• 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!

More than 250 cases of alleged voter fraud involving tens of thousands of illegal votes

marke said:
So? Should no effort be made in a state to secure our elections from future fraud just because there may be more of one party than another in the state?
Click to expand...

Who's words were these Marke?


The strongest weapons wielded by democrats who oppose investigations into voter fraud are Bias, ignorance, deceit, smoke, nonsense and disbelief.
Click to expand...
 
TomFitz said:
So, which right wing blog fed you this link, which you didnt bother to read?????

After all. you dont have to get past about the third paragraph to learn that your OP claim is flatly contradicted by the paper itself.

Out of 400 million votes, the study found exactly ONE case of a person trying to impersonate someone else.
Click to expand...

why does that evangelical start so many threads that are lies?
 
TomFitz said:
That’s fairly typical of the voter suppression effort.
Click to expand...

guns, god, abortion, thugs and voter fraud.



that's all we're gonna hear from now until November.
 
Didn't anyone notice that the Brennan Center report covers the years 2000-2006?

"tens of thousands of cases of voter fraud"?

With remarkably few reports, and next to no evidence, of pollsite impersonation fraud, the State
and its allied amici instead recite hundreds of examples of election problems that could not
possibly be solved by Indiana’s law requiring photo ID at the polls. These include allegations of
ballot tampering by election officials, erroneous vote tallying, vote buying, voting by citizens
rendered ineligible by conviction, registration by noncitizens, multiple voting in the voter’s own
name, and absentee ballot fraud and mishandling. Often, when these allegations are investigated,
they reveal not fraud, but rather mistake or administrative error. But even when these reports are
accurate, the misconduct they describe could not possibly be prevented by the challenged law.
Click to expand...

Close to 400 million votes were cast during the years examined, yet the number of proven cases of voter fraud that would have been prevented by photo ID was ONE.

References to various infamous elections during the past 200 years by the plaintiffs in the Indiana case failed to note that in almost every instance the fraud was committed by those already holding power and not by individual voters.
 
marke said:
Assuming no fraud is exposed in this document is stupid and wrong. Criticizing all efforts to protect our voting system from future is stupid and wrong. Claiming there is no fraud and there is nothing we can to to protect elections from fraud is stupid and wrong.
Click to expand...

Giving this document any credence whatsoever is utterly foolish.
 
Somerville said:
Didn't anyone notice that the Brennan Center report covers the years 2000-2006?

"tens of thousands of cases of voter fraud"?

Close to 400 million votes were cast during the years examined, yet the number of proven cases of voter fraud that would have been prevented by photo ID was ONE.

References to various infamous elections during the past 200 years by the plaintiffs in the Indiana case failed to note that in almost every instance the fraud was committed by those already holding power and not by individual voters.
Click to expand...

The Brennan Center was putting out the usual liberal-left propaganda.

They had zero intent of actually finding voter fraud.

Have you read either of John Fund's two books filled with mostly Democrat-committed voter fraud?

Read through Heritage's 1200 examples?

No? Didn't think so.
 
marke said:
Assuming no fraud is exposed in this document is stupid and wrong. Criticizing all efforts to protect our voting system from future is stupid and wrong. Claiming there is no fraud and there is nothing we can to to protect elections from fraud is stupid and wrong.
Click to expand...

You didnt read the document. You didnt find it on your own. And you have no idea what this document says.

It said, they found exactly ONE instance of voter impersonation in 400 million votes.

But you didnt read that.

And supporting your false claim by demanding everyone make the same assumptions you do, is still dishonest.
 
marke said:
If you don't want to deal with the truth of voter fraud then don't try to understand why there are so many hundreds of cases of voter fraud listed in court documents, as detailed in the report posted on the OP.
Click to expand...

How do you know?

You didnt read it.

And you dodged the question, What right wing blog fed this to you? We all know you didnt find it on your own. And we all know you didnt even read the first three paragraphs.
 
Termn8or said:
The Brennan Center was putting out the usual liberal-left propaganda.

They had zero intent of actually finding voter fraud.

Have you read either of John Fund's two books filled with mostly Democrat-committed voter fraud?

Read through Heritage's 1200 examples?

No? Didn't think so.
Click to expand...

Nope, I don't read crap.

As a Conservative, perhaps you know of a fellow by the name of Paul Weyrich, who said the following at a meeting of Christian supporters of Ronald Reagan in 1980:
“How many of our Christians have what I call the ‘goo-goo’ syndrome — good government. They want everybody to vote. I don’t want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people. They never have been from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”
Click to expand...

