I don’t think I can break this down any more simply. At the end of the day, you are advocating additional laws and regulations that are unnecessary so that you can feel better. I’m just not an advocate of unnecessary regulations.
It seems the best way to combat fraudulent voting would be to increase legitimate voting. Let’s say the pool of potential voters is large. Lets also say that a large portion of voters will not vote. Let’s say the number of fraudulent votes is a small fraction of votes. Finally let’s also say every fraudulent vote is for party “A” (highly unrealistic).
Given the conditions above, as long as the (small) number of fraudulent votes by party “A” is less than the (larger) number of votes cast by the enticed eligible-but-not-voting members of party “B” then the fraudulent votes would be more than negated. All the efforts to prevent voter fraud should be less effective than a get-out-the-vote effort by party “B”.
As the conditions above are a reasonable representation of actual conditions (except for the final condition) I have to wonder why one party would put fighting voter fraud over expanding the vote. It’s perusing a loosing tactic, intentionally, knowing it will not help them win.
2 Likes
Partly why I defended widening mail in ballots to the greater electorate in a previous post. For those who like others to make the arguments, see Fox’s Chris Wallace in the first four minutes below:
Why wasn’t I informed that this whole kerfuffle was about mail-in ballots?!?
Uh Oh, another chuckle.
That the crux of it. The Rate of Return on voter impersonation is very low (one vote has high costs). If there is x dollars in the budget how should they be spend. Better to spend on Facebook spreading memes etc or like Hunter S. Thompson describes.
This is one of the oldest and most effective tricks in politics. Every hack in the business has used it in times of trouble, and it has even been elevated to the level of political mythology in a story about one of Lyndon Johnson’s early campaigns in Texas.*
“The race was close and Johnson was getting worried. Finally he told his campaign manager to start a massive rumour campaign about his opponent’s life-long habit of enjoying carnal knowledge of his barnyard sows.*
“Christ, we can’t get away with calling him a pig-f***r,” the campaign manager protested. “Nobody’s going to believe a thing like that.”
“I know,” Johnson replied. “But let’s make the sonofab***h deny it.”
4 Likes
Akin to: “Tell us Senator, are you still beating your wife?”
1 Like
If an American is a little bit interested in history & politics they are probably familiar of our crooked voting past. But for those who aren’t & for any foreigners who might believe the US has a long history of honest elections.
Of course. the dem Joe Kennedy was the most honest voter of all time.
Odd “story”. With no explanation it states, “ Chicago is famous for its history of people voting from the grave and for helping President John F. Kennedy “steal” the 1960 election. (JFK beat Richard Nixon by 9,000 votes in Illinois by capturing what some considered a suspiciously high 450,000 advantage in Cook County.)”
But if you click the link, you see that the quotes around ‘steal’ are not correct. Which one could deduce from simply deducting Illinois’ electoral votes from the overall totals—didn’t matter. ‘John’ F Kennedy won.
Modern history?
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle found that a new state law amounts to an “unconstitutional pay-to-vote system” imposed on citizens who may not be able to pay fines, or even know if anything is owed.
2 Likes
Know a guy who wasn’t able to vote in Florida because he killed an alligator many years ago. 3rd degree felony. Florida was one of the few states where ex felons couldn’t vote. The people voted in a referendum to do away with that law. Then the legislature got involved. Florida…the state that elected a governor who was CEO of a company guilty of one of the biggest Medicare frauds in history. He’s now a US senator.
so back to what is ID and how to prove you are American
You dont even need a real address as per the California Voter Registration web;
https://covr.sos.ca.gov/?step=2
Home Address *** I have a street address .I do not have a street address.
Describe where you live including cross streets, Route, N, S, E, W
*County ****
- My mailing address is different from my home address.*
So after saying I dont have a social security number or DL, what will they ask for at the polling station as proof of ID?
Does that also mean I wont get a postal vote?
I cant go further on the web page as I will be breaking the law…
Criminis. In the electronic age when your every opinion, transaction or search is monitored, no one is anonymous. If I can file my taxes online with IRS, I should be able to vote online.
2 Likes
no reason at all, Fed should be checking all online voters to see if they exist perhaps by a 10 point check, do you have this doc, or this, tax return, etc etc
We are chatting about how to get that right to vote in the USA and that appears to be different in different states
Electronic comms are wonderful. Is it possible though that someday, a computer virus as virulent as the corona virus shuts down all the networks?
Good point Lee
Homelessness isn’t a disqualifying condition for voting or being a citizen. Mariners, for one, often won’t have a home address or even a home. I spent years ‘homeless’ splitting my time between working on ships and vacationing around the world. Why pay a mortgage or rent for a place I’ll see a few days a year? (That’s a waste of beer money!) I’d stay in hotels, hostels, friends houses and the occasional lockup. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
Depending on the State an address can be a homeless shelter or other fixed location such as an underpass, bench or place where you spend most of your time at.
No one should have to pay money (rent, mortgage, utilities) to be eligible to vote.
2 Likes
sure, plus living on a boat
But how do you prove your are eligible to vote?
No disagreement here.