• 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!

Death penalty for voter fraud

Do you support the death penalty for voter fraud?

  • I'm a Democrat and approve the death penalty for committing voter fraud.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    75
Voter fraud has two parts to it, your irrelevant examples only speak to the second which isn't illegal by itself. It's the fraud part that's specifically illegal.

Irrelevant examples?!?!?!? What irrelevant examples? Explain yourself. You gave us a definition of voter fraud and I showed you why that definition is full of crap since it also perfectly describes a myriad of perfectly legal activities.



Originally Posted by HumanBeing
Voter fraud is an attempt to change the outcome of an election.


Each one of my "irrelevant examples" :doh fit perfectly the definition you provided. You obviously over reached.
 
Irrelevant examples?!?!?!? What irrelevant examples? Explain yourself. You gave us a definition of voter fraud and I showed you why that definition is full of crap since it also perfectly
I didn't give you a definition of voter fraud. I noted its stated goal. "Explain yourself"? Seriously? You come up with all this complete and utter nonsense, you don't even seem to read anything before you respond to it, and you have the nerve to demand people "explain themselves" to you? This is getting pathetic. You abandoned your initial point over a page ago :roll:

haymarket said:
Each one of my "irrelevant examples" :doh fit perfectly the definition you provided. You obviously over reached.
They were irrelevant because they weren't illegal. Voter fraud is an illegal action that is designed to change the outcome of elections. Campaigning is a legal action aimed at achieving the same result. Is that clear enough, or do you need someone to draw you a picture?

Trolling is fine if you can be clever or funny about it, but there's nothing endearing about your condescending ignorance.

You claim that discussion of punishment for a crime is only warranted if the crime has already been proven to have been committed on a mass scale. That's it. That's your point. That's what you've spent roughly a dozen pages trying to back up. It's just silly, and by definition it is the polar opposite of "prudent" which you are claiming to be.

pru·dent
/ˈpro͞odnt/
Adjective
Acting with or showing care and thought for the future.
 
I didn't give you a definition of voter fraud.

Yes you did. Here it is again:

Voter fraud is an attempt to change the outcome of an election.

Now you try to correct that error by moving the goalposts as follows

Voter fraud is an illegal action that is designed to change the outcome of elections.

Too bad for you that was not your original statement before you had to be corrected.

Trolling is fine if you can be clever or funny about it, but there's nothing endearing about your condescending ignorance.

Perhaps it is for you - but I view it as a violation of the rules. As for ignorance, you are the one who was caught giving a bogus meaning to a term and then had to change it when corrected.

You claim that discussion of punishment for a crime is only warranted if the crime has already been proven to have been committed on a mass scale.

That is false. That is not my position nor has it been my position and you presented no quote from me which states such. The crime of voter fraud is indeed punished in the law. It already is. What you apparently want to do is change that system and because IT IS YOU who wants more - IT IS YOU who has the burden to demonstrate that this is indeed a serious and significant problem that requires a greater solution that is now available in the law.


It's just silly, and by definition it is the polar opposite of "prudent" which you are claiming to be.

Actually, my approach on this issue is indeed the conservative and prudent approach. We have a crime - we have a punishment. That is in the law now and has been for some time. I am happy with it and do not want to expand the powers of government or risk encroaching and violating peoples rights in the future on this because of paranoia and fear from political extremists.

That is very much a conservative approach. The radical approach is to go off half-cocked and take sweeping action without even proving such action is warranted. Not only is that radical - but it is the opposite or prudent.... it is grossly irresponsible.
 
Last edited:
When we reach that reality, I can properly evaluate it and give you a definitive answer.

So you would propose different penalties depending on the number. That was a very roundabout way of answering my original question, but thank you, finally.
 
So you would propose different penalties depending on the number. That was a very roundabout way of answering my original question, but thank you, finally.

There already are penalties to deal with the crime. I am NOT proposing any different penalties nor am I endorsing any NEW methods to deal with a problem that is not yet proven to exist beyond the current level which the law already deals with.

You and others think the current law and penalties is not sufficient? Fine. State your case and present your proof of a problem that is plaguing the nation that the current law does not adequately deal with.
 
before considering the death penalty for voter fraud, we should discuss the death penalty for something much more serious - voter suppression ...
 
There already are penalties to deal with the crime. I am NOT proposing any different penalties nor am I endorsing any NEW methods to deal with a problem that is not yet proven to exist beyond the current level which the law already deals with.

You and others think the current law and penalties is not sufficient? Fine. State your case and present your proof of a problem that is plaguing the nation that the current law does not adequately deal with.

I'm fine with the current law. I simply asked whether you would decide upon the penalty for a crime based upon the frequency with which that crime is committed.
 
I'm fine with the current law. I simply asked whether you would decide upon the penalty for a crime based upon the frequency with which that crime is committed.

I would not even worry about such a consideration without first viewing proof that the problem exists in the first place and is not being handled in the law today.
 
Usually because it doesn't get caught.

[video]https://www.declarationentertainment.com/scribing/voter-fraud-101[/video]

Voter ID Laws Target Rarely Occurring Voter Fraud | Fox News

Even a story from Fox News points out that it doesn't really happen.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

This story is about the five-year plan by the Bush DoJ to seek out voter fraud and in five years, they didn't find anything.

So, without actual evidence, it's just a canard to rile-up rural types so they fear that city-folks and college kids trying to steal elections.

It's like the people who look at a map of the country and see all those red counties and can't figure out WHY their guy didn't win, when it's actually quite simple. My county (one of the few blue ones in Tennessee) is just a tiny speck on that national map - but it contains more people than the entire state of Wyoming. But, when you don't get things like geography, you assume that something awful must be happening. "Those people" must be stealing votes.
 
No because thats excessive.
 
Yes you did. Here it is again

Now you try to correct that error by moving the goalposts as follows

Too bad for you that was not your original statement before you had to be corrected.

I'm pretty sure you're just trolling at this point, but my statement was pointing out the end goal of voter fraud, not what is illegal about it, because that's what was relevant to the absurd point you were trying to make (which you now seem to have given up on). I really don't know how to spell it out for you any more clearly.

The rest of your statement about how not discussing crime until it's been committed on a mass scale being "prudent" is just too laughable to take seriously.
 
I'm pretty sure you're just trolling at this point, but my statement was pointing out the end goal of voter fraud, not what is illegal about it, because that's what was relevant to the absurd point you were trying to make (which you now seem to have given up on). I really don't know how to spell it out for you any more clearly.

The rest of your statement about how not discussing crime until it's been committed on a mass scale being "prudent" is just too laughable to take seriously.

Now you are simply lying. I stated quite clearly that voter fraud is a crime and we have laws dealing with it.

You seem to be getting very frustrated and are now resorting to these snide comments instead of doing the work and research necessary to build your case. That is both sad and illustrative of a larger point - namely that you have no case to substantiate.
 
Now you are simply lying. I stated quite clearly that voter fraud is a crime and we have laws dealing with it.

You seem to be getting very frustrated and are now resorting to these snide comments instead of doing the work and research necessary to build your case. That is both sad and illustrative of a larger point - namely that you have no case to substantiate.

Lying about what? Of course I'm frustrated, I've got a guy who clearly lost his point pages ago who's calling me a liar and demand that I "explain myself" to him. It's beyond rediculous. You took a simple comment that way out of context, and proceeded to drag it around like it means something.

Your entire point was that it isn't valid to have a discussion about appropriate punishment for a crime until it's been committed on a mass scale. It wasn't a valid point, so you're just trying to drag the topic away from it and wind me up with accusations of lying instead. What case don't I have to substantiate? You have no idea what you're talking about or arguing against anymore, you're just being condescending for the sake of it. "Prudent" not to discuss something until it already happened? Again dude, I already posted the meaning of the word prudent as you evidently have no idea what it means. This is just absurd.
 
Lying about what?

about this statement from you

The rest of your statement about how not discussing crime until it's been committed on a mass scale being "prudent" is just too laughable to take seriously.

The issue never has been about me not wanting to discuss crime.
The issue never has been about me contending that we cannot discuss crime on a mass scale.

The issue has been the ridiculous absurdity of proposing that we as a society drastically INCREASE the legal punishment for that crime by adopting the death penalty for a crime that is already punished with legal sanctions when no evidence has been presented warranting such a drastic change.

That is the issue now and has been the issue that you play ostrich from hiding your head in the sand.

I already posted the meaning of the word prudent as you evidently have no idea what it means. This is just absurd.

Why is that an issue? I took no issue with the definition of the word prudent. In fact, I used part of it to illustrate why my approach was prudent. You need to go back and read instead of merely reacting and then attacking without cause.
 
Quote Originally Posted by yobarnacle View Post
does voite fraud exist?
People are caught at it and convicted.
search "vote fraud convictions", generates more than 30 pages of links (that's as far as I punched NEXT).
Are ALL guilty caught?
I suspect only a tiny % are caught and/or convicted.
Why do people vote illegally, twice or more, or in other peoples name?
Obviously, THEY believe they are having an effect on the election.
Is there a conspiracy of vote fraud? Do these people know each other, and are confident their combined efforts sway the election?
I doubt most are in mutual contact, but I also suspect everyone involved in vote fraud has "friends" also involved in vote fraud.
I can't believe people would go to the trouble of voting fraudulently, UNLESS they believed it was WORTH the effort!
But even ONE fraudulent vote, robs ALL the American people! And is TREASON in my opinion!


So tell us then - how many people were convicted of voter fraud since the year 2000?

I don't know and do not need to provide a number of convicted vote frauds since whenever.

If that number is significant to you, do the research yourself.

My point is, those DOING the vote fraud BELIEVE they are accomplishing their goals to steal elections.
Otherwise, no one would bother.

I say we need to inhibit vote fraud by the strongest possible means.

But to clarify your stance, Do you support the death penalty for ANY crime?

If you are against death penalty in ALL circumstances, then, certainly you won't see the justice in using it for the treason of vote fraud. :)
 
I don't know and do not need to provide a number of convicted vote frauds since whenever.

If that number is significant to you, do the research yourself.

I have done the research and presented it right in this discussion. Here it is again - the most comprehensive study done recently on the topic

http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/The Truth About Voter Fraud.pdf

It is called THE TRUTH ABOUT VOTER FRAUD. And the truth is there is previous little of it to report.

They could have titled it MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING but they could not get the rights from Billy Shakespeare.
 
I have done the research and presented it right in this discussion. Here it is again - the most comprehensive study done recently on the topic

http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/The Truth About Voter Fraud.pdf

It is called THE TRUTH ABOUT VOTER FRAUD. And the truth is there is previous little of it to report.

They could have titled it MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING but they could not get the rights from Billy Shakespeare.


Vote fraud DOES occur.
Current laws and punishment obviously are NOT sufficient deterrent, since it's NOT deterring those committing vote fraud.

If only a few are guilty, as you contend, then we'd only execute a few.

Now, if half the population was involved in vote fraud, and we were faced with needing mass executions, I'd say some further thought was needed.

Then, I'd still probably conclude that I'd want to execute the traitors.
 
Vote fraud DOES occur.
Current laws and punishment obviously are NOT sufficient deterrent, since it's NOT deterring those committing vote fraud.

Please present your data to support this conclusion.
 
I have done the research and presented it right in this discussion. Here it is again - the most comprehensive study done recently on the topic

http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/The Truth About Voter Fraud.pdf

It is called THE TRUTH ABOUT VOTER FRAUD. And the truth is there is previous little of it to report.

They could have titled it MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING but they could not get the rights from Billy Shakespeare.



I challenge the authors expertise. First, obvious from locale and sentiments expressed, he's very liberal. No surprise the liberals down play vote fraud as an important issue. We see it HERE.

But to be specific, I quote a faulty logic, or narrow thinking in that article, on that authors part.


"IV. Voter Fraud And The Press For Photo Id
The most common example of the harm wrought by imprecise and inflated claims of “voter fraud” is the
call for in-person photo identification requirements. Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing
individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls
— an occurrence more rare than getting struck by
lightning.16"

Did he INTENTIONALLY omit voting in precincts where formerly resided as well as currently dwelling?

Since purging voter rolls is discouraged, many voters are still on rolls at earlier addresses and a government issued picture ID would be difficult to obtain for multiple addresses and/or in multiple states.

Apparently at least some vote fraud, is folks voting twice or more, in different precincts, as themself.

Since this abuse did not occur to the articles author, I would say, the article is NOT substantive, NOT non-partisan, and NOT well researched, and not well thought.

So much for your BEST source.

But we don't need to decide if we will have voter IDs. It's ALREADY decided in 33 states.
Let's see how that turns out in 2014.


I expect other states to adopt IDs after 2014. The states where the citizens are FED UP with vote fraud.
 
Last edited:
There is almost no voter fraud. The RW does not get beat in elections because of busloads of them people voting illegally. It just does not happen. It is extremely rare. There is absolutely no evidence it does. Find some evidence, real evidence someone can be convicted of in court in significant numbers I will believe you and stand down at my precient next election and watch for the bus. But the RW keeps this widespread myth alive to explain why most of the US understands the Republican party is out of touch. The OP has at least as much creditability siting the lack of evidence as evidence there is little fraud as the RW does making the accusations without evidence.
I challenge the authors expertise. First, obvious from locale and sentiments expressed, he's very liberal. No surprise the liberals down play vote fraud as an important issue. We see it HERE.

But to be specific, I quote a faulty logic, or narrow thinking in that article, on that authors part.


"IV. Voter Fraud And The Press For Photo Id
The most common example of the harm wrought by imprecise and inflated claims of “voter fraud” is the
call for in-person photo identification requirements. Such photo ID laws are effective only in preventing
individuals from impersonating other voters at the polls
— an occurrence more rare than getting struck by
lightning.16"

Did he INTENTIONALLY omit voting in precincts where formerly resided as well as currently dwelling?

Since purging voter rolls is discouraged, many voters are still on rolls at earlier addresses and a government issued picture ID would be difficult to obtain for multiple addresses and/or in multiple states.

Apparently at least some vote fraud, is folks voting twice or more, in different precincts, as themself.

Since this abuse did not occur to the articles author, I would say, the article is NOT substantive, NOT non-partisan, and NOT well researched, and not well thought.

So much for your BEST source.
 
Simply searching "guilty of vote fraud found dozens of links pages like this first one.

Democrat Mayor’s Campaign Worker Guilty of Voter Fraud ...
... mayor’s re-election campaign in 2011 has agreed to plea guilty to three counts of vote fraud in Jennings County Circuit Court on ...
specfriggintacular.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/democrat... - Cached

Democrat Legislator Guilty of Felony Voter Fraud – Reduced ...
UnPoliticallyCorrect! (by UnPoliticallyCorrect) ... January 2, 2013 **The real travesty here is that this “pillar of society” will be permitted to run ...
specfriggintacular.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/democrat... - Cached

Ex-lawmaker pleads guilty to vote fraud - WLFI.com ...
VERNON, Ind. (AP) - A southern Indiana judge sentenced a former state representative to 18 months after the defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of vote fraud ...
www.wlfi.com/.../ex-lawmaker-pleads-guilty-to-vote-fraud - Cached

Hamilton County poll worker found guilty of voter fraud
A Hamilton County poll worker accused of voter fraud was found guilty for illegal voting in ... Mailing in a ballot registering to vote at a precinct after you've ...
www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/local_news/hamilton-county-poll... - Cached

Guilty Of Voter Fraud - Video Results
ACORN GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD!!!!.Play VideoACORN GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD!!!!Indiana Secretary of State found guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoIndiana Secretary of State found guilty of voter fraudU.S. Guilty of Voter Fraud.Play VideoU.S. Guilty of Voter FraudElection official guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoElection official guilty of voter fraudGuilty Of Voter Fraud.Play VideoGuilty Of Voter FraudElection official guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoElection official guilty of voter fraudMore Guilty Of Voter Fraud videos »
Ex-Ind. lawmaker pleads guilty to vote fraud | www ...
A former state representative and Democratic campaign consultant from southern Indiana was sentenced to nine months in jail and nine months' probation Wednesday after ...
www.daytondailynews.com/ap/ap/...guilty-to-vote-fraud/nXdSf - Cached

Poll worker convicted of voting fraud | Cincinnati.com ...
Nun pleads guilty to voter fraud; escapes prison; Hamilton County Board of Elections widens probe; Nun resigns after vote fraud accusation;
news.cincinnati.com/.../Poll-worker-convicted-voting-fraud - Cached

Obama Supporter Found Guilty Of Multiple Counts Of Voter ...
Melowese Richardson has already admitted that she committed voter fraud to help Barack Obama get elected. “Yes, I voted twice,” Richardson told WCPO-TV.
Obama Supporter Found Guilty Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud In Ohio | Right Wing News... - Cached

Barnum woman guilty of voter fraud | Duluth News Tribune ...
Published May 11, 2013, 09:21 AM Barnum woman guilty of voter fraud Shawn Marie Kaarbo of Barnum pleaded guilty in Carlton County Court last Wednesday to one count ...
www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/266840 - Cached

Voter Fraud Is a Proven Election Manipulation Tactic | Debate ...
Probably not, since the Lincoln County auditor was also found guilty of voter fraud in 2005. [See photos of Wisconsin Voters Heading to the Polls]
Is Voter Fraud a Real Problem? | Debate Club | US News Opinion... - Cached

Missouri lawmaker’s uncle pleads guilty in KC vote fraud ...
In August 2010, Missouri House candidate John Joseph Rizzo defeated his Democratic primary opponent, Will Royster, by a single vote. On Monday, Rizzo’s uncle John ...
www.kansascity.com/2013/05/13/4233705/missouri-lawmakers... - Cached

Post 77 page 8.


Only the first page of many dozens of pages of links.

The vote frauders convicted, I believe are 1/100th of a % of those GUILTY!
 
Simply searching "guilty of vote fraud found dozens of links pages like this first one.

Democrat Mayor’s Campaign Worker Guilty of Voter Fraud ...
... mayor’s re-election campaign in 2011 has agreed to plea guilty to three counts of vote fraud in Jennings County Circuit Court on ...
specfriggintacular.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/democrat... - Cached

Democrat Legislator Guilty of Felony Voter Fraud – Reduced ...
UnPoliticallyCorrect! (by UnPoliticallyCorrect) ... January 2, 2013 **The real travesty here is that this “pillar of society” will be permitted to run ...
specfriggintacular.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/democrat... - Cached

Ex-lawmaker pleads guilty to vote fraud - WLFI.com ...
VERNON, Ind. (AP) - A southern Indiana judge sentenced a former state representative to 18 months after the defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of vote fraud ...
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/www.wlfi.com/.../ex-lawmaker-pleads-guilty-to-vote-fraud - Cached

Hamilton County poll worker found guilty of voter fraud
A Hamilton County poll worker accused of voter fraud was found guilty for illegal voting in ... Mailing in a ballot registering to vote at a precinct after you've ...
www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/local_news/hamilton-county-poll... - Cached

Guilty Of Voter Fraud - Video Results
ACORN GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD!!!!.Play VideoACORN GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD!!!!Indiana Secretary of State found guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoIndiana Secretary of State found guilty of voter fraudU.S. Guilty of Voter Fraud.Play VideoU.S. Guilty of Voter FraudElection official guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoElection official guilty of voter fraudGuilty Of Voter Fraud.Play VideoGuilty Of Voter FraudElection official guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoElection official guilty of voter fraudMore Guilty Of Voter Fraud videos »
Ex-Ind. lawmaker pleads guilty to vote fraud | www ...
A former state representative and Democratic campaign consultant from southern Indiana was sentenced to nine months in jail and nine months' probation Wednesday after ...
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/www.daytondailynews.com/ap/ap/...guilty-to-vote-fraud/nXdSf - Cached

Poll worker convicted of voting fraud | Cincinnati.com ...
Nun pleads guilty to voter fraud; escapes prison; Hamilton County Board of Elections widens probe; Nun resigns after vote fraud accusation;
news.cincinnati.com/.../Poll-worker-convicted-voting-fraud - Cached

Obama Supporter Found Guilty Of Multiple Counts Of Voter ...
Melowese Richardson has already admitted that she committed voter fraud to help Barack Obama get elected. “Yes, I voted twice,” Richardson told WCPO-TV.
Obama Supporter Found Guilty Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud In Ohio | Right Wing News... - Cached

Barnum woman guilty of voter fraud | Duluth News Tribune ...
Published May 11, 2013, 09:21 AM Barnum woman guilty of voter fraud Shawn Marie Kaarbo of Barnum pleaded guilty in Carlton County Court last Wednesday to one count ...
www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/266840 - Cached

Voter Fraud Is a Proven Election Manipulation Tactic | Debate ...
Probably not, since the Lincoln County auditor was also found guilty of voter fraud in 2005. [See photos of Wisconsin Voters Heading to the Polls]
Is Voter Fraud a Real Problem? | Debate Club | US News Opinion... - Cached

Missouri lawmaker’s uncle pleads guilty in KC vote fraud ...
In August 2010, Missouri House candidate John Joseph Rizzo defeated his Democratic primary opponent, Will Royster, by a single vote. On Monday, Rizzo’s uncle John ...
www.kansascity.com/2013/05/13/4233705/missouri-lawmakers... - Cached

This was post 77 on page 8.

A first page of many dozens of pages, links that resulted from "vote fraud conviction" search.


I think it IS a significant problem, as I believe where a few are convicted, probably 1000s are not caught for everyone that IS caught.

I want STRONG deterrent
 
I challenge the authors expertise. First, obvious from locale and sentiments expressed, he's very liberal.

Tell you what pal. I really don't give a bag of common garden manure if you like the author or not. I really don't care if he set fire to your town and burned it all down. Got that?

Your opinion about the author and if he is liberal, or a marxist, or a communist or a pedophile is irrelevant. Got that one too?

He cites fact and figures and cold hard statistics. You got a problem? Pick on those and tell us what is wrong with them.

If you way of attacking this landmark study is asking lame questions like you just did - do your own research and answer them and let us know what you discovered.
 
Tell you what pal. I really don't give a bag of common garden manure if you like the author or not. I really don't care if he set fire to your town and burned it all down. Got that?

Your opinion about the author and if he is liberal, or a marxist, or a communist or a pedophile is irrelevant. Got that one too?

He cites fact and figures and cold hard statistics. You got a problem? Pick on those and tell us what is wrong with them.

If you way of attacking this landmark study is asking lame questions like you just did - do your own research and answer them and let us know what you discovered.
So much anger. So little substance.
 
Tell you what pal. I really don't give a bag of common garden manure if you like the author or not. I really don't care if he set fire to your town and burned it all down. Got that?

Your opinion about the author and if he is liberal, or a marxist, or a communist or a pedophile is irrelevant. Got that one too?

He cites fact and figures and cold hard statistics. You got a problem? Pick on those and tell us what is wrong with them.

If you way of attacking this landmark study is asking lame questions like you just did - do your own research and answer them and let us know what you discovered.

So who besides YOu decided it was a "landmark" study?

:D

He made an "absolute" statement that photo IDs for voters was only good for ONE thing.
I suggested another and valid use for the IDs.

The authors "ONLY" was blown out of the water and the author shown to be non-objective.

YOU will have to deal with his studies failure.

Unlike you, I didn't/don't invest any faith or value in his (or yours for that matter) opinion. :D
 
Back
Top Bottom