1 - I imagine the implication isn't so much that people think they are voting illegally as it is to say to a group that someone has a tool to make voting a very criminal act. It would not be a new thing for minorities to suffer undue consequences for voting, even if entirely in the right.

 

2 - It's probably easier than you think. Voting isn't exactly a high tech operation. If you registered to vote through a third party you might wonder if they did everything correctly. If you or your polling place has moved there might be some confusion about exactly where you are supposed to vote, especially since procedures and mechanisms vary place to place. Etc.

 

I don't buy #2 for a second. I just moved recently to a new county. When I went and got my license changed, they had me sign a form and said I would be receiving a letter detailing where I was to vote now. About a week later, my letter arrived stating exactly where I was to go. It's not complicated or confusing unless you have the IQ of a 5 year old.

 

Another point, the beauty of fraud is intent has to be proven. That provision is in there to safeguard people who make an honest mistake from being criminally prosecuted. So if someone unknowingly votes in the wrong place, unlawfully, etc. They won't be prosecuted. Just another reason #2 has no merit.

You think it will encourage voter fraud???

 

I don't believe it was ever meant to discourage voter fraud, otherwise why didn't they go up in a wide variety of neighborhoods? I believe the publicity has led to greater efforts to get out the vote in just the areas they targeted.

I don't buy #2 for a second. I just moved recently to a new county. When I went and got my license changed, they had me sign a form and said I would be receiving a letter detailing where I was to vote now. About a week later, my letter arrived stating exactly where I was to go. It's not complicated or confusing unless you have the IQ of a 5 year old.

 

Yes and I doubt it's impossible for an overextended local government to run inefficiently, particularly in an overcrowded and poorer area. I also doubt it's impossible for a poor person to have to switch between addresses frequently because you don't own a home and live with family as much as you live alone and might not be certain exactly where their polling place is or if it's the "legal" one. I know, I know, the world is very simple and can be described in stark, dichotomous terms.

If you don't intend to commit voter fraud then the sign isn't directed at you so don't worry about it. If they put that sign in Ashland not one person would notice.

If you don't intend to commit voter fraud then the sign isn't directed at you so don't worry about it. If they put that sign in Ashland not one person would notice.

 

Putting anything in Ashland is a good way to get no one to notice it.

 

There are ten times more billboards, and stores, for cash advance places in the hood. Racist?

If the same sign was put up in a community with a Ford or GM plant would union workers be offended?

 

If the billboard said I should be able to work without joining a union and its sponsor was a RTW supporter it would be.

 

Seems as if there is some history of voter fraud in the last presidential election in Cleveland

 

In that neighborhood? There's a lot more green in her background compared to the other one.

There are ten times more billboards, and stores, for cash advance places in the hood. Racist?

 

According to Furious Styles it is.

If you don't intend to commit voter fraud then the sign isn't directed at you so don't worry about it. If they put that sign in Ashland not one person would notice.

 

Anyone sophisticated enough to successfully commit voter fraud probably doesn't even live in that neighborhood.

In that neighborhood? There's a lot more green in her background compared to the other one.

That sign looked to be in a business district not a residential area where she appears to be, don't see many billboards near homes anywhere. But this video was posted due to Clydes questioning of placing it in Cleveland where there was no evidence of voter fraud.

That sign looked to be in a business district not a residential area where she appears to be, don't see many billboards near homes anywhere. But this video was posted due to Clydes questioning of placing it in Cleveland where there was no evidence of voter fraud.

 

Looked like inner city Cleveland is where the voter fraud billboard is at. The ACORN video looks very residential to me. Big difference.

According to Furious Styles it is.

 

Best role he's ever had.

If you don't intend to commit voter fraud then the sign isn't directed at you so don't worry about it. If they put that sign in Ashland not one person would notice.

 

You're missing the point. If this sign HAD been put in Ashland and Ashtabula then there's no issue. It's a true PSA. Didn't happen. Not a PSA. Intent is obvious.

There are ten times more billboards, and stores, for cash advance places in the hood. Racist?

 

No. The intent there is simply to make money. It's not intending to scare anyone from voting.