He fought in World War II. He died in 2014. And he just registered to vote in Va.

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

P4L

Sheriff
Nov 7, 2007
2,965
6,590
1,743
Kenosha, WI
#25
Unfortunately, it's a statistically flawed study.

https://electionupdates.caltech.edu/2017/09/11/report-on-voter-fraud-rife-with-inaccuracies/

https://medium.com/@max.hailperin/presidential-advisory-commission-on-election-integrity-september-12-2017-meeting-materials-4512dd139ee6


Even assuming the 45000 votes was true, that means 0.03% of votes cast in 2016 were fraudulent. I don't think anyone could call that rampant.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,409
2,197
1,743
So Cal
#26
Unfortunately, it's a statistically flawed study.

.
yeah, I was making a point about the silly link to the WaPo.

There is no way to know how bad voter fraud is, or isn't. Until we have voter ID, nobody will ever know.

remember when the spoof guy asked for Eric Holder's ballot, and it was given to him? That's how easy it is.

California is far, far worse.... absolutely no way to know how bad it is, or isn't.

We should not have to limp through such silly and archaic voting processes in this day and age... it's freaking criminal, and totally partisan.
 

John C

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
1,018
1,768
743
63
#27
There isn’t a single statistical test presented by Professor Gronke that rules out at any level of confidence the possibility of more than 45,000 illegally cast ballots.
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,015
16,355
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#28
Unfortunately, it's a statistically flawed study.

https://electionupdates.caltech.edu/2017/09/11/report-on-voter-fraud-rife-with-inaccuracies/

https://medium.com/@max.hailperin/presidential-advisory-commission-on-election-integrity-september-12-2017-meeting-materials-4512dd139ee6



Even assuming the 45000 votes was true, that means 0.03% of votes cast in 2016 were fraudulent. I don't think anyone could call that rampant.
Not necessarily,
If a few hundred or even less votes can swing a congressional seat (and they can) and you can swing 10-20 seats with those 45,000 illegal or fraudulent votes, then that is by any reasonably definition rampant voter fraud, looking at that study I would argue their number including their moe is way off but assuming they are spot on it is still rampant voter fraud.

In Texas, they just modified a voting law (I don't specifically know the details but I'm sure someone on here does) a seat that has been democrat for 100 years just turned republican. Is that voter fraud, don't know won't hazard a guess, but it would be interesting if someone did a deep dive analysis to find out.

For me it's a simple issue, to claim that someone cannot get the proper id to vote given everything else you need a proper id to purchase is one of the 2 things
1. You are telling those people they are too ignorant to use the same Id they use to cash a check, purchase alcohol, board a plane and so on. To borrow from the hyperbole bandwagon, I would suspect 99.5% of legal voters already have an id that would suffice to meet a voter id law and they could make it extraordinarily simple for those who don't.
2. You are trying to hide something

Everyone of these studies is flawed and most are simply trying to prove the bias they went in with, here's a real world example of a 'maybe, maybe not' voter fraud situation - in Ca they sent out hundreds of ballots to one apartment in So Cal, accident, perhaps, perhaps not and there is no way to know for sure, what is known is that it is not a one time incident.
There's simply no legitimate reason not to have a voter id law on the books, the technology has existed for years to do it, to track it and to have a continuously updated registration system it would also make the move to e-voting (it's coming) a far less complex effort.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,409
2,197
1,743
So Cal
#29
There's simply no legitimate reason not to have a voter id law on the books, the technology has existed for years to do it, to track it and to have a continuously updated registration system it would also make the move to e-voting (it's coming) a far less complex effort.
Is Blockchain Technology the Future of Voting?

In Mac Warner’s 23 years in the U.S. Army, he experienced firsthand the hurdles of voting from abroad. “On a hillside in Afghanistan, it’s hard to get mail, it’s hard to ship it out,” he says.

As West Virginia’s secretary of state, Warner wants to help deployed service members to more easily cast a ballot—only 20 percent of the state’s overseas military personnel voted in 2016. He also wants to bolster election security.

In the state’s primary in May, Warner got his wish. A pilot program enabling voting via a blockchain network allowed his son Scott—an Army first lieutenant in Vicenza, Italy—to cast a ballot with his smartphone. “In the same amount of time that I could’ve pulled up and watched a YouTube video,” Scott Warner says, “I actually got to go perform my civic duty.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-10/is-blockchain-technology-the-future-of-voting
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,545
3,371
743
48
#31
How many documented cases of voter fraud, where an actual voter in multiple elections happen in 2016?

I'll gladly venmo $5 to the first person with a correct answer.
There are some in every election. The problem is not the documented ones, because we prosecute those. The problem is the undocumented ones. Pretending they don't exist doesn't mean they don't exist. It's like atoms, because we can't see them doesn't mean we aren't made of them.
Exactly, like people turning in absentee ballots for multiple people from the same address that turn out to be dead or unrelated senior citizens that are actually in nursing homes. If you catch 1 there are more you didn't catch. And it would be easier to catch if Democrats didn't fight the auditing of voter roles and voter id.

Sent from my stang5litre Edition 5.0 using Tapatalk
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
65,169
47,571
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#32
Exactly, like people turning in absentee ballots for multiple people from the same address that turn out to be dead or unrelated senior citizens that are actually in nursing homes. If you catch 1 there are more you didn't catch. And it would be easier to catch if Democrats didn't fight the auditing of voter roles and voter id.

