TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 The judicial branch as a co-equal part of our democracy is certainly not immune from the human element, so of course it happens on both the left and right. Let me know when we see people convicted as a result of the likelihood that was discussed from the data in the studies you linked. Speaking of rejection, you have no problem refuting the many sources I linked that show it's a non issue and of course you did because you don't like the conclusion.You linked one source, from a study that wasn't comprehensive. You linked a single non-comprehensive study, and the notion that research showing the possibility of wide spread voter fraud should be dismissed because it hasn't led to prosecutions is absurd. Should we also dismiss studies linking smoking to cancer because the existence of the study didn't lead to the end of smoking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 (edited) You linked a single non-comprehensive study, and the notion that research showing the possibility of wide spread voter fraud should be dismissed because it hasn't led to prosecutions is absurd. Should we also dismiss studies linking smoking to cancer because the existence of the study didn't lead to the end of smoking? Wrong! I provided a single link to multiple studies from a variety of sources. I get it, you don't accept data that doesn't match your views. It's cool. Edited July 20, 2017 by 26CornerBlitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookieG Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 I have yet to see any real study or hard evidence that this is a real issue worth any serious consideration and I certainly wouldn't trust any audit done by the state of NC after they tried to enact a biased voter id law that was struck down: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/15/528457693/supreme-court-declines-republican-bid-to-revive-north-carolina-voter-id-law Well, the North Carolina Baord of Elections found nothing of the sort... Their Post Audit found that out of more than 4.7 million votes cast, 41 were from non-citizens. All were under green card status and as the audit says, there seems to be more of a confusion in the few who voted. Many of them believed they were eligible to vote. 41 out of 4.7 million votes casts does not equal 14%. They did have more than 400 felons voting. In NC, you can't vote if you've been convicted of a felony unless you've completed your sentence AND probation/parole. Again, according to the audit, some weren't aware that they were ineligible, others produced evidence that they were off probation. 16 have been referred to prosecutors, the other 440+ are open, because people never sent back requests for information. It also found 2 cases of someone voting for a deceased family member. one said she had a power of attorney to vote for her deceased mother. https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/sboe/Post-Election%20Audit%20Report_2016%20General%20Election/Post-Election_Audit_Report.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Well, the North Carolina Baord of Elections found nothing of the sort... Their Post Audit found that out of more than 4.7 million votes cast, 41 were from non-citizens. All were under green card status and as the audit says, there seems to be more of a confusion in the few who voted. Many of them believed they were eligible to vote. 41 out of 4.7 million votes casts does not equal 14%. They did have more than 400 felons voting. In NC, you can't vote if you've been convicted of a felony unless you've completed your sentence AND probation/parole. Again, according to the audit, some weren't aware that they were ineligible, others produced evidence that they were off probation. 16 have been referred to prosecutors, the other 440+ are open, because people never sent back requests for information. It also found 2 cases of someone voting for a deceased family member. one said she had a power of attorney to vote for her deceased mother. https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/sboe/Post-Election%20Audit%20Report_2016%20General%20Election/Post-Election_Audit_Report.pdf Good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Wrong! I provided a single link to multiple studies from a variety of sources. I get it, you don't accept data that doesn't match your views. It's cool. You provided a link to the Brenner Center for Justice which is an activist group seeking to expand the franchise. Given the nature of the group, and the assembly of those smaller studies (which I'll get to in a moment) for a purpose, with the assumption that the BCfJ has vetted those studies given their decision to utilize them, I chose to label the grouping as a single study. It was lazy language, not a lack of examination. It's important to note the mission of the BCfJ when looking at the data they've chosen to provide. They are agenda driven. You'll note that there's no mention of any research which runs against it's stated purpose. Where is the Harvard study? Where is the study from Old Dominion? Those omissions, and omissions of similar studies, are persuasive towards the argument that BCfJ isn't interested in the truth, but is rather preoccupied with it's "truth"; and this case is further