BGC, do you believe the states that are creating these rules are doing it solely to protect the sanctity of the vote?

BGC, do you believe the states that are creating these rules are doing it solely to protect the sanctity of the vote?

 

I really think they are having to do it since the ability to exploit the fragile voting system has been exposed and it is now known how easy it is to cheat it.

 

Those who are truly want to cheat the system as has been for years do not have to do much. And when it is the lone voter frauder - who cares. But when nursing homes are raided and the occupants show up and are given prefilled out ballots or fake letters are set that scam hundreds into sending absentee ballots to a central location - a political operative location, etc. etc. Then we have problems

 

Just how massive was ACORN driven fraud? Maybe terribly massive. Maybe not much. Probably in between. But it showed that the system was fragile and depended on honor and integrity and every level to work. It showed how someone or some organization(s) who cared not about honor and integrity could get into the system they could rip it apart easily. So like TSA, a response HAS to be done to reassure the entire public that there is integrity in the system.

 

But like TSA, they may be fighting yesterdays battles. 'Vote-ahead', electronic no paper trail voting, internet-voting, etc. scare the heck out of me.

I really think they are having to do it since the ability to exploit the fragile voting system has been exposed and it is now known how easy it is to cheat it.

 

 

So this voting fraud thing is new?

My 71 year old mother passed away last October, but she had been a consistent voter her whole life. She hadn't been on an airplane since the 70s. She'd never made a purchase over $10,000. She hadn't driven a car in 15 years. Being disabled, going to the courthouse to get an ID would have been very difficult for her.

 

I see no reason why she and those like her should have to be disenfranchised.

My 71 year old mother passed away last October, but she had been a consistent voter her whole life. She hadn't been on an airplane since the 70s. She'd never made a purchase over $10,000. She hadn't driven a car in 15 years. Being disabled, going to the courthouse to get an ID would have been very difficult for her.

 

I see no reason why she and those like her should have to be disenfranchised.

 

Why is a trip to the courthouse to get an ID anymore burdensome than showing up to vote?

 

Just like scammers the elderly have been used in a lot of voter fraud. And unfortunately the extra controls - just like the airport - put burden on the innocent and the honest.

 

A truly serious question - has anyone validated that your mother has been removed from the rolls? Or could someone vote using her name in the next election? The answers - probably not and probably. But when we assume people are honest and have integrity we do not expect to happen and do not expect it be rampant. Thus, there not tight protection on this situation that is very common and universal.

 

But what if someone gets a list of recent deceased people - 100s or 1000s...and sends others to vote under those names? It big cities where people do not know each other too well. That 'could' happen. And the fact that we all know it could happen now means it needs 'a fix'.

 

As for being disenfranchised I now know the feeling. Mr. Chandler made sure to disenfranchise a bunch of us in the latest round of redistricting.

So this voting fraud thing is new?

 

I believe the it has spread - like a lot of things - via the internet. Techniques are refined, traded and expanded over the internet. It is much more prevalent IMHO.

I believe the it has spread - like a lot of things - via the internet. Techniques are refined, traded and expanded over the internet. It is much more prevalent IMHO.

 

Again, no proof actual voting fraud - just registration fraud. We've heard about the Chicago "vote early vote often" and you say Philly is corrupt yet we're just now getting around to trying to fix the problem after the massive D turnout in 2008? Telling.

 

And I'm not evening going to mention (well, I guess I am) the issue of changing rules about churches being able to register voters in Florida, Wisconsin closing voter reg places in poor sections of Wisconsin, silly rule changes throughout the country since the 08 election.

 

Come on, BGC. It's as obvious as the big head on top of my shoulders.

Why is a trip to the courthouse to get an ID anymore burdensome than showing up to vote?

 

Just like scammers the elderly have been used in a lot of voter fraud. And unfortunately the extra controls - just like the airport - put burden on the innocent and the honest.

 

A truly serious question - has anyone validated that your mother has been removed from the rolls? Or could someone vote using her name in the next election? The answers - probably not and probably. But when we assume people are honest and have integrity we do not expect to happen and do not expect it be rampant. Thus, there not tight protection on this situation that is very common and universal.

 

But what if someone gets a list of recent deceased people - 100s or 1000s...and sends others to vote under those names? It big cities where people do not know each other too well. That 'could' happen. And the fact that we all know it could happen now means it needs 'a fix'.

 

As for being disenfranchised I now know the feeling. Mr. Chandler made sure to disenfranchise a bunch of us in the latest round of redistricting.

 

My mother voted via absentee ballot once she was disabled. She seldom left her house except for doctors appointments. Those were physically draining for her.

 

Any mail that is still sent in her name comes to my house. So, if an absentee ballot is sent, I'll be sure to return it to our courthouse and get her name removed as a voter.

Clyde, I do understand what you are saying. The mere fact that it's taking place four months prior to the election, does make it look very politically motivated and perhaps one-sided...especially when it may be limited to one certain state.

 

However, for it to NOT be the red herring you are saying it is...just how much voter fraud has to exist in order for it to be considered worth addressing? Unless you can claim there is zero chance of it occurring, isn't it at least worth addressing at some point in time? A decade ago we re-did the security at airports because 4 planes out of probably 5 to 6 million or so that year, got hijacked. Add in the previous years without a similar incident and that's a pretty small number. So changes were made. But, does it completely eliminate all chances of it happening again? No. The same way, that you have pointed out, that a voter ID would not completely eliminate any chance of fraud down the line.

 

So whether changes are made right now, or six months from now after the election is over, I'm all for looking into the current "system" and addressing any potential problems. That's what I'm trying to say.

Again, no proof actual voting fraud - just registration fraud. We've heard about the Chicago "vote early vote often" and you say Philly is corrupt yet we're just now getting around to trying to fix the problem after the massive D turnout in 2008? Telling.

 

And I'm not evening going to mention (well, I guess I am) the issue of changing rules about churches being able to register voters in Florida, Wisconsin closing voter reg places in poor sections of Wisconsin, silly rule changes throughout the country since the 08 election.

 

Come on, BGC. It's as obvious as the big head on top of my shoulders.

 

Tighting things up is needed. I think the battle is really in the 'new' stuff. 'Pre-voting' is scary. Cast votes just sitting around for a week or 2...what could go wrong there?!?! Internet voting! OMG...no chance for fraud there!!!! And another favorite - paperless electronic voting. With all of these 'photo-id' issue is a concern but with votes in electronic storage for days or longer the opportunity for fraud is massive.

 

I am not familiar with Wisconsin closings or Florida or churches. But if ACORN can do voter drives - why not churches?

 

If the pendulum is swinging the other way and going to far....well...who started it? The simple fact is voter fraud is primarily a tool of one party.

My mother voted via absentee ballot once she was disabled. She seldom left her house except for doctors appointments. Those were physically draining for her.

 

Any mail that is still sent in her name comes to my house. So, if an absentee ballot is sent, I'll be sure to return it to our courthouse and get her name removed as a voter.

 

OK. But she would not need a photo-ID to vote absentee I believe. So really, this law would not have impacted her at the time.

 

I am sorry for your loss.

OK. But she would not need a photo-ID to vote absentee I believe. So really, this law would not have impacted her at the time.

 

I am sorry for your loss.

 

Thank you.

 

Why would an absentee voter have a different set of requirements to vote than a regular voter?

Thank you.

 

Why would an absentee voter have a different set of requirements to vote than a regular voter?

 

Look at that video from Pennsylvania I posted. It was an 'absentee fraud' case. Absentee does require a signature. And it can be check and validated before being 'cast'. So, if sent DIRECTLY to the election office it should be safe. But in that video people were instructed to send it to a 3rd party...who could then change or just discard the ones that were not for 'their guy'. It was a localized event apparently. The lady says so. But it involved hundreds of votes.

 

Again, many of our political systems depend on honestly throughout the process. Unfortunately, it is now known that rogue elements can impact the system. And to keep peoples confidence in the system there has to be new actions and reactions. And it does put a burden on people that if they do not then take action they end up 'disenfranchised'.

Just saw this on Facebook.

If there is a significant problem with voter fraud and much of it is occurring with absentee ballots, is the proposed law a good one if it is not as stringent on absentee voters as at poll voters?