Sent from my stang5litre Edition 5.0 using Tapatalk
"But look, it's only 0.03% of the vote!"

Well, what about the other 99.99% that we don't catch.
1538827610838.png
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
65,169
47,571
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#33
using that logic of absence of proof/evidence-based findings.

What was your opinion of Dr. Ford's testimony about Kavanaugh's character? :)
P.S. It isn't "absence of proof." We aren't talking about an individual case. We actually have proof that it happens. But from the limited sample we can't possibly know exactly how much it happens because people try to hide it and cover it up.

I can think of only one reason why someone wouldn't be concerned about voter fraud and wouldn't want to do everything possible to eliminate it, they think it helps their side. On the other hand, Russians!
 

OrangeFan69

LA Face with an Okla. booty.
A/V Subscriber
#34
P.S. It isn't "absence of proof." We aren't talking about an individual case. We actually have proof that it happens. But from the limited sample we can't possibly know exactly how much it happens because people try to hide it and cover it up.

I can think of only one reason why someone wouldn't be concerned about voter fraud and wouldn't want to do everything possible to eliminate it, they think it helps their side. On the other hand, Russians!
I think the voter registrations are more a product of identity fraud for registering for fake credit cards via motor voter bill than actual vote casters. It's a problem, but I think it has more to do with the ease of access of credit in our society that can be exploited through financial deviance than a voter fraud issue.

Voter Fraud in my opinion is used to limit poor people especially in rural areas from voting. I feel that the media makes it more of an anti black thing versus an anti poor thing. It's not the same thing, but that follows the 3/5 compromise, redlining of districts and racial gerrymandering for political gain.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,409
2,197
1,743
So Cal
#35
I think the voter registrations are more a product of identity fraud for registering for fake credit cards via motor voter bill than actual vote casters. It's a problem, but I think it has more to do with the ease of access of credit in our society that can be exploited through financial deviance than a voter fraud issue.

Voter Fraud in my opinion is used to limit poor people especially in rural areas from voting. I feel that the media makes it more of an anti black thing versus an anti poor thing. It's not the same thing, but that follows the 3/5 compromise, redlining of districts and racial gerrymandering for political gain.
I have never ever, even once, been asked for my voter registration for any financial transaction that I have ever conducted. I have never ever been asked for voter registration when registering a motor vehicle.... it' is the OPPOSITE - in CA you are automatically registered when you complete your motor vehicle registration.

Poor people in rural areas most likely already receive federal aid, for which they must have identification. If there are some that need assistance in obtaining an ID, then it is a very, very small number, and can be accommodated very cheaply. That is not an issue and if it's a "concern" it can easily be remedied.

You're creating a problem that doesn't even exist, and dismissing all possible solutions because you don't care to have voting done right... that has to be it.

The 3/5ths compromise was designed to give blacks MORE recognition, not less.
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,015
16,355
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#36
I have never ever, even once, been asked for my voter registration for any financial transaction that I have ever conducted. I have never ever been asked for voter registration when registering a motor vehicle.... it' is the OPPOSITE - in CA you are automatically registered when you complete your motor vehicle registration.

Poor people in rural areas most likely already receive federal aid, for which they must have identification. If there are some that need assistance in obtaining an ID, then it is a very, very small number, and can be accommodated very cheaply. That is not an issue and if it's a "concern" it can easily be remedied.

You're creating a problem that doesn't even exist, and dismissing all possible solutions because you don't care to have voting done right... that has to be it.

The 3/5ths compromise was designed to give blacks MORE recognition, not less.
You’re right on all fronts, there’s nothing that says tolerance like telling someone they’re not intelligent enough to obtain a valid id, which, to borrow from Sen Collins, it’s more likely they already have than not.
Here’s an interesting read

https://publicinterestlegal.org/blog/248-counties-registered-voters-live-adults/

Does having more registered voters than eligible voters mean voter fraud occurred, not necessarily but it means the system is fouled up and highly likely to be taken advantage of.
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
12,015
16,355
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#39
There are 2 separate issues
1. Voter fraud - intentional & a crime albeit one that is not often punished indefensible under any circumstance
2. Illegal voting - unintentional and thus not fraud and many times has a legitimate rational behind it

I think when you conflate them that is a mistake, I think that is what most of the studies do. Again, too many registered is not in and of itself fraud nor does it mean that any illegal votes were counted, it just means the system is broken.

Both threaten the validity of our elections, both are unnecessary, both are easily identifiable and both can be easily remedied, if politicians wanted to.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,742
17,957
1,743
#40
Unfortunately, it's a statistically flawed study.

https://electionupdates.caltech.edu/2017/09/11/report-on-voter-fraud-rife-with-inaccuracies/

https://medium.com/@max.hailperin/presidential-advisory-commission-on-election-integrity-september-12-2017-meeting-materials-4512dd139ee6



Even assuming the 45000 votes was true, that means 0.03% of votes cast in 2016 were fraudulent. I don't think anyone could call that rampant.
Depends on where they are, concentrated in the right spot it could decide a presidential election or swing the balance of the US Senate.