buttressed by the fact that many of the studies cited don't speak to the voter fraud directly, but rather make assumptions about it based on prosecutions for voter fraud. You'll also note that no where have I claimed that the studies I have linked are comprehensive. They aren't. There haven't been any truly comprehensive studies on voter fraud done. And if we're being honest with each other, and we agree that the franchise, and our experiment with self-governance is important, we should also be able to agree that crafting laws which protect it are important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 You provided a link to the Brenner Center for Justice which is an activist group seeking to expand the franchise. Given the nature of the group, and the assembly of those smaller studies (which I'll get to in a moment) for a purpose, with the assumption that the BCfJ has vetted those studies given their decision to utilize them, I chose to label the grouping as a single study. It was lazy language, not a lack of examination. It's important to note the mission of the BCfJ when looking at the data they've chosen to provide. They are agenda driven. You'll note that there's no mention of any research which runs against it's stated purpose. Where is the Harvard study? Where is the study from Old Dominion? Those omissions, and omissions of similar studies, are persuasive towards the argument that BCfJ isn't interested in the truth, but is rather preoccupied with it's "truth"; and this case is further buttressed by the fact that many of the studies cited don't speak to the voter fraud directly, but rather make assumptions about it based on prosecutions for voter fraud. You'll also note that no where have I claimed that the studies I have linked are comprehensive. They aren't. There haven't been any truly comprehensive studies on voter fraud done. And if we're being honest with each other, and we agree that the franchise, and our experiment with self-governance is important, we should also be able to agree that crafting laws which protect it are important. I accept this and I agree with you about crafting laws being important, but when doing so there should be the premise of solving a demonstrated problem with input from all parties to make it an inclusive process. This, unfortunately, is all too lacking in today's political realm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 (edited) Well, the North Carolina Baord of Elections found nothing of the sort... Their Post Audit found that out of more than 4.7 million votes cast, 41 were from non-citizens. All were under green card status and as the audit says, there seems to be more of a confusion in the few who voted. Many of them believed they were eligible to vote. 41 out of 4.7 million votes casts does not equal 14%. They did have more than 400 felons voting. In NC, you can't vote if you've been convicted of a felony unless you've completed your sentence AND probation/parole. Again, according to the audit, some weren't aware that they were ineligible, others produced evidence that they were off probation. 16 have been referred to prosecutors, the other 440+ are open, because people never sent back requests for information. It also found 2 cases of someone voting for a deceased family member. one said she had a power of attorney to vote for her deceased mother. https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/sboe/Post-Election%20Audit%20Report_2016%20General%20Election/Post-Election_Audit_Report.pdf Given that I was talking about a 2014 audit, I'd say your contribution isn't relevant. The audit was conducted after a citizens group expressed concerns about 10,000 individuals who may have registered to vote illegally. The audit concluded that 14% of these individuals were likely non-citizens. None of this is in dispute. I accept this and I agree with you about crafting laws being important, but when doing so there should be the premise of solving a demonstrated problem with input from all parties to make it an inclusive process. This, unfortunately, is all too lacking in today's political realm. The first step is coming to a consensus that the franchise is important, and should be protected. The second is to admit that there have been no truly comprehensive studies done, and that the potential for abuse exists. The third is to actually agree to conduct thorough and comprehensive research in order to determine where and how voter fraud is most likely to be committed, and to then craft legislation addressing it. The talking past each other people are doing, the insisting that any reforms are racist, has to stop. Edited July 20, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 You announce a crackdown with Immigration officials at random places, that'll preventatively drop voter fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookieG Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Given that I was talking about a 2014 audit, I'd say your contribution isn't relevant. The audit was conducted after a citizens group expressed concerns about 10,000 individuals who may have registered to vote illegally. The audit concluded that 14% of these individuals were likely non-citizens. None of this is in dispute. Why am I not surprised... -the opinion of 50 State Boards of Election - biased -the opinion of the National Association of Secretaries of State - biased -Any study produced or cited by the Brennan Center - biased -the multiyear hunt by one Secretary of State in a state of 1.6 million registered voters that uncovered 1 noncitizen voter in 7 years. - irrelevant -a post audit of 4.7 million voters that uncovered 41 noncitizens votin- irrelevant On the other hand... -an internet poll where less than 1000 identified themselves as noncitizens, and extrapolating their unverified answers on a nationwide basis- VALID (Despite one of the authors of the study coming out and stating not to use the extrapolation in the study.) -a claim by a "citizens group" that 10000 people were noncitizens voting...and a DMV/SAVE search that 1400 registered to vote -VALID that 14% of noncitizens register to vote. Despite a caveat by the Board of Elections that in cases of a person flagged as possibly being a noncitizen in the SAVE database turn out to be citizens 97.6% of the time. (See p. 10 of the post audit/Appendix P.2 I cited earlier) That part doesn't matter...we'll go with the 14% figure. There is hearing what you want to hear and tuning out what you don't want to hear.... ...and then there's this. I can only say...wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Why am I not surprised... -the opinion of 50 State Boards of Election - biased -the opinion of the National Association of Secretaries of State - biased -Any study produced or cited by the Brennan Center - biased -the multiyear hunt by one Secretary of State in a state of 1.6 million registered voters that uncovered 1 noncitizen voter in 7 years. - irrelevant -a post audit of 4.7 million voters that uncovered 41 noncitizens votin- irrelevant On the other hand... -an internet poll where less than 1000 identified themselves as noncitizens, and extrapolating their unverified answers on a nationwide basis- VALID (Despite one of the authors of the study coming out and stating not to use the extrapolation in the study.) -a claim by a "citizens group" that 10000 people were noncitizens voting...and a DMV/SAVE search that 1400 registered to vote -VALID that 14% of noncitizens register to vote. Despite a caveat by the Board of Elections that in cases of a person flagged as possibly being a noncitizen in the SAVE database turn out to be citizens 97.6% of the time. (See p. 10 of the post audit/Appendix P.2 I cited earlier) That part doesn't matter...we'll go with the 14% figure. There is hearing what you want to hear and tuning out what you don't want to hear.... ...and then there's this. I can only say...wow. I'm not sure whom exactly you think you're impressing with your intellectual dishonesty. What I have pointed out is the following: 1. That political power is extremely valuable 2. That politicians and political parties are largely corrupt 3. That the franchise is vitally important to the fabric of the nation, and should be protected 4. That the citizens of the nation should be able to have confidence that non-citizens are unable to vote 5. That there has never been a truly thorough study done on voter fraud in the United States 6. That the group whose uncomprehensive studies have been presented are compromised by conflicts of interest, or are activist groups seeking a specific outcome. 7. That the findings of other studies with differing results are being dismissed out of hand My only ask has been that we undertake a thorough and comprehensive study of voter fraud in the United States, and that we then pass appropriate legislation to prevent voter fraud based on those findings. Your ask is that we not conduct the study, and that we continue to dismiss any evidence which cuts against your narrative. Wow indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Why am I not surprised... -the opinion of 50 State Boards of Election - biased -the opinion of the National Association of Secretaries of State - biased -Any study produced or cited by the Brennan Center - biased -the multiyear hunt by one Secretary of State in a state of 1.6 million registered voters that uncovered 1 noncitizen voter in 7 years. - irrelevant -a post audit of 4.7 million voters that uncovered 41 noncitizens votin- irrelevant On the other hand... -an internet poll where less than 1000 identified themselves as noncitizens, and extrapolating their unverified answers on a nationwide basis- VALID (Despite one of the authors of the study coming out and stating not to use the extrapolation in the study.) -a claim by a "citizens group" that 10000 people were noncitizens voting...and a DMV/SAVE search that 1400 registered to vote -VALID that 14% of noncitizens register to vote. Despite a caveat by the Board of Elections that in cases of a person flagged as possibly being a noncitizen in the SAVE database turn out to be citizens 97.6% of the time. (See p. 10 of the post audit/Appendix P.2 I cited earlier) That part doesn't matter...we'll go with the 14% figure. There is hearing what you want to hear and tuning out what you don't want to hear.... ...and then there's this. I can only say...wow. You are wasting your breath. The poster you're talking to believes only property-owners or military men should be allowed to vote. Gee I wonder why he supports voter ID laws and opposes any research that shows they are unnecessary? You don't even have the burden of proof here but you did a bang-up job, just don't expect him to listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 (edited) You are wasting your breath. The poster you're talking to believes only property-owners or military men should be allowed to vote. Gee I wonder why he supports voter ID laws and opposes any research that shows they are unnecessary? You don't even have the burden of proof here but you did a bang-up job, just don't expect him to listen. What is the purpose of a nation state? Where did I lend my support to any particular law or type of law? How are your first and second sentences anything other than non-sequitur? As to his contribution? He didn't do much of anything other than mischaracterize my statements, engaging in intellectual dishonesty. That fact you find that laudable says more about you than anything else you've posted. And finally, for someone trumpeting the importance of listening, you sure don't do a very good job of it yourself. Edited July 20, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 I'm not sure whom exactly you think you're impressing with your intellectual dishonesty. What I have pointed out is the following: 1. That political power is extremely valuable 2. That politicians and political parties are largely corrupt 3. That the franchise is vitally important to the fabric of the nation, and should be protected 4. That the citizens of the nation should be able to have confidence that non-citizens are unable to vote 5. That there has never been a truly thorough study done on voter fraud in the United States 6. That the group whose uncomprehensive studies have been presented are compromised by conflicts of interest, or are activist groups seeking a specific outcome. 7. That the findings of other studies with differing results are being dismissed out of hand My only ask has been that we undertake a thorough and comprehensive study of voter fraud in the United States, and that we then pass appropriate legislation to prevent voter fraud based on those findings. Your ask is that we not conduct the study, and that we continue to dismiss any evidence which cuts against your narrative. Wow indeed. It's not just non-citizens voting. It's the fraud that gets democrats elected with over 100% of the population in a precinct having cast ballots. It's the kind of corrupt dealings that got diaper boy elected via recount in Minnesota. Why is the left so concerned about looking into this stuff or requiring picture I.D.'s? It's rather humorous, but the hypocrisy of the left is shown in its full splendor when you realize that in order to get into the last Democrat Convention you had to show picture I.D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 So in order for Congress to make a law, there has to be proof that a law is necessary? Is there a timetable on the number of convictions under a specific law before that law is automatically revoked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 (edited) So in order for Congress to make a law, there has to be proof that a law is necessary? Is there a timetable on the number of convictions under a specific law before that law is automatically revoked? Well, yes. Unless you'd like to make the case that congress should pass unnecessary laws? The proper argument to make is that we absolutely should have laws in place to protect the integrity of the franchise. With that in mind we should conduct a thorough and comprehensive study of the issue, with the findings used to put laws in place. Edited July 20, 2017 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Voting is so last century. Elections should be decided in the ring... WWE style! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Voting is so last century. Elections should be decided in the ring... WWE style! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Well, yes. Unless you'd like to make the case that congress should pass unnecessary laws? The proper argument to make is that we absolutely should have laws in place to protect the integrity of the franchise. With that in mind we should conduct a thorough and comprehensive study of the issue, with the findings used to put laws in place. And laws should sunset after 5 years or so. If the law is truly necessary then there will be no problem renewing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 And laws should sunset after 5 years or so. If the law is truly necessary then there will be no problem renewing it Jefferson agreed with your idea, and thought the Constitution should be rewritten every 19 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Well, yes. Unless you'd like to make the case that congress should pass unnecessary laws? The proper argument to make is that we absolutely should have laws in place to protect the integrity of the franchise. With that in mind we should conduct a thorough and comprehensive study of the issue, with the findings used to put laws in place. When you look at the list of laws currently on the books you can't say that they've all been proven necessary before they were passed. While I agree with the spirit of the idea, it's just not a prerequisite for lawmaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts