothing to see here about ID laws. Same as Holder.

They're bright. How bright? Someone just about voted in Holder's name. :lol:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_9_12_23_31_24.jpg

Robert Goren
04-10-2012, 03:52 AM
How do you cash your welfare checks without photo ID?
How do you register to vote in the first place without photo ID?

An alternative to this would be to use your fingerprints to identify you.
Place you thumb on an electric scanner and prove you is who says you is.

The plus side is that most dems ar already in the system. :lol: I don't think anybody gets welfare checks anymore. Most states if not all have gone to debt cards. All they need is a pin number, not a photo id.

newtothegame
04-10-2012, 03:54 AM
I don't think anybody gets welfare checks anymore. Most states if not all have gone to debt cards. All they need is a pin number, not a photo id.
But upon ORIGINALLY obtaining said card, they have to show an ID.....funny how you leave that part out Goren. or is it your contention that anyone can go to a public assistance office WITHOUT ID and start claiming money? :lol:

Robert Goren
04-10-2012, 04:26 AM
But upon ORIGINALLY obtaining said card, they have to show an ID.....funny how you leave that part out Goren. or is it your contention that anyone can go to a public assistance office WITHOUT ID and start claiming money? :lol:Undoubtly you do.
Since 9/11 you need IDs to get a job. It hasn't stopped illegal immigrants from getting them. The only thing it has done is create a flourishing black market in fake IDs.

rastajenk
04-10-2012, 02:17 PM
If O'Keefe had sent researches to many polling places and if they had signed for ballots which did not belong to them and if they had voted, then there would be proof that there was a problem. There would also be researchers guilty of the fraud they are trying prove can happen. Tough spot to be in; would you volunteer for that assignment?

I wonder if Holder ever did vote that day.

Valuist
04-10-2012, 02:30 PM
I don't know about the welfare checks, but I do know that you do not need a photo ID to register to vote; at least not in New York state. You need to provide your DMV number or the last four digits of your Social Security number and you need to sign an affadavit that you are eligible to vote and live where you say you do. Illinois has similar requirements.

Use of thumbprints at least has the advantage that everyone would have to go and be put in the system.It would be inconvenient for everyone.

A major objection to any of these plans is that they are so unnecessary. I know all you conservatives think there are legions of liberal, illegal, Democrats just lining up to vote in someone else's place. It just ain't so.

O'Keefe knew Holder's address because Holder is a well known person. Of course O''keefe never said he was Holder and scurried away when asked to sign for the ballot. So we will never know if he would have been allowed to vote. Or if the election clerk was not as dumb as you think and was just waiting for him to forge the signature of the Attorney General of the United States. Then we could put the little weasel where he belongs.

Again, you steal elections after the polls have closed.

And nobody is better at getting the dead vote out than Chicago Dems!

JustRalph
04-16-2012, 10:17 PM
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/04/16/Okeefe-DC-Vid-Jealous

IA1k2h8qtBc

JustRalph
04-23-2012, 10:27 PM
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/apr/22/tdmain01-va-investigates-voter-fraud-ar-1859666/

Virginia is considered in play by both parties

ElKabong
04-23-2012, 11:37 PM
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/apr/22/tdmain01-va-investigates-voter-fraud-ar-1859666/

Virginia is considered in play by both parties

Dems have cheating down-pat

boxcar
04-24-2012, 12:48 AM
Your problem is that you do not understand the difference between empirical evidence and anecdotal evidence. If O'Keefe had sent researches to many polling places and if they had signed for ballots which did not belong to them and if they had voted, then there would be proof that there was a problem.

He's not the one with the problem. You are! Here's a clue, Clueless One: If O'K and associates had actually signed for ballots, they could have been arrested and charged with voter fraud -- the very thing they set out to prove how easy it was to accomplish.. You think everyone in the world is as dumb as you are? :lol: :lol:

But he did not do that. He went to a few polling places. He never signed for a ballot. He never voted. All he presented was anecdotal evidence. He took a small number of occurrences and applied it to an entire system.

And in doing that little, he proved his point, didn't he? They were all willing to let him vote with no real I.D.!

Kind of like the ballplayer who goes four for five on opening day and ends up hitting .217 for the year. A scientist does research to find the answer to a question-whatever that answer might be. O'Keefe has an answer and tailors his research to prove that answer. Tailors is not the right word; the right word is manipulates.

You should stay away from analogies. They are way over your head. The baseball player who batted .800 on opening day didn't manipulate anything, which is what you're claiming about O'Keefe. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: In fact, neither did O'Keefe. He simply gamed or played the system that was already in place -- not a system that he put in place. He demonstrated to the world how easy it is to commit voter fraud in a state with lax laws. And he did it so cleverly that they could never prosecute him for voter fraud. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

Robert Goren
04-24-2012, 05:36 AM
And nobody is better at getting the dead vote out than Chicago Dems!Anybody who thinks a voter ID law is going stop the dead from voting in Chicago probably owns a couple broodmares in Nebraska.

boxcar
04-24-2012, 11:20 AM
Anybody who thinks a voter ID law is going stop the dead from voting in Chicago probably owns a couple broodmares in Nebraska.

Would you mind elaborating on your rationale?

Boxcar

Mike at A+
04-24-2012, 11:36 AM
Pennsylvania's Voter ID law went into effect in today's special election and primaries. I didn't see anyone (of any race) complaining or failing to produce a photo ID. No one was "disenfranchised" contrary to the claims of the corrupt Democrat Party and no dead people or cartoon characters voted to the joy of the Republican Party. This should be the law in EVERY state. It's the ONLY WAY to ensure that all voters are qualified to vote.

Tom
04-24-2012, 11:50 AM
Fair elections....the bane of all democrats.