Mr Weyrich was one of the founders of ALEC, a group that has pushed conservative-desired laws thru various state legislatures. He was also a founder of the Heritage Foundation and obviously an influence on John Fund. When a person openly states that they don't want all Americans to vote, then one might just think their claims of "voter" fraud are founded less on facts and more on ideology.
 
Last edited:
Somerville said:
Nope, I don't read crap.

As a Conservative, perhaps you know of a fellow by the name of Paul Weyrich, who said the following at a meeting of Christian supporters of Ronald Reagan in 1980:


Mr Weyrich was one of the founders of ALEC, a group that has pushed conservative-desired laws thru various state legislatures. He was also a founder of the Heritage Foundation and obviously an influence on John Fund. When a person openly states that they don't want all Americans to vote, then one might just think their claims of "voter" fraud are founded less on facts and more on ideology.
Click to expand...

So ALEC you say? :lol:

Oops: Florida Republican Forgets To Remove ALEC Mission Statement From Boilerplate Anti-Tax Bill – ThinkProgress

Funded almost entirely by large corporations, ALEC produces “model legislation” favorable to industry that state lawmakers can introduce as their own bills. Usually, the legislators tweak the language of the bills to make them state-specific or to obfuscate their origins. Usually, but apparently not always.

In November, Florida state Rep. Rachel Burgin (R) introduced a resolution (PDF here) that would officially call on the federal government to reduce corporate taxes, but she apparently forgot to remove ALEC’s mission statement from the top of the bill, which she seems to have copied word-for-word from ALEC’s model bill...​

It's so easy to be a republican where the thinking and the campaign fundraising is all done for you.
 
Odd. The "official document" presented is strewn with quotes like these:

"no allegations of in-person impersonation fraud"

"no allegations of wrongdoing that could be prevented by a law requiring photo ID at the polls"

"none of which involve any allegation of impersonation fraud at the polls"

"no allegations of in-person impersonation fraud"​

I would have picked a different official document if I was trying to prove voter fraud.
 
Termn8or said:
The Brennan Center was putting out the usual liberal-left propaganda. They had zero intent of actually finding voter fraud. Have you read either of John Fund's two books filled with mostly Democrat-committed voter fraud? Read through Heritage's 1200 examples? No? Didn't think so.
Click to expand...

One, then don't use The Brennan Center study, and, two, admit the allegations are unsupported assertions. Yes?
 
TomFitz said:
I wouldn’t try and hide behind Jimmy Carter if I were you.

Ask the man himself, and he will not endorse the voters caging, voter suppression tactics employed by the GOP today.
Click to expand...

He may have changed his mind. That is common, especially from old dinosaurs. But his logic is just as clear, crisp and appropriate today as it was when he first said it several years ago. We need to strenghthen our voting system to guard against future fraud of the type so common in the past and so prevalent in the OP report.
 
More than 250 cases of alleged voter fraud involving tens of thousands of illegal votes
Click to expand...

From this, we can see that the problem isn't in who votes, but who counts the votes. Voter ID, purging voter roles, and all of the other right-wing tactics aren't aimed at voter fraud. They are aimed at restricting people's ability to vote.
 
TomFitz said:
Thousands who had intended to vote illegally is something you made up.

No evidence exists to support this at all.

And your attempt to defend the GOPs voter suppression effort by trying to reframe the discussion into an either/or fallacy is just as dishonest.
Click to expand...

Thousands of votes are listed in these court cases involving reports of voter fraud. There is no sense in denying that fact.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Giving this document any credence whatsoever is utterly foolish.
Click to expand...

Dedicated leftists who have been warned by their leaders not to read materials which are not approved by leftist liberal headquarters will not accept the facts and details listed in these court cases.
 
marke said:
Assuming no fraud is exposed in this document is stupid and wrong. Criticizing all efforts to protect our voting system from future is stupid and wrong. Claiming there is no fraud and there is nothing we can to to protect elections from fraud is stupid and wrong.
Click to expand...

The instances of fraud mentioned are statistically insignificant; a few hundred (maybe), from hundreds of millions of potential votes cast. You can work out how dangerously subversive that is.
 
marke said:
Dedicated leftists who have been warned by their leaders not to read materials which are not approved by leftist liberal headquarters will not accept the facts and details listed in these court cases.
Click to expand...

Don't be ridiculous. Have a quiet word with yourself mate; you're sounding like an angry old man yelling at traffic.
 
TomFitz said:
You didnt read the document. You didnt find it on your own. And you have no idea what this document says.
Click to expand...

