Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 109

Thread: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

  1. #91
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,777

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Would you rather have someone take an extra look at voting rolls that doesn't need to be made or would you rather just let anyone vote as many as times as they want to?? There's no doubt that this wasn't done well, but at least it's erring on the side of wasting time and resources and not on the side of allowing people to double-vote. You want to toss the whole mess, but that's not what is needed. Fix the problem and move on from there. Learn from the mistakes as you go and make the corrections needed, don't just dump the whole thing.
    I'll just say that the article points out a non-partisan group that goes about this the right way, and the vast differences in approaches. That's the better option and I'd support that. The "try a method that is guaranteed to produce garbage out" isn't one I'd support under any circumstance. It's FAR worse than doing nothing, especially since good approaches exist and are available.

  2. #92
    Sage
    faithful_servant's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Beautiful Central Oregon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,694

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Howd they get that number? Oh yea using a highly flawed database...
    Crosscheck identified about 300,000 potential cases and they were trimmed down to the ~38,000 that needed to be purged. This wasn't a case of Crosscheck throwing out a list and the whole list getting purged, it was a case of Crosscheck throwing out a list, the list getting reviewed and the legitimate problems getting purged. AGAIN, the whole story is substantially different than the truncated narrative you are pushing.
    Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

  3. #93
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,777

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    Point me to one person who has been disenfranchised because of this list. And is the "because of known reasons" a Democrat dog whistle or something? People too dumb to return a post card?
    You're trying to miss the point - never said too dumb, said that poor people RENT and therefore MOVE more often so WILL NOT GET the postcard. See the difference?
    Well yay! But wait. He has been on the job 5 months with 192,000 entries to followup on? Hmmm... how many people are under him in the investigation? How many of the 192,000 have been cleared? Since these are interstate registration issues how much jurisdiction does a contractor in NC have in, say, GA? Do you know? How many should he have caught in 5 months?
    See, I know you're not serious. Are you telling me you'd hire someone to prosecute double voting, provide him a list with 192,000 likely fraudulent voters, and if after five months you as his boss can't go to the press with even ONE name, you think he's done his job? LMFAO. If you're honest, you KNOW you'd fire the guy, unless you don't actually expect him to find more than a handful....

    And while they have found no evidence of voter fraud, guess what? Al Jeez has also found no evidence of disenfranchisement. All Al Jeez does is talk about "potential", and funny how when they come to the potential dangers of the list they don't actually quote anyone but the goblins in the head of the author. If Crosscheck determines that the double entry is because someone moved out of state and they remove them fro the state register am I suppose to scream voter suppression?
    The process is bogus, and produces garbage. I'm not sure what more you need to know. And why would you support such obvious incompetence on the part of the people doing the 'match?'

    You really have a problem with cleaning up election rolls, don't you?
    Not at all. I just have a problem with a process to allegedly do that that is so obviously incompetent and produces predictable garbage? Ignores Jr. and Sr.? Middle names? You have to be kidding me.

    You are making things up at this point. The Crosscheck creates a list of potential double votes that then must be investigate by the states. The states then weed out the entries that aren't voter fraud and clarify the residence of others that appear to have duplicate entries. This is how you update databases.
    But if you are an election administrator, tell me any reason in the world you'd want a list of people whose middle names do not match? Your first step is tossing those right off the bat. Also, those with inactive registrations on one side or the other - they're not double voters. Why would you want YOUR staff to figure that out? Etc. You're defending incompetence. Not sure why.

  4. #94
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,689

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    You're trying to miss the point - never said too dumb, said that poor people RENT and therefore MOVE more often so WILL NOT GET the postcard. See the difference?
    You are supposed to send the election board a notice of address change. Whose fault is it if the election board was not notified?


    See, I know you're not serious. Are you telling me you'd hire someone to prosecute double voting, provide him a list with 192,000 likely fraudulent voters, and if after five months you as his boss can't go to the press with even ONE name, you think he's done his job? LMFAO. If you're honest, you KNOW you'd fire the guy, unless you don't actually expect him to find more than a handful....
    Well, first your formulation of your statement is wrong. He was hired to check the list, not find voter fraud. If the list has found no fraud in 5 months guess what: NOBODY WAS DISENFRANCHISED.

    Secondly, I guess it's because you are a Democrat, but you assume that the goal here is a political stunt, it's not. It is to verify the US voter rolls. Whether the end result is no fraud and a verfied voter list or some fraud and a verified voter list is a mission accomplished.

    The process is bogus, and produces garbage. I'm not sure what more you need to know. And why would you support such obvious incompetence on the part of the people doing the 'match?'
    So how many from the Crosscheck list were found to have changed addresses and failed to notify the state? Is a clean voter roll so egregious?

    Not at all. I just have a problem with a process to allegedly do that that is so obviously incompetent and produces predictable garbage? Ignores Jr. and Sr.? Middle names? You have to be kidding me.
    That isn't incompetent, it is what is known in data management as a first-pass. Many millions of voters were eliminated on 0 and 1 degree of correlation, 2 degrees and above were passed to the human checkers. Then the state takes these lists and pairs them down, eliminating the entries where only a few criteria match. I am more willing to level incompetence on, say, a website that dies the day it is turned on than a first-pass data clean up that contains false positives.

    But if you are an election administrator, tell me any reason in the world you'd want a list of people whose middle names do not match? Your first step is tossing those right off the bat. Also, those with inactive registrations on one side or the other - they're not double voters. Why would you want YOUR staff to figure that out? Etc. You're defending incompetence. Not sure why.
    Because the system checks for matches and doesn't count misspellings as matches. If you decide that 3 degrees of correlation is sufficient for a postcard then you get a list of 2 degree correlation so you can screen for data entry errors that could actually be 3+ degrees of correlation.

    Hence the first pass spits out a lot of first/last name matches.

    Fun Fact: The middle name on my official birth Certificate is different than my middle name on my social security card due to a screw up by the hospital. I've never really fixed it because I have gained government security clearances, loans etc. without it ever being a problem. I could, theoretically, register to vote in one state with my drivers license and social security card and register in another state with my birth certificate and my middle name would not match.

    This would be especially easy living in the Washington DC area since I have 4 states and Washington DC withing an hour's drive of my home.

    I don't do that, but it's possible.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  5. #95
    Sage
    Roadvirus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,143

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Or do you advocate for not following the law?
    He's a Democrat...what do you think?

  6. #96
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,777

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    You are supposed to send the election board a notice of address change. Whose fault is it if the election board was not notified?
    You're supposed to, but very few do, especially if you're moving every 6 months or year, which is obviously more common for the poor than the wealthy.

    Well, first your formulation of your statement is wrong. He was hired to check the list, not find voter fraud. If the list has found no fraud in 5 months guess what: NOBODY WAS DISENFRANCHISED.
    Not what the press release from NC said. “Stuber’s focused experience will enhance our Agency’s ability to detect and combat voter fraud and violations of campaign finance law....investigate cases of possible voter fraud identified by an interstate cross-check comparing election records from 28 states."

    Secondly, I guess it's because you are a Democrat, but you assume that the goal here is a political stunt, it's not. It is to verify the US voter rolls. Whether the end result is no fraud and a verfied voter list or some fraud and a verified voter list is a mission accomplished.
    I assume it's a political stunt because it's been led from the beginning by a very partisan republican, Kris Kobach, and is being pursued almost entirely in red states. And at its core it's not hard at all to see that it's just another form of voter caging. Instead of registered mail, they're sending out postcards. Probably more effective than most cases of voter caging. If that's the case, lots of false positives is a feature, not a bug. Hmm....... Partisan GOPer leading an effort that identifies lots of false positives, which can be used by republican election officials to purge voters off the registration rolls.

    That isn't incompetent, it is what is known in data management as a first-pass. Many millions of voters were eliminated on 0 and 1 degree of correlation, 2 degrees and above were passed to the human checkers. Then the state takes these lists and pairs them down, eliminating the entries where only a few criteria match. I am more willing to level incompetence on, say, a website that dies the day it is turned on than a first-pass data clean up that contains false positives.
    I'm sorry, but I see no advantage for the 'human checkers' to bother with a list that doesn't distinguish between different middle names.

    Fun Fact: The middle name on my official birth Certificate is different than my middle name on my social security card due to a screw up by the hospital. I've never really fixed it because I have gained government security clearances, loans etc. without it ever being a problem. I could, theoretically, register to vote in one state with my drivers license and social security card and register in another state with my birth certificate and my middle name would not match.

    This would be especially easy living in the Washington DC area since I have 4 states and Washington DC withing an hour's drive of my home.

    I don't do that, but it's possible.
    Yes, but every state has a record of your vote, your SSN and birth date, your last name. And each time you'd be committing a felony. Seems to deter about 99.9999% or more of potential fraudsters.

    And for some odd reason, this list of double voters has been in use since 2005. At best (from what I found) it identified 14 possible cases in Kansas, no convictions, and similar trivial amounts of possible cases, with no or less than a handful of convictions elsehwhere. So it's not identifying fraud more than the trivial. And when a partisan engages in massive efforts that generates millions of names, and almost NO cases of actual fraud, I'm wondering what the real point is. If the point is a different type of voter caging, the strategy makes sense. If it's to identify double voters and "voter fraud" it doesn't. So I go with the one that makes sense.

  7. #97
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,793

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    This measure seems to be highly discriminatory against double voters.
    I wonder if you or anyone liking your post actually read any of that.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #98
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,689

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    You're supposed to, but very few do, especially if you're moving every 6 months or year, which is obviously more common for the poor than the wealthy.
    If they don't then IT IS THEIR FAULT, not the fault of people who have been hired to clean up the voter rolls.

    Not what the press release from NC said. “Stuber’s focused experience will enhance our Agency’s ability to detect and combat voter fraud and violations of campaign finance law....investigate cases of possible voter fraud identified by an interstate cross-check comparing election records from 28 states."
    And the screening has at this point found little or no double voting fraud. The left has spun this into insane, bulls*** "Jim Crow" claims. You say you want tto just ignore the "Jim Crow" thing but that won't happen. The attempts to make this a racial hot point is the real problem here, not the process to check for voter fraud.

    I assume it's a political stunt because it's been led from the beginning by a very partisan republican, Kris Kobach, and is being pursued almost entirely in red states. And at its core it's not hard at all to see that it's just another form of voter caging. Instead of registered mail, they're sending out postcards. Probably more effective than most cases of voter caging. If that's the case, lots of false positives is a feature, not a bug. Hmm....... Partisan GOPer leading an effort that identifies lots of false positives, which can be used by republican election officials to purge voters off the registration rolls.
    The political stunt in the left wing nut jobs screaming "JIM CROW!!" because someone wants to check the voter rolls for errors.

    I'm sorry, but I see no advantage for the 'human checkers' to bother with a list that doesn't distinguish between different middle names.
    It is a first pass screening. It isn't supposed to do anything other than filter out the very low correlation data. I'm sorry you don't understand how the process works.

    Yes, but every state has a record of your vote, your SSN and birth date, your last name. And each time you'd be committing a felony. Seems to deter about 99.9999% or more of potential fraudsters.
    Maybe, but it is a really wierd thing for you to say since you seem so vehemently opposed to confirming that is the case.

    And for some odd reason, this list of double voters has been in use since 2005. At best (from what I found) it identified 14 possible cases in Kansas, no convictions, and similar trivial amounts of possible cases, with no or less than a handful of convictions elsehwhere. So it's not identifying fraud more than the trivial. And when a partisan engages in massive efforts that generates millions of names, and almost NO cases of actual fraud, I'm wondering what the real point is. If the point is a different type of voter caging, the strategy makes sense. If it's to identify double voters and "voter fraud" it doesn't. So I go with the one that makes sense.
    The problem, JasperL, is that regular routine screening of voter eligibility, when regular and routine, will not turn up a lot of voter fraud because it is regular and routine. It's like bitching that there are security guards at a bank when it has never been robbed.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  9. #99
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,777

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Quote Originally Posted by jmotivator View Post
    If they don't then IT IS THEIR FAULT, not the fault of people who have been hired to clean up the voter rolls.
    Yes, technically it is their fault, but that's not a fault that is IMO sufficient to kick someone off the rolls, particularly how they do it - with a post card, and no follow up. The details do matter, and you're dismissing the details as irrelevant.

    And the screening has at this point found little or no double voting fraud. The left has spun this into insane, bulls*** "Jim Crow" claims. You say you want tto just ignore the "Jim Crow" thing but that won't happen. The attempts to make this a racial hot point is the real problem here, not the process to check for voter fraud.
    Goodness, I can disagree with the policy without agreeing to how AJ characterized it. Give me a break. Whether the process to "check for voter fraud" is bullcrap or legitimate does not hinge on how one news outlet characterized the motives of those putting it in place.

    The political stunt in the left wing nut jobs screaming "JIM CROW!!" because someone wants to check the voter rolls for errors.
    You asked why I suspected something other than 'voter fraud' was the motivation, and I answered. You ignored the answer.

    And, again, checking the voter rolls for errors is fantastic, but a process that produces 99% or more false positives is a BS way to do it.

    It is a first pass screening. It isn't supposed to do anything other than filter out the very low correlation data. I'm sorry you don't understand how the process works.
    If I'm election list boss, why would I want my staff having to manually reject John Milton Smith from Overland Park Kansas and John Jay Smith from Wilmington NC as likely double voters? They're different people, but the list would treat them as possible double voters. If I can't reject those, then why should I reject voters with different FIRST names as potentially fraudulent? Or different spellings of last name?

    Maybe, but it is a really wierd thing for you to say since you seem so vehemently opposed to confirming that is the case.
    I am not opposed to 'confirming' it. If that list was JUST used to investigate the nearly non-existent cases of double voting, I'd be fine with it. As a taxpayer I'd think it's a waste of money to hire a presumably well qualified FBI retiree (gotta cost $100k/year, plus at least double that for staff and benefits, just to get started) who can't use that list to find EVEN ONE case of 'voter fraud' but there are worse ways to waste taxpayer money.

    But they're using the list to voter cage. Not investigate fraud.

    The problem, JasperL, is that regular routine screening of voter eligibility, when regular and routine, will not turn up a lot of voter fraud because it is regular and routine. It's like bitching that there are security guards at a bank when it has never been robbed.
    Uhh... no. If the 'regular screening using the BS list is what prevents fraud, then we'd see lots of prosecutions in the first year or two, and they'd drop off because of the deterrent threat or because registrations were cleaned up and people who moved were dumped off the old rolls. There is no evidence of that - states who use the list don't find fraud, at the beginning, the middle or the end. At best they do some house cleaning, and in the meantime based on the article are kicking people off the rolls on the basis of ONE postcard and whether it's returned or not.

  10. #100
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,777

    Re: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge

    Just to be clear, efforts to clean up registrations and the rest are fantastic. If the states used this outfit, I'd support them 100%. According to AJ, in Washington ERIC got a list of suspected problem registrations of 37,000 compared to more than 370,000 for the Cross Check. It's probably because ERIC requires hits on things other than first and last name and therefore generates likely GOOD names and not garbage.

    It's also notable that participants in ERIC have to pledge to use the list to ADD people to the registration rolls, after notifying them, etc. So the process isn't a one way - kick as many off as possible - exercise. It includes INCREASING the number of registered voters.

    Who We Are

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •