5 ms·

How do you even distinguish voter fraud from a regular vote after the fact? This seems impossible because the vote is anonymous and there is no ID requirement,

How do you even distinguish voter fraud from a regular vote after the fact? This seems impossible because the vote is anonymous and there is no ID requirement, so no wonder putting a number on it after the fact is hard. The source doesn't change the content of what they discovered, people caught red handed, or the statements made by officials such as NYC Democratic Commisioner Alan Schulkin.

codyb 7y ago
For a non American you seem very invested in this. I see no proof of people being caught redhanded and that’d be pretty easy to verify since voter fraud is a felony and they’d have a court cases. It would take thousands of cases to sway most elections, so you’d need hundreds and hundreds of people to commit multiple felonies. And yet somehow none of this giant conspiracy to manipulate voter fraud is leaking out? Seems implausible. And they’d all need to assume identities of people already on the voter registration rolls. So those hundreds of felons would have to somehow not take the vote of someone who would vote later that day, or someone who’d already voted. This is a lot of work and a really grand conspiracy to keep under wraps. It’s almost certainly easier, cheaper, and more effective to spread false narratives such as “voter fraud is a big issue and only Republicans care about the sacredness of _your_ vote” than it is to actually somehow find and organize enough people to make it worthwhile.
- manquer 7y ago
  Not OP, not American either. The voter ID laws in India helps enormously in reducing fraud, if India can implement a system like that, Surely US should be able to as well ?
  - codyb 7y ago
    As I’ve explained, it’s a solution to a problem that doesn’t need solving. Maybe it is a different situation in India, but here the people proposing voter identification laws are doing so in bad faith. They’re trying to make it harder to vote so elections are less fair, as opposed to making elections more fair by guaranteeing the sanctity of the individuals vote which is the position they’re pretending to be standing on.
    - asabjorn 7y ago
      To make it harder a significant number of people need to have no ID. Banking require and id [1] and 93.5% of the population is banked. Most of the remainder probably has an ID for Government services that need them such as applying for food stamps, medicare, medicaid, having a job, unemployment support and social security. In Norway, my home country, it has never been an issue in our 200 years as an independent country for anyone to get an ID to vote. And we used to be mostly dirt poor fishers and farmers that often lived in fairly isolated places.
      - asabjorn 7y ago
        Forgot link of evidence that banking require ID https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-cfpb/can-i-get-a-checking-account-without-a-social-security-number-en-929/ https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-cfpb/can-i-get-a-checkin...
      - codyb 7y ago
        Generally that 6.5% of unbanked persons tend not to vote for less healthcare and more tax breaks for the rich. Instituting the voter ID law makes it harder for 6.5% of people that rarely vote for Republicans to vote to prevent 0.000X% of votes cast fraudulently each election. Do you get it now?
        asabjorn 7y ago
        As I stated the unbanked are likely to be very old or poor so that use government services that require an ID. For instance, they rely on food stamps or Medicaid or social security. A large part of this 6.5% and the cohort you talk about therefor has an ID. The reason why I think so is that people that are not poor can not lead their lives without a bank account due to the essentials for a non poor life requiring a bank account.
        codyb 7y ago
        This is my last comment. The Republicans would much prefer to prevent or make it harder to vote for 2%, 1%, whatever. They don’t care about voter fraud. At all. They care about adding enough shit together that they can win elections. That is all they care about. It is not in good faith. It is not about protecting the sanctity of elections. It is about the opposite. They’ve never been able to show that voter fraud has ever affected an election. They’re in it because even shaving a percentage of people from voting Democrat is worth it for them. That is it. That’s the only reason. Goodbye.

codyb 7y ago

For a non American you seem very invested in this. I see no proof of people being caught redhanded and that’d be pretty easy to verify since voter fraud is a felony and they’d have a court cases. It would take thousands of cases to sway most elections, so you’d need hundreds and hundreds of people to commit multiple felonies. And yet somehow none of this giant conspiracy to manipulate voter fraud is leaking out? Seems implausible. And they’d all need to assume identities of people already on the voter registration rolls. So those hundreds of felons would have to somehow not take the vote of someone who would vote later that day, or someone who’d already voted. This is a lot of work and a really grand conspiracy to keep under wraps. It’s almost certainly easier, cheaper, and more effective to spread false narratives such as “voter fraud is a big issue and only Republicans care about the sacredness of _your_ vote” than it is to actually somehow find and organize enough people to make it worthwhile.

manquer 7y ago
Not OP, not American either. The voter ID laws in India helps enormously in reducing fraud, if India can implement a system like that, Surely US should be able to as well ?
- codyb 7y ago
  As I’ve explained, it’s a solution to a problem that doesn’t need solving. Maybe it is a different situation in India, but here the people proposing voter identification laws are doing so in bad faith. They’re trying to make it harder to vote so elections are less fair, as opposed to making elections more fair by guaranteeing the sanctity of the individuals vote which is the position they’re pretending to be standing on.
  - asabjorn 7y ago
    To make it harder a significant number of people need to have no ID. Banking require and id [1] and 93.5% of the population is banked. Most of the remainder probably has an ID for Government services that need them such as applying for food stamps, medicare, medicaid, having a job, unemployment support and social security. In Norway, my home country, it has never been an issue in our 200 years as an independent country for anyone to get an ID to vote. And we used to be mostly dirt poor fishers and farmers that often lived in fairly isolated places.
    - asabjorn 7y ago
      Forgot link of evidence that banking require ID https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-cfpb/can-i-get-a-checking-account-without-a-social-security-number-en-929/ https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-cfpb/can-i-get-a-checkin...
    - codyb 7y ago
      Generally that 6.5% of unbanked persons tend not to vote for less healthcare and more tax breaks for the rich. Instituting the voter ID law makes it harder for 6.5% of people that rarely vote for Republicans to vote to prevent 0.000X% of votes cast fraudulently each election. Do you get it now?
      - asabjorn 7y ago
        As I stated the unbanked are likely to be very old or poor so that use government services that require an ID. For instance, they rely on food stamps or Medicaid or social security. A large part of this 6.5% and the cohort you talk about therefor has an ID. The reason why I think so is that people that are not poor can not lead their lives without a bank account due to the essentials for a non poor life requiring a bank account.
        codyb 7y ago
        This is my last comment. The Republicans would much prefer to prevent or make it harder to vote for 2%, 1%, whatever. They don’t care about voter fraud. At all. They care about adding enough shit together that they can win elections. That is all they care about. It is not in good faith. It is not about protecting the sanctity of elections. It is about the opposite. They’ve never been able to show that voter fraud has ever affected an election. They’re in it because even shaving a percentage of people from voting Democrat is worth it for them. That is it. That’s the only reason. Goodbye.