You show yourself silly by claiming I did not locate this document on my own and did not read it. That is stupid. I simply Googled "Cases of voter fraud" and picked out this report among dozens that popped up. To try to be generous, I will admit I did not find this on my own. I had help from Google. Like Obama told small business owners in America, "You did not build your business on your own." Obama was absolutely right. Nobody does anything on their own, inuding politicians. They either get help from God or from the devil.

It said, they found exactly ONE instance of voter impersonation in 400 million votes. But you didn't read that.
Click to expand...

You read one case? There were more that 250 cases listed, with details. Let's pick another case at random.

Election Officials Example #4:
“Ineligible persons on voter rolls include those not citizens. A congressional task force found,
for example, that there was “clear and convincing evidence that 748 invalid votes” by aliens
were cast in a 1996 California congressional election. H.R. 105-416, 105th Cong. at 12 (1998),
see also John Fund, Wall Street Jour., OpinionJournal, May 21 [sic], 2006 . . . (noting that
“everal California counties report that an increasing number of registered voters called up
for jury duty write back saying they are ineligible because they aren’t citizens”).” (p. 12 & n.10)
The allegation concerning the congressional task force is, again, inaccurate. 124 of the ballots
cited were absentee ballots improperly delivered, not votes cast by noncitizens.75 There is no
indication that the remaining votes were cast in person or in someone else’s name. See AG
Example #2.
The second source cited above not only contains no allegation of any ballot cast in the name of
another at the polls, but explicitly states that “[m]uch of the voter fraud taking place today occurs
not at polling places but through absentee ballots.”76
Election Officials Example #5:


This is cited from the Congressional Record. Those who claim this material is false are dummies. In a clear effort to mislead the authors of the report claim 124 of the ballots were not cast by noncitizens. That much is likely true, but they don't know for sure about the rest of the 748 fraudulent votes. They offer this guess about the remaining votes as if their opinion even matters:

"There is no indication that the remaining votes were cast in person or in someone else's name." I'm sure that sounds good to voter fraud crooks and their supporters, but the satement is deliberately misleading. What the biased deceitful authors did not say, which is equally true is

There is no indication that the remaining votes were not cast in person or in someone else's name."

And supporting your false claim by demanding everyone make the same assumptions you do, is still dishonest.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TomFitz said:
How do you know?

You didnt read it.

And you dodged the question, What right wing blog fed this to you?
Click to expand...

GOOGLE

We all know you didnt find it on your own. And we all know you didnt even read the first three paragraphs.
Click to expand...

All I can say to you in response to that foolishness is you obviously don't know crap.
 
snakestretcher said:
The instances of fraud mentioned are statistically insignificant; a few hundred (maybe), from hundreds of millions of potential votes cast. You can work out how dangerously subversive that is.
Click to expand...

You miscomprehend the magnitude of the problem. I'm guessing that is because you have done very little research into the widespread reports of voter fraud over the last few decades.
 
marke said:
Jimmy Carter recommended voter ID to secure elections against fraud. He knew what he was talking about even if modern lefts do not want to agree.
Click to expand...
This isn't about whether there should be voter ID or not. This is about some legal case about voter ID where a whole load of evidence of electoral fraud was presented as a justification for voter ID and an article explaining (quite legitimately) why those examples were not legitimate justification for voter ID. That doesn't mean there is no valid justification, only that it wasn't presented in that case.

Once the partisan politics and personal bias are stripped away, that is how policy decisions are actually made; An open and honest discussion of detailed proposals and all the actual evidence surrounding them. The outstanding question is whether America is capable of stripping away that partisan politics and personal bias. I'm sad to say that I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future, and this thread isn't helping with that opinion. You might get more voter ID (here already is some after all) but I don't see you getting a better election system regardless.
 
HonestJoe said:
This isn't about whether there should be voter ID or not. This is about some legal case about voter ID where a whole load of evidence of electoral fraud was presented as a justification for voter ID and an article explaining (quite legitimately) why those examples were not legitimate justification for voter ID. That doesn't mean there is no valid justification, only that it wasn't presented in that case.

Once the partisan politics and personal bias are stripped away, that is how policy decisions are actually made; An open and honest discussion of detailed proposals and all the actual evidence surrounding them. The outstanding question is whether America is capable of stripping away that partisan politics and personal bias. I'm sad to say that I don't see that happening in the foreseeable future, and this thread isn't helping with that opinion. You might get more voter ID (here already is some after all) but I don't see you getting a better election system regardless.
Click to expand...

We have ample evidence of various types of voter fraud in past elections. All good Americans want security measures strengthened to prevent such voter fraud in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom