• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

South Carolina's Attorney General detects voter fraud during primaries

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,664
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Already, there has been some question into folks who cast their ballots on Saturday. South Carolina's Attorney General, Alan Wilson has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud. Wilson says an analysis found 953 ballots cast by voters were people who are listed as dead. He has asked the State Law Enforcement Division to investigate.

There's no problem with voter fraud in this country!!

Yes. Yes, there is.

South Carolina's Attorney General detects voter fraud during pri - WTOC, Savannah, Georgia, news, weather and sports |
 
Well, at least this time I can't say, only in South Carolina.
 

Just something you should realize. More than 230,000 people voted for Gringrich. Mitt Romney received nearly 170,000 votes. If we were to take those 900 votes and remove them because of voter fraud, how would that even remotely change the election outcome? I must remind you, in 2008 - Obama beat McCain by more than 5 million votes every single victory he had over Hillary was in the thousands of votes. So what exactly is this big crisis of voting that we're facing? A few discrepancies here and there? Sure. The massive voter fraud you're making it out to be? Hardly.
 
Of course voter fraud is a problem. It's not a very big one in terms of affecting the actual outcomes of elections, but it's an affront to democracy. Well, one additional caveat. Voter fraud in the sense of people voting twice or casting dead people's ballots... not common enough to actually effect an election. All the mucking about in Florida in 2000? Jeb Bush and his cronies preventing ten thousand people from voting in order to tip the scales towards his brother? That's a serious voting fraud issue. Tampering with voting machines (which also took place in Florida in 2000), to disregard some votes is also a huge issue.

An honest electoral process is integral to the meaning of democratic government. When people try to game the system, we all lose out.

Because voter ID came up in the thread, I'll address that, too. The net effect of voter ID requirements is fewer people voting. The few individuals who are abusing the system may well be stopped, but a far greater number of legitimate votes would be stopped as well. This whole voter ID movement, that's just another attempt to game the system. Just like gerrymandering, just like cold calling people to convince them not to vote. All of it. It's despicable.
 

I thought Republicans never cheated!

Oh, and once an investigation is completed, they are likely to find that it's a poll worker mix-up (similar sounding names or matching names). Something like this happened in Indiana when I lived there and everyone freaked out. They investigated and nearly every single one of them was a legal voter and the poll worker messed up due to either the exact same name or a similar sounding name.

That's the problem. Everyone freaks out and jumps to conclusions and pretends that everything is going to collapse because of "dead voters".

They haven't investigated anything yet. So, as such, what is the Attorney General's agenda in making this public before the investigation?

And how much do you want to bet when the investigation is complete and no criminal intent to commit fraud is found (as I said, it's very likely simple error) that the AG will say absolutely nothing?

Why? Because this story will linger and Republicans can use it to say "Voter fraud DOES exist".

This happens every election cycle. Put out a story about suspicion and ignore the story when all the facts prove nothing.

Of course, I'll use it to say, Republicans obviously are the cheaters, so maybe ID laws are to prevent Republican cheating.

After all, the first person arrested under Indiana's new voter fraud laws? The Republican Secretary of State who is supposed to oversee elections and verify that they are legitimate.

Secretary of State Charlie White indicted for voter fraud

(It's just for fun, honestly - Republicans don't really cheat necessarily any more than Democrats do - they just do their damnedest to keep people from voting freely).
 
Nothing I've read in this "article" or others have said it was due the lack of requirement of a photo ID, do you know something the investigators do not???

Cat. Where did I say anything about photo i.d.s? Or do you know something the rest of us do not??? ;)

Just something you should realize. More than 230,000 people voted for Gringrich. Mitt Romney received nearly 170,000 votes. If we were to take those 900 votes and remove them because of voter fraud, how would that even remotely change the election outcome? I must remind you, in 2008 - Obama beat McCain by more than 5 million votes every single victory he had over Hillary was in the thousands of votes. So what exactly is this big crisis of voting that we're facing? A few discrepancies here and there? Sure. The massive voter fraud you're making it out to be? Hardly.

Where did you get the idea I thought there was massive voter fraud? Boy, you guys sure do "read between the lines...."

I thought Republicans never cheated!

Oh, and once an investigation is completed, they are likely to find that it's a poll worker mix-up (similar sounding names or matching names). Something like this happened in Indiana when I lived there and everyone freaked out. They investigated and nearly every single one of them was a legal voter and the poll worker messed up due to either the exact same name or a similar sounding name.

That's the problem. Everyone freaks out and jumps to conclusions and pretends that everything is going to collapse because of "dead voters".

They haven't investigated anything yet. So, as such, what is the Attorney General's agenda in making this public before the investigation?

And how much do you want to bet when the investigation is complete and no criminal intent to commit fraud is found (as I said, it's very likely simple error) that the AG will say absolutely nothing?

Why? Because this story will linger and Republicans can use it to say "Voter fraud DOES exist".

This happens every election cycle. Put out a story about suspicion and ignore the story when all the facts prove nothing.

Of course, I'll use it to say, Republicans obviously are the cheaters, so maybe ID laws are to prevent Republican cheating.

After all, the first person arrested under Indiana's new voter fraud laws? The Republican Secretary of State who is supposed to oversee elections and verify that they are legitimate.

Secretary of State Charlie White indicted for voter fraud

(It's just for fun, honestly - Republicans don't really cheat necessarily any more than Democrats do - they just do their damnedest to keep people from voting freely).

Who said it was Republicans? Where are you guys getting your "facts?"
 
Cat. Where did I say anything about photo i.d.s? Or do you know something the rest of us do not??? ;)

The only voter fraud issues in the current news has been the very tiny number of voter fraud the right has tried to inflate to justify restricting poor people from voting.

You may have thought your attempt to lend credibility to this inflated voter fraud problem went unnoticed. It didn't.
 
The only voter fraud issues in the current news has been the very tiny number of voter fraud the right has tried to inflate to justify restricting poor people from voting.

You may have thought your attempt to lend credibility to this inflated voter fraud problem went unnoticed. It didn't.

It doesn't even seem to be "voter fraud". It looks more like "electoral fraud"
 
The only voter fraud issues in the current news has been the very tiny number of voter fraud the right has tried to inflate to justify restricting poor people from voting.

You may have thought your attempt to lend credibility to this inflated voter fraud problem went unnoticed. It didn't.

I posted a news story showing voter fraud. The way you interpret that news story is, of course, up to you. But to try to cast some aspersion on me for having posted it? That's just straight up stupid. Take the chip off your shoulder, Cat, you're starting to walk funny.
 
Last edited:
The only voter fraud issues in the current news has been the very tiny number of voter fraud the right has tried to inflate to justify restricting poor people from voting.

You may have thought your attempt to lend credibility to this inflated voter fraud problem went unnoticed. It didn't.

Since when is ignoring voter fraud of any level acceptable?
 
Since when is ignoring voter fraud of any level acceptable?

I would agree we shouldn't ignore it. But as others point out, persepctive is also important.

And MaggieD, I ahve no problem with you posting this. It's a legit issue.
 
It doesn't even seem to be "voter fraud". It looks more like "electoral fraud"

A lot of harder to make a mountain out of molehill as a case for Photo ID hardship, if that proves to be the case.....................

We don't even know how many elections these cases were spread out over either -

"The letter doesn’t say which election the ballots were cast in, or whether multiple elections were involved."

SC AG Informs Justice Department Of Dead Voters « CBS Charlotte
 
Man libs sure know how to introduce flies into the ointment...More a case for closing SC primaries.

j-mac
 
Since when is ignoring voter fraud of any level acceptable?

Who said it was acceptable? That is why there is a $5,000 fine and 5 years in jail for voter fraud. Is there any other crime that can boast of fewer abuses than voter fraud?
 
Last edited:
Who said it was acceptable? That is why there is a $5,000 fine and 5 years in jail for voter fraud. Is there any other crime that can boast of fewer convictions as voter fraud?

Catwba, I think you're shooting yourself in the foot by even using the term "voter fraud" wrt this thread. It's just another dishonest attempt by the rightwing to misportray something as being voter fraud, when it is not
 
I posted a news story showing voter fraud.

From the article...South Carolina's attorney general has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.

We've see way too many articles long on allegations, short on actual. :)
 
From the article...South Carolina's attorney general has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.

We've see way too many articles long on allegations, short on actual. :)


Thank the demo's for making the "seriousness of the charge" more important than any actual fact.

j-mac
 
From the article...South Carolina's attorney general has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.

We've see way too many articles long on allegations, short on actual. :)

Tha is important.
 
Cat. Where did I say anything about photo i.d.s? Or do you know something the rest of us do not??? ;)



Where did you get the idea I thought there was massive voter fraud? Boy, you guys sure do "read between the lines...."



Who said it was Republicans? Where are you guys getting your "facts?"

Uh, the article said there were fraudulent voters in the Republican Primary. Thus, if this is about cheating, it would be about Republicans cheating...

So, I got my "facts" from the article you posted, since it was about a Republican Primary.
 
Thank the demo's for making the "seriousness of the charge" more important than any actual fact.

j-mac

Again, if you'd read my first post in the thread, this "allegation" occurs frequently (and most frequently from Republicans - in this case it was a Republican primary). The thing that doesn't get posted is the fact that they will likely find out that it was simple error and not voter fraud that caused it. In almost every other case like this, they've discovered that it was simple error and not anyone trying to game the system. Or if there is an effort to game the system, it's by a poll worker and not the voter.
 
Voter fraud in the sense of people voting twice or casting dead people's ballots... not common enough to actually effect an election.

"Not common enough to actually effect an election." Really? That makes me wonder why in 2006 the election for the state senator from my district was voided because dead people were casting votes. The "winning" candidate "won" by 13 votes. Perhaps your statement isn't entirely accurate?

Electoral fraud is real, it happens, and has the potential to affect the outcome of elections. Honest people everywhere should demand that elections are kept on the up and up instead of making weak excuses.
 
Back
Top Bottom