RE: ID's to vote (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message

PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:46:40 PM)

quote:


and, by having measures in place, which greatly REDUCES the opportunity for voter fraud, THUS, it would give Dems LESS of an opportunity to claim "Voter Fraud" when an election doesn't go "their way"....



The reason Dems seem so intent on crying "fraud" is that Bush and Company were so intent on committing it. One more example: http://action.dscc.org/campaign/diebold1/explanation



JimboFletch -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:46:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky

Jimbo, I am not against absentee ballots for the military though there is the potential for voter fraud just as in Oregon. I was in the military for 20 years and I know of cases of voter fraud that occurred with the absentee ballots. Most of the time, the spouse would fill out the ballot of the service member, sign their name to it, and mail it back in.

And yes, I reported it every time I heard about it, even if they happened to support the same candidates I did.

Jeff, I've been giving you a very hard time this week, but I want to take a moment to thank you for your service in the military and for afterwards. I salute you.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:47:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

quote:


didn't the dems in the last few elections want to disregard/not fully count active-military 'absentee' ballots from overseas? and, what was the reasoning for that, do ya think?


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9507E0D8133BF936A25754C0A9679C8B63


That article plainly states that it is unknown as to who received the votes from those disputed ballots. And nowhere does the article mention the dimpled chads that Florida law said should not be counted but the Democrats insisted on counting in heavily Democratic counties. But, you can't expect the New York Times to tell the whole story can you? [:D]



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:50:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JimboFletch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff_from_Kentucky

Jimbo, I am not against absentee ballots for the military though there is the potential for voter fraud just as in Oregon. I was in the military for 20 years and I know of cases of voter fraud that occurred with the absentee ballots. Most of the time, the spouse would fill out the ballot of the service member, sign their name to it, and mail it back in.

And yes, I reported it every time I heard about it, even if they happened to support the same candidates I did.

Jeff, I've been giving you a very hard time this week, but I want to take a moment to thank you for your service in the military and for afterwards. I salute you.


Thank you Jimbo! I appreciate that very much. I've been giving you a hard time as well but I do appreciate the fact that you also served and I want to thank you and salute you for your service!



kernsfamily -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:51:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

quote:


and, by having measures in place, which greatly REDUCES the opportunity for voter fraud, THUS, it would give Dems LESS of an opportunity to claim "Voter Fraud" when an election doesn't go "their way"....



The reason Dems seem so intent on crying "fraud" is that Bush and Company were so intent on committing it. One more example: http://action.dscc.org/campaign/diebold1/explanation


you forgot to add this to your "link".....
Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
enough said.

did ya ever notice that "lobbyists" "special interests" "political action committees".....they are ONLY "bad" when they work in favor of "conservatives".....
when they are for "liberal causes" and the democrats, then, well, then they're OK....



PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:55:29 PM)

It also states that disputed ballots were accepted in "bush" counties, and rejected in "Gore" counties.

Now, I'm not saying the Dems didn't try to cheat. I'm sure they did. But it seems like the Republicans tried harder, and succeeded (which makes sense, with Jeb being governor and all).

Add that to all of the people who's names were thrown off the roles because they happened to have similar sounding names as felons (and live in Democratic counties) and we see that the very same party that is sponsoring the ID act doesn't care so much about stopping fraud. They care about winning elections.



PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 5:59:37 PM)

yup. I got the information from a biased source. But that doesn't mean it's not true. Search for yourself on Diebold voting machines. Look up how much their CEO gave to the Republican party.

Doesn't it seem strange that the company that made hackable, no paper trail, voting machines provided them to swing states won by Republicans, with contracts awarded to Rebublican donors?

Really. Why else, other than fraud, would a state want a voting machine that kept NO PHYSICAL RECORD of the votes?



inthysite -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 6:17:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

yup. I got the information from a biased source. But that doesn't mean it's not true. Search for yourself on Diebold voting machines. Look up how much their CEO gave to the Republican party.

Doesn't it seem strange that the company that made hackable, no paper trail, voting machines provided them to swing states won by Republicans, with contracts awarded to Rebublican donors?

Really. Why else, other than fraud, would a state want a voting machine that kept NO PHYSICAL RECORD of the votes?


This kind of rhetoric never ceases to amaze me.[8|] If a Conservative or Republican were to make these kind of accusations, assumptions and jumps to conclusion using only biased sources for their information he/she would be jumped on in a heart beat and their conclusions said to have no merit. But let a Democrat or a Liberal do it and it's just fine.

Personally, I don't trust any "investigative" reports by the NYT. They are not the paper they used to be but are now mainly nothing but a smear rag used by liberals, far left liberals at that.



PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 6:31:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: inthysite

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

yup. I got the information from a biased source. But that doesn't mean it's not true. Search for yourself on Diebold voting machines. Look up how much their CEO gave to the Republican party.

Doesn't it seem strange that the company that made hackable, no paper trail, voting machines provided them to swing states won by Republicans, with contracts awarded to Rebublican donors?

Really. Why else, other than fraud, would a state want a voting machine that kept NO PHYSICAL RECORD of the votes?


This kind of rhetoric never ceases to amaze me.[8|] If a Conservative or Republican were to make these kind of accusations, assumptions and jumps to conclusion using only biased sources for their information he/she would be jumped on in a heart beat and their conclusions said to have no merit. But let a Democrat or a Liberal do it and it's just fine.

Personally, I don't trust any "investigative" reports by the NYT. They are not the paper they used to be but are now mainly nothing but a smear rag used by liberals, far left liberals at that.


Do you dispute any of these facts:

Diebold machines don't leave a paper trail or other physical record.

Ohio was a swing state

Ohio was governed by a Republican

The CEO of Diebold was a large donor to the republican party.

Diebold got the contract to supply the machines.


Obviously, I can't get you to "connect the dots," but you do agree on the facts of the situation?



bzirk -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 7:00:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Consecrated2God

I think photo ID's should be required to vote, and although it is not undue hardship to obtain one, I think it's reasonable to provide those who for whatever reason can't afford one with a free one.


I agree.

My mother-in-law helped work a precinct in Cook County, Illinois in the 50s. She said that was almost enough to turn her off voting because of the garbage she witnessed. She about blows a gasket every time she hears that people do not have to give id to vote.

I never had that kind of experience, but common sense tells me that making it so easy for anyone to vote is just asking for fraud to happen -- at least at a greatsd rate than it does already.



inthysite -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 7:25:54 PM)

quote:

Obviously, I can't get you to "connect the dots," but you do agree on the facts of the situation?


Sure, I can connect the dots. But as any child will tell you the way you connect them determines the picture you get. Connect them in the wrong order and you get a different picture, leave out dots altogether and behold yet another picture. You must connect all the dots in the correct order to get the correct picture.

The Problems with a Diebold conspiracy to steal the 2004 Election

As a pure matter of probability, let me point something out: if there were a Diebold scheme to steal the election, we'd see one of two things:

1. A very targetted voting anomaly, sufficient to swing the election.

2. A broad voting-pattern discrepancy between counties that used Diebold machines, and counties that used paper ballots.


The problem with the "broad voter fraud" theory is that the voting pattern held in both Diebold areas and paper ballot areas. Any conspiracy to steal votes under those circumstances runs into two problems....

1. It would require the participation, flawless execution, and total silence of thousands of people, - officials in every county in which voter fraud was attempted. And not just the ones who pulled off this nationwide fraud, but also those who were "approached" to do so, and refused. Not one of them could make a mistake, get caught, or speak out. Not one.

2. It would require the non-involved local officials be completely unaware of fraud going on under their nose.

3. By the end of the day, the exit polls ended up being very close to the actual election outcome. In addition, most polls prior to the election showed Bush winning by between 1-5 points. A vast voter fraud effort would require we believe the pre-election polls, exit polls and election outcome were all wrong...despite being almost exactly the same.


Finally, there is one more thing that needs pointed out. DieBold is not a Republican organization. Certainly, some board members may be Republicans, but others are Democrats. For example:

* *** Diebold's election-systems division is "run by a registered Democrat"


* *** Mark Radke--Director of Marketing for Diebold Election Systems--has an exclusively Democratic donation history, having donated close to $10,000 to Democrats since 1995--when he was with Fulbright and Jaworski--including the legal limit of $2000 to John Kerry in the recent campaign. [2000-2004: $4,250] -- [1995-1999: $5,600]



While there are inherent problems with electronic voting, the current allegations about Diebold and the 2004 election just don't hold much water.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 8:28:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: inthysite

The problem with the "broad voter fraud" theory is that the voting pattern held in both Diebold areas and paper ballot areas. Any conspiracy to steal votes under those circumstances runs into two problems....

1. It would require the participation, flawless execution, and total silence of thousands of people, - officials in every county in which voter fraud was attempted. And not just the ones who pulled off this nationwide fraud, but also those who were "approached" to do so, and refused. Not one of them could make a mistake, get caught, or speak out. Not one.

2. It would require the non-involved local officials be completely unaware of fraud going on under their nose.

3. By the end of the day, the exit polls ended up being very close to the actual election outcome. In addition, most polls prior to the election showed Bush winning by between 1-5 points. A vast voter fraud effort would require we believe the pre-election polls, exit polls and election outcome were all wrong...despite being almost exactly the same.


You don't think that it is possible that thousands of us conspired to defraud the American public and steal the election? After all, Hillary Clinton did warn the American public years ago about the vast right-wing conspiracy! [:D]

Sorry, I just couldn't resist that one! It was too good to pass up! [:D]



colliefan -> RE: ID's to vote (6/6/2008 9:21:52 PM)

Another thing: the infamous "butterfly" balllot was designed by an election commision governed by Democrats.

Over in Durham, during the 2004 campaign voters swamped an early vote location so much they ran out of ballots. So, who did the voters blame? Not the dems who control the election commision, but the reps. Typical of most dems, not trained to think but to feel.



Consecrated2God -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 9:08:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

yup. I got the information from a biased source. But that doesn't mean it's not true. Search for yourself on Diebold voting machines. Look up how much their CEO gave to the Republican party.

Doesn't it seem strange that the company that made hackable, no paper trail, voting machines provided them to swing states won by Republicans, with contracts awarded to Rebublican donors?

Really. Why else, other than fraud, would a state want a voting machine that kept NO PHYSICAL RECORD of the votes?


Be careful now, you don't want this to get moved to Conspiracy Central now, do you? [8D]



rcjames -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 3:14:27 PM)

Would someone please explain to me why that IDs should not be requierd to vote.

I mean you got to have one to go to a bar, get married, travel by airline, etc. etc.

Thanks
RC



Jhud -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 3:46:46 PM)

Yeah, an ID is the minimum requirement we should have to be able to vote.

If someone does have the wits and capability to get an ID as a matter of course in their life, do we really want them choosing who are leaders are going to be?



PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 4:46:04 PM)

As I have pointed out before: it's not the fact of the ID that is problematic, it's the cost.

People already have to choose between medicine and food. Having to choose between medicine and food and voting means that it is likely that said person will not vote.

If you really think that it is important for people to have IDs to vote, set up a fund to pay for people to get IDs, and every challenge to the rules will go away.



SovereignIsHe -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 5:28:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

As I have pointed out before: it's not the fact of the ID that is problematic, it's the cost.

People already have to choose between medicine and food. Having to choose between medicine and food and voting means that it is likely that said person will not vote.

If you really think that it is important for people to have IDs to vote, set up a fund to pay for people to get IDs, and every challenge to the rules will go away.


If I have to pay to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights I don't see any issue with folks having to pay to have an ID to vote...

John



bzirk -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 5:38:18 PM)

It's been stated several times that the government could help those who have difficulty obtaining an id. But hey, that makes too much sense.

The alternative to no ids is that we allow the vote to whoever shows up at the polls.

The absurdity of that just about has me speechless. I think if the dearth of common sense were only or mostly about such things as these, it wouldn't bother me, but it seems common sense has died. It was never all that prevalent, but now it seems dead.

BTW, I noticed the defeaning silience about immigration during the primaries. I'm sure the candidates would love to have all those illegal aliens vote, so it's not going to shock me if we eventually make it a violation of the voting rights act to bar anyone from requiring id to establish voting eligibility. How dare the officials ask someone to prove they are able to vote? What are they thinking?!

Hey, once we put two women (one biological mother and one not) on the same birth certificate, I knew beyond doubt we were so messed up that trying to inject common sense was like whistling in the wind. Why I'm even typing this post is beyond me, because I'm so thoroughly disgusted with the lack of common sense in general (in the U.S), and my mini-rant will mean exactly nothing, and of course you can't really say anything about the lack of common sense, because issues like this one have been cloaked in a kind of pseudo compassion that makes it untouchable.



colliefan -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 5:51:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD
As I have pointed out before: it's not the fact of the ID that is problematic, it's the cost. People already have to choose between medicine and food. Having to choose between medicine and food and voting means that it is likely that said person will not vote. If you really think that it is important for people to have IDs to vote, set up a fund to pay for people to get IDs, and every challenge to the rules will go away.


A small fee - $10 - every eight years is small change. People spend money on what is important to them. Our nation is going under due to the entitlement mentality. Anyway, these individuals would only vote for the individuals favoring the system that has kept them enslaved.



bzirk -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 5:56:33 PM)

I don't know about the rest of you, but for the first time in my life I feel that we are on the precipice of losing our freedoms in a much more material way than ever before.

I truly am concerned about it, but it's not in my nature to knee jerk. I'm praying about how to proceed.

But I can't help but think that if this idiocy of not making sure people are really eligible to vote catches on, we're done.



PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 6:32:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: colliefan

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD
As I have pointed out before: it's not the fact of the ID that is problematic, it's the cost. People already have to choose between medicine and food. Having to choose between medicine and food and voting means that it is likely that said person will not vote. If you really think that it is important for people to have IDs to vote, set up a fund to pay for people to get IDs, and every challenge to the rules will go away.


A small fee - $10 - every eight years is small change. People spend money on what is important to them. Our nation is going under due to the entitlement mentality. Anyway, these individuals would only vote for the individuals favoring the system that has kept them enslaved.



It's over $50 in my state, every five years. I know people that do not have a gov't issued ID because they cannot afford them.

Again, I don't want fraud either, but the current system has fraud controls in place. I had to prove my address and citizenship when I registered, and my ID assured with a signature when I vote.

Sure, somebody could try to fake my signature, but a poll worker would notice. If the poll worker doesn't do a good job checking a signature, neither will they do a good job checking IDs.



Jeff_from_Kentucky -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 7:04:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

Again, I don't want fraud either, but the current system has fraud controls in place.


They why do the Democrats cry fraud everytime they lose? It seems the Democratic Party believes that the current fraud controls do not work yet the Democrats are against the simplest solution which is requiring a photo ID when you go to vote.



rcjames -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 7:14:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PhunkD

As I have pointed out before: it's not the fact of the ID that is problematic, it's the cost.

People already have to choose between medicine and food. Having to choose between medicine and food and voting means that it is likely that said person will not vote.

If you really think that it is important for people to have IDs to vote, set up a fund to pay for people to get IDs, and every challenge to the rules will go away.


Seems like the po folks do not have any trouble coming up if IDs for food stamps, medicaid, or a 40 ouncer.

It would be a simple thing for the state to issue affordable or free ids. Right now here in Oklahoma a state ID is 10 bucks.

Thanks
RC



PhunkD -> RE: ID's to vote (6/7/2008 7:16:06 PM)

Most of the fraud that Dems have complained about has involved keeping people from the polls. ie, when black voters were taken off the rolls for having names that were similar to those of felons.



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI