3 ms·
>Most studies of voter fraud have shown it's negligible. Source? If I were going to commit fraud I sure as hell wouldn't do it while taking part in a study. Cu
by kaffeemitsahne 6y ago
>Most studies of voter fraud have shown it's negligible.
Source? If I were going to commit fraud I sure as hell wouldn't do it while taking part in a study. Curious how that is dealt with.
Of course I know about the related talking points of the other side, I just think it's curious that people regard "double spending" votes so casually.
- greedo 6y agohttp://voterfraudfacts.com/ http://voterfraudfacts.com/ has a pretty extensive list of sources and explanations.
- 9HZZRfNlpR 6y agoNot even an American but this number is convicted people for voter fraud. It's not even a study or some intelligence agency estimate, so you're dishonest here.
- greedo 6y agoDid you mean to reply to a different post? The link I included has reports from the Department of Justice, as well as by numerous independent sources.
- Frondo 6y agoI regard it casually because it's statistically negligible. I usually post this link in threads about vote-by-mail where people bring up fraud, but it applies here too: https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/politics/2017/09/15/voter-fraud-oregon-november-election-dennis-richardson/671503001/ https://www.statesmanjournal.com/story/news/politics/2017/09... The (elected, republican) secretary of state audited the 2016 election and found 54 cases -- out of 2+ million votes cast -- of what's generally called "voter fraud," most of which were people voting in Oregon and in another state. Oregon is entirely vote-by-mail, so there's no way to show an ID. Remember, how you voted is anonymous, but who voted is known to the government agencies. They can and do analyze that. Voter fraud is not a meaningful problem.