Feds to Florida: halt non-citizen voter purge

American said:

waaaa

Click to expand...

The thing where the right accuses the left of wanting slack immigration policies just to get new voters is idiotic. It just doesn't line up with the actual timeline at all. Just a few years ago both the Republicans and the Democrats had essentially the same immigration policy. And, the Republicans got decent support from Hispanics. Since then the Republicans launched a massive series of totally unprovoked attacks on Hispanics in general that were unrelated to immigration. The bans on cultural studies courses, racist attacks on Sotomayor by Republican senators, English as a national language, embracing racial profiling, etc. By doing all that, the Republicans moved the Hispanic voters into the Democrats' column, not some change in the Democrats' position on immigration. The Democrats didn't change their position on immigration.

teamosil said:

The thing where the right accuses the left of wanting slack immigration policies just to get new voters is idiotic. It just doesn't line up with the actual timeline at all. Just a few years ago both the Republicans and the Democrats had essentially the same immigration policy. And, the Republicans got decent support from Hispanics. Since then the Republicans launched a massive series of totally unprovoked attacks on Hispanics in general that were unrelated to immigration. The bans on cultural studies courses, racist attacks on Sotomayor by Republican senators, English as a national language, embracing racial profiling, etc. By doing all that, the Republicans moved the Hispanic voters into the Democrats' column, not some change in the Democrats' position on immigration. The Democrats didn't change their position on immigration.

Click to expand...

And too, these aren't exactly uncharted waters. The Bush DOJ launched a major campaign to stamp out supposed voter fraud, and they basically came up with nothing. Every time there's a closely contested election they do a recount that involves checking the voter rolls. Invariably they discover that voter fraud is incredibly rare, and when it does happen it almost always involves shenanigans by poll workers or other back-office staffers.

So what's the more likely scenario? Are Democrats countenancing election fraud to pick up an additional ... what ... 10 - 15 votes in Florida? Or are Republicans pushing these laws in order to potentially pare the rolls of hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters across the country? Hmmm....

Phys251 said:

Oh no. I'm not going to casually dismiss the race issue. YOUR side played the race card. YOUR side singled out two ethnicities (African-Americans being the other) that overwhelmingly voted Democratic. YOUR side needs to explain how this is any different than the Southern Strategy and other racist platforms in your past. This is all on YOU (plural).

Click to expand...

"My side"?

Nice try to flip it, total fail though. Ine issue is the attempt to prevent people who are legally entitled to vote, and should have every protection to allow them to vote.

The other is an attempt to allow people who are not entitled to vote, and they should be prevented from voting.

So unless you are claiming that somehow aliens have some kind of right to vote, this is a fail.

Hatuey said:

If most followed the modern conservative standards for racism, we'd believe the civil war wasn't about slavery, racial discrimination is a "states right" and the civil rights act of 1964 is a violation of property rights.

Click to expand...

Nice try.

Now try for some facts. Which Party voted to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by 15% or more over the other party? I will give you one guess, and it was not the Democrats.

Once again, race card fail.

Phys251 said:

Do you believe, then, that Hispanics are lazy?

Click to expand...

Oh yes, certainly. After all, my wife is at work at this time, doing her usual 7pm-7am shift.

j-mac said:

Let's not forget the thousands (if needed) of absentee ballots riding around in former ACORN, (who knows what they call themselves now) trunks, just waiting for some stooge, George Soros funded, SOS, liberal/progressive to pop up with the old 'hey, just found these ballots to count'.....

Just like with Al Franken.


j-mac

Click to expand...

And that makes huge news as "disenfrancisement".

Meanwhile, huge numbers of military votes are routinely never counted.

Truth On Target: Military Votes Not Counted 98,000 Lost Military Ballots
71% of Military Ballots not counted in the 2010 election. [ArthurK]

This is an outrage, but you certainly do not hear people like me crying crocodile tears over it. In fact, one news item that most people probably never heard about a week or so back:

Agreement Reached to Protect Voting Rights of Military & Overseas Californians | KSEE 24 News - Central Valley's News Station: Fresno-Visalia - News, Sports, Weather | Local News

On 29 May, the Justice Department signed an agreement with California over military ballots.

The agreement was filed at the same time as a lawsuit brought under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). The Justice Department filed suit in response to the state’s failure to send absentee ballots to thousands of California’s eligible military and overseas voters for the June 5, 2012, federal primary election at least 45 days prior to the election, as required by UOCAVA. The complaint also alleges that the state failed to ensure that ballots were sent by the voters’ preferred method of transmission (by mail or electronically), as required by federal law.

Which is just wonderful, considering the primary was 5 June. By the time this agreement was reached, it was far to late for any out of state military to vote. This is nothing new, this has gone on for decades, but nobody cared. I know that when I was in the military and registered to vote in California, never once did I ever get my absentee ballot packet on time. I remember one time in particular, when I got my ballot package for the 1988 Presidential Election. In May 1989.

It is things like this that make me really wonder at people that are getting all upset about the "rights" of people who are not even entitled to vote. How about giving up some of that outrage to US citizens who are serving in the military? People who are serving for all of you, and are routinely denied their right to vote because of beauro-rats who do not want their vote counted?

Hatuey said:

I didn't know the living US citizens affected by this were included in those minorities. Or did you just make up a straw man? Well, it fits your MO perfectly so I don't doubt it.

Click to expand...

I could not give 2 dimes about "minorities". All I care about is seeing those not entitled to vote purged from the roles. Period. I do not care if they are legal resident aliens from Bolivia, illegal aliens from Germany, or convicted pedophiles. If they do not belong on the roles, purge them. Period.

And that is the reall issue, is it not? Purging people who should not be on the roles? Myself and others are not trying to make this a racial issue, you are.

Oozlefinch said:

Nice try.

Now try for some facts. Which Party voted to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by 15% or more over the other party? I will give you one guess, and it was not the Democrats.

Once again, race card fail.

Click to expand...

Be wary of trying to equate liberals with Democrats, and conservatives with Republicans, especially when it comes to the parties of the 1950s and 60s. The split was along north-south lines rather than by party. I'm sure you're familiar with these numbers now, but just to refresh our memories, from wikipedia:

The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)

Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)

The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

Click to expand...

So if you see that if we split the analysis along regional lines, Northern Democrats were, percentage-wise, more supportive of the bill than Northern Republicans, and Southern Republicans consistently more against the bill than Southern Dems.

Thrilla said:

the issue of voter purges aside for a second...

I think the issue of the fed still having control over some of the southern states elections has got to stop... I think 135 years is a long enough punishment for their part in the Civil War.

Click to expand...

Well, it is not just "Southern States". Some of the states covered are also Arizona, Alaska, and parts of California, New York, South Dakota, Michigan, and New Hampshire.

However, West Virginia and Maryland is not covered, nor is Tennessee. And only parts of Florida (only 5 counties) and North Carolina are covered by the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

I think most of the law should stand. But that states and counties still covered by this law should be able to be given a way to region the rest of the nation. Only a few of the areas first placed under this law have ever been able to get themselves removed from this.

teamosil said:

The thing where the right accuses the left of wanting slack immigration policies just to get new voters is idiotic.

Click to expand...

No, that is not true.

Most of us are aware that a lot of Democrats want slack immigration policies so that they will have another class of minorities to oppress. After all, who else is going to clean the dishes at the posh Liberal eating establishments, and mow the lawns of their McMansions? Since the Democrats no longer have slaves, having lots of illegal immigrants is the next best thing. No more standing over them with a lash, just let them in, and threaten them with going along with them or getting deported.

Oozlefinch said:

And that makes huge news as "disenfrancisement".

Meanwhile, huge numbers of military votes are routinely never counted.

Truth On Target: Military Votes Not Counted 98,000 Lost Military Ballots
71% of Military Ballots not counted in the 2010 election. [ArthurK]

This is an outrage, but you certainly do not hear people like me crying crocodile tears over it. In fact, one news item that most people probably never heard about a week or so back:

Agreement Reached to Protect Voting Rights of Military & Overseas Californians | KSEE 24 News - Central Valley's News Station: Fresno-Visalia - News, Sports, Weather | Local News

On 29 May, the Justice Department signed an agreement with California over military ballots.

The agreement was filed at the same time as a lawsuit brought under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA). The Justice Department filed suit in response to the state’s failure to send absentee ballots to thousands of California’s eligible military and overseas voters for the June 5, 2012, federal primary election at least 45 days prior to the election, as required by UOCAVA. The complaint also alleges that the state failed to ensure that ballots were sent by the voters’ preferred method of transmission (by mail or electronically), as required by federal law.

Which is just wonderful, considering the primary was 5 June. By the time this agreement was reached, it was far to late for any out of state military to vote. This is nothing new, this has gone on for decades, but nobody cared. I know that when I was in the military and registered to vote in California, never once did I ever get my absentee ballot packet on time. I remember one time in particular, when I got my ballot package for the 1988 Presidential Election. In May 1989.

It is things like this that make me really wonder at people that are getting all upset about the "rights" of people who are not even entitled to vote. How about giving up some of that outrage to US citizens who are serving in the military? People who are serving for all of you, and are routinely denied their right to vote because of beauro-rats who do not want their vote counted?

Click to expand...

If military voters are being disenfranchised then it's definitely an issue, however the way I understand it is that overseas absentee ballots often go uncounted because they will not be enough to change the outcome of a particular race anyways.

Oozlefinch said:

Nice try.

Now try for some facts. Which Party voted to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by 15% or more over the other party? I will give you one guess, and it was not the Democrats.

Once again, race card fail.

Click to expand...

StillBallin75 said:

Be wary of trying to equate liberals with Democrats, and conservatives with Republicans, especially when it comes to the parties of the 1950s and 60s. The split was along north-south lines rather than by party. I'm sure you're familiar with these numbers now, but just to refresh our memories, from wikipedia:

So if you see that if we split the analysis along regional lines, Northern Democrats were, percentage-wise, more supportive of the bill than Northern Republicans, and Southern Republicans consistently more against the bill than Southern Dems.

Click to expand...

Your reading comprehension failure was exposed by a kid who isn't even out of high school yet. How do you feel about it?

StillBallin75 said:

Be wary of trying to equate liberals with Democrats, and conservatives with Republicans, especially when it comes to the parties of the 1950s and 60s. The split was along north-south lines rather than by party. I'm sure you're familiar with these numbers now, but just to refresh our memories, from wikipedia:

Click to expand...

And here is the chart you missed:

Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

Cloture in the Senate:[16]
Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version:[15]
Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[15]
Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)

Statistics swing both ways. And it may make you feel better by saying it was a "Southern Thing" if you like. And that was actually a landmark bill, since it was the first Civil Rights bill that most Democrats actually supported. The previous bills all passed normally with the majority of Democrats voting agaisnt them.

StillBallin75 said:

If military voters are being disenfranchised then it's definitely an issue, however the way I understand it is that overseas absentee ballots often go uncounted because they will not be enough to change the outcome of a particular race anyways.

Click to expand...

And that is the excuse? 98,000+, but screw it, they do not matter anyways.

I thought that is what this was all about, making every vote count, not removing the vote from people. Now I guess it is OK to do so, since they do not matter anyways?

have I stepped into the Twilight Zone here?

Hatuey said:

If that were their only attack on the voting (and more importantly human) rights of minorities you'd be right. Sadly, Southern states had that whole "Jim Crow" issue only a few decades ago. Furthermore, there are still people alive today not much older than myself who remember a time when the South was intimidating not just blacks who tried to vote but killing people coming to ensure they had that right. In general, **** the South. It's got over 150 years of history proving that when it comes to voting, it doesn't really like anybody who isn't white and protestant.

Click to expand...

Jim crow laws disappeared in the 60's.. it's time to move on... it's time to treat states equally under the law.

the real issue has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with party affiliation and qualified voters.... only the race baiters keep hanging on to race issues long after they have been legally rectified.

there are states other than southern states who engage in voter purges as well, but they are not under federal control... they have the right to handle their issues themselves..southern states are denied that right.... and thus we are faced with inequality under the law.

Hatuey said:

Your reading comprehension failure was exposed by a kid who isn't even out of high school yet. How do you feel about it?

Click to expand...

No, I simply did not focus on that part of your argument, because it had nothing to do with what I was discussing.

You are one of those that sees everything as black and white, and that is fine. One side is good, the other is evil. I got it. You are a Liberal, that means I am evil because I am a Conservative.

I simply rejected that and concentrated on something else. You still did not make your point regardless.

Oozlefinch said:

No, I simply did not focus on that part of your argument, because it had nothing to do with what I was discussing.

Click to expand...

Oh so you completely ignored the point in my post and fought a straw man? Glad to hear.

You are one of those that sees everything as black and white, and that is fine. One side is good, the other is evil. I got it. You are a Liberal, that means I am evil because I am a Conservative.

Click to expand...

Lol, here's a violin:

View attachment 67129016

If you purchase a platinum donation, I'll make sure it plays a sad song just for you.

I simply rejected that and concentrated on something else. You still did not make your point regardless.

Click to expand...

Wait, wait, the point is that CONSERVATIVES on various historical occasions have tried to white wash their attempts to discriminate against minorities and you focused on some Republican v. Democrat nonsense and then called it a day? I'm not even sure whether I can call that trolling or stupidity. For the sake of not getting gigged on uncertainty I'll refrain from calling it anything and let you move along in your merry straw man way.

Thrilla said:

Jim crow laws disappeared in the 60's.. it's time to move on... it's time to treat states equally under the law.

Click to expand...

You live in such a naive little world. I guess if we go by your standard systemic discrimination ceased to exist with the federal ban on such laws? You remind me of all those people who think racism is no longer an issue in America because Obama got elected. Never you mind there exists anywhere from 20-30% of this country that probably didn't vote for him cause they thought he was a muslim who wanted to kill white people.

the real issue has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with party affiliation and qualified voters.... only the race baiters keep hanging on to race issues long after they have been legally rectified.

there are states other than southern states who engage in voter purges as well, but they are not under federal control... they have the right to handle their issues themselves..southern states are denied that right.... and thus we are faced with inequality under the law.

Click to expand...

Voter fraud is not an issue in the US and hasn't been an issue since the beginning of the 20th century.

/end thread.

Grant said:

Yeah, and you just might be.

My understanding is that there are over 2 million federal employees. Isn't there an agency somewhere which can figure out who is eligible to vote?

It's been over 235 year now. Aren't the citizens getting a little impatient for the Feds to solve the problem?

Click to expand...

What problem? There has never been any data to suggest that voting by non-citizens is happening at all. It's all just an effort to reinstate Jim Crow laws all over the south. It's despicable and very un-American to attempt to supress the vote. I hope you would agree.

Thrilla said:

Jim crow laws disappeared in the 60's.. it's time to move on... it's time to treat states equally under the law.

the real issue has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with party affiliation and qualified voters.... only the race baiters keep hanging on to race issues long after they have been legally rectified.

there are states other than southern states who engage in voter purges as well, but they are not under federal control... they have the right to handle their issues themselves..southern states are denied that right.... and thus we are faced with inequality under the law.

Click to expand...

More nonsense...... all States are subject to Federal voting rights legislation and supressing the vote in this manner is illegal in any State. If we wanted to single out the south we would take Scott out to the whipping post for even trying this ****. He makes a mockery of our Democracy.

iguanaman said:

What problem? There has never been any data to suggest that voting by non-citizens is happening at all. It's all just an effort to reinstate Jim Crow laws all over the south. It's despicable and very un-American to attempt to supress the vote. I hope you would agree.

Click to expand...

I love that argument. You do everything possible to prevent finding out who actually votes (or signs ballot/recall petitions) yet assert that no evidence or data exists to prove who actually votes. That is nonsense. Is there ANY indication on a state issued photo ID in FL as to who is/is not a citizen, or who is/is not a convicted felon? Is there any indication that poor or minority people suffer from lacking a state issued photo ID required to buy alcohol/tobacco or to cash a check?

The entire concept of voter registration (actually it is pre-registration) is a bit puzzling to me, except as a list from which to try to get jurors and to force a potential voter to declare a party affiliation to limit their primary election participation, UNLESS that list is checked against the data bases of those that have died, have been convicted ot a felony or are not U.S. citizens. The voter (pre)registration process does serve as a list, of people (names/adresses) that you may SAY that you are, subject to misuse, by any person with access to it, for assisting voter fraud, IFF no positive verification of a state issued photo ID, bearing that person's name/address combination, is required to be shown at the time of voting.

As of now, we DO have documented cases of people PROVING that they did not vote/sign a petition, yet OFFICIAL records show that they did so. We also have cases of the deceased and convicted felons being able to vote. The ONLY way that is possible, is that someone ELSE (possibly a non-citizen or felon) has used that person's identity to vote/sign a petition in their place; meaning that the system NOW IN PLACE is subject to fraud AND that we have inadequate checks/balances in place to prevent it.

You constantly want those to prove a negative, that whoever voted as John Q. Voter, was not a citizen or was a convicted felon while having NO WAY to show that if John Q. Voter had died, moved out of the state or simply chose not to vote in that election, that ANYONE with access to his being a registered voter, may simply cast a ballot and attribute that vote to him. In other words, it is not who votes that counts, it is who counts the votes (or has access to voter registration records) that may decide an election.

Hatuey said:

Voter fraud is not an issue in the US and hasn't been an issue since the beginning of the 20th century.

/end thread.

Click to expand...

Translation: I win, you loose, nothing else matters because I got nothing else to say.

iguanaman said:

What problem? There has never been any data to suggest that voting by non-citizens is happening at all. It's all just an effort to reinstate Jim Crow laws all over the south. It's despicable and very un-American to attempt to supress the vote. I hope you would agree.

Click to expand...

OK, wait a minute.

Jim Crowe was to remove the vote from blacks. And I thought the entire idea of this was to remove the vote from Hispanics.

So which is it now? Please, make up my mind, because I can't figure out where all this is headed.

teamosil said:

Actual voter ID where they just require a valid photo ID I don't have a huge objection to. It would cause more people to be denied the vote who have the legal right to vote than it would prevent frauds. The studies show that about 0.1% of votes (at the very most) cast in a polling place are fraudulent, but 1% of people who are legally allowed to vote lack any valid photo ID. So, it would make the electoral system up to 0.9% less accurate.

Click to expand...

I'll need a reliable source for those studies.

teamosil said:

But, that's not a huge deal. That isn't a major blow to democracy.

Click to expand...

teamosil said:

What is a huge deal is all these acts of extreme election fraud calling themselves "voter ID" laws that tack on all kinds of other requirements to try to manipulate the results. For example, if you're in a district where the incumbent is disfavored by students, but favored by the elderly, he'll push not to allow student IDs or out of state IDs, but to allow medicare cards. Or, if you're in a district where there is a military base that votes against the incumbent, but the poor vote for the incumbent, you'll allow IDs with out of date addresses (the poor move much more often), but you won't allow military ID or out of state IDs. Etc. With all those manipulations in place, up to 10% of people lack IDs they decide to accept and that is a truly severe blow to democracy. That is enough to make the election results no longer represent the will of the people and to de-legitimize the entire process.

Click to expand...

Far more voter fraud takes place in the vote by mail system. They need to computerize a cross reference system from the DMV, the IRS, addresses and death records. When the typical criteria for fraudulent voters have been met the mail in voter needs to verify their identity.

Hatuey said:

I didn't know the living US citizens affected by this were included in those minorities. Or did you just make up a straw man? Well, it fits your MO perfectly so I don't doubt it.

Click to expand...

This is the most intelligent and thoughtful reply you could manage ? :lamo
The real straw man is your accusations that this is some sort of conspiracy to prevent valid voters from voting !