VoterID and Voter Fraud

From iGeek
Revision as of 23:30, 2 February 2019 by Ari (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
VoterFraud.jpg

The purpose of this aimless article isn’t to convince people of any particular solution, it is to meander through the facts, eviscerate the fallacies, and give everyone the data to come to their own conclusions about Voter fraud and VoterID. There are a lot of fallacies and noise about voter fraud and whether voterID (requiring ID at voting places would fix it). I’ll list just a few of the many examples of voter fraud, and reasons for concerns below -- yet, there's are a lot of DNC fronts (media outlets) that claim there’s virtually none. Why the discrepancy? Well the reason is that voter fraud overwhelmingly benefits the Democrats (DNC). If you were them, would you want it to stop? Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.


Democrats Arguments

Here's a list of things they do:

  • (1) pretend it doesn’t exist, and it’s absurd to think it might..
  • (2) And even if it did exist, it couldn’t possibly sway an election…
  • (3) And even when it does, it’s absurd to think VoterID would fix it…
  • (4) And besides, the only bad people would want VoterID (to suppress the minority vote)…
  • (5) Then they support the first 4 with FakeNews and shoddy research/reasoning...
  • (6) and if that doesn't work, they call you a racists and start back at #1.

It’s very circular referencing gish gallop (which is slang for the debate style of Duane Gish, who could spew out so many bullshit arguments at once, that people would give up). But whether you agree or not, in order to understand the issue, we need to know the facts. Not that I think this will do much -- a few people that read this just claim, "see no evidence" despite many pages of it. But for those with open eyes and minds, here's a list of evidence that it's a problem.

How popular is Voter ID?

When you can't fight popularity numbers like that fairly, then you better lie until the public changes their mind. #amiright?

Where's the beef?

There are multiple books that offer many chapters of evidence to detail how bad voter fraud is, or at least has been. This article is only covering a fraction of what’s out there that shows what’s real. New York, Chicago, Detroit, DC, and many cities are infamous for their voter corruption that goes back to the rise of progressives (Tammany Hall, Boss Tweed, Chicago Political Machine), though much of that political corruption goes beyond just cooking elections and into what they do with their power once annointed.

I have a list of some book and experts at the end of this article, that you can use to dive deeper.[1] But even if all the books, examples and common knowledge was wrong (which their evidence implies they are not), the popularity of the books and people that believe that it is a problem proves that the public doesn’t trust the insecurity in our election process. Even if it was just a placebo to increase public's trust, it's worth doing.

Examples of Voter Fraud

GrandmaVote.png

There are three common classes of illegal voting: non-citizen (Illegals), proxy (voting for someone else, alive or dead, individually or mass ballot stuffing), duplicate voting (more than one state). All can be mitigated with simple voter roll sanitizing -- but Democrats have historically been against that as well as voter ID... anyone care to guess why? (Hint: the party with the least fraud in their favor is a fan of fixing it).

Voter Suppression

Main article: Voter Suppression

The knee-jerk anti-voterID response is, “but Voter Suppression”. While voter suppression is real, and infrequently happens on both sides of the aisle -- it's usually done by not having enough polling places in the right areas, not by checking ID. And you can tell how seriously the Democrats care about it, because in cases where goons in Philadelphia are standing outside a polling station with clubs, presumably to intimidate away anyone not voting how they might prefer, the Obama Administration's DOJ (Democrats), just dropped open-and-closed case, to prevent sending a signal that such voter intimidation/suppression will not be tolerated. It would only be a problem for them if white folks did that.

Conclusion

The point are NOT that

  • VoterID fixes everything ~ There are many kinds of voter fraud. But locking a door might not keep out a determined criminal, yet it still makes it harder to get robbed and decreases the frequency, and it certainly gives the occupants a little confidence that they’re at least doing something to prevent it. So we can only make it harder, never eliminate it.
  • Not that every example of questionable voter roles, scans, or too many votes proves voter fraud. There's a lot of nuances. But those claiming that it doesn't exist or isn't a problem are fools or frauds. They're ignorant of the rich history of it in the United States, or choosing to deny realities they don't like. Like how voter fraud has swung local, regional and nation elections. And they either don't know that, or they're actively choosing to keep their head in the sand about it.

All you have to do is remember that it would have swung the 2000 election if the Supreme Court hadn't step in for other reasons, it likely swung the 2008 or 2012 elections, it definitely swung balance of power in many State and local elections. And despite a lack of convictions, there are hundreds of thousands of voters on the roles that shouldn't be, and very poor policing of them. And one party fighting voraciously to prevent any improvement in quality controls on our election quality.

Where's the rotten beef? (FakeNews)

No report would be complete without showing many examples of FakeNews -- how the Democrat media spins yarns and pretends that the real evidence is trumped up conspiracies by the evil Republicans, while all the real (phony) evidence supports their causes. When a causal scanning of their data/methodology shows laughably flawed and biased thinking.

Most rationalizations of the far left / anti-logic position stem from either:

  • (A) A few softer “investigations” that show that not all the cross-state or dead-people name collisions are nefarious, thus we should ignore all incidents of it.
  • (B) A liberal NYU Justin Levitt study or reasoning (or the link to WaPo articles, which all refer to Justin’s “study”). Justin's flim-flam is that in his research he found shows only "31 instances” of convictions between 2000-2014. And since there’s no convictions, there’s no problem. (With a side argument that few elections are close enough to matter). Thus we should ignore all incidents of it

So ignore the problem, it’s just evil racist republicans that want to suppress the vote. By their reasoning, since most college sexual assault perpetrators aren't convicted, we should ignore all of them. But of course anyone with a brief understanding of the topic would laugh out loud at that reasoning.

  • Q: Why aren’t there any convictions?
  • A: Because there’s poor monitoring and no voter ID to catch frauds in the first place.

How can you prove someone isn’t who they say they are (and convict them), if you don’t check their ID’s? They walk up to a list of names, and point, and say, “that’s me there”, and they get a ballot. And if the real person comes in later, they have no way of getting back to the fraudulent voter to do those conviction. So it's a circle-reference (begging the question) to assume a lack of convictions proves a lack of a problem. It shows how bad it is.

So any study with the “methodology” of only looking at convictions, should be openly laughed at and mocked. No credible academic, institution, publisher, or journalist can defend the holes in reasoning required. Fortunately for WaPo or NYU, their readers and alums don’t care.

References

Footnotes

  1. Books and experts
    • Hans von Spakovsky (Federal Election Commission and a former Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights in the Department of Justice)

More

Examples of Voter Fraud

Voter Suppression

Voter-suppression.jpg
The knee-jerk anti-voterID response is, “but Voter Suppression”. While voter suppression is real, and infrequently happens on both sides of the aisle -- it's usually done by not having enough polling places in the right areas, not by checking ID. Yet when real voter intimidation comes up by goons in Philadelphia standing outside a polling station with clubs, the Obama admin drops it, because it benefited them. 400M poor people in India can voter with VoterID, and an ID is required to collect unemployment, foodstamps, welfare, medicare, Social Security. But it's "intimidation" to ask to see them at the polling booth.
Main article: Voter Suppression

Election 2016: shame and regrets

Tomorrow (11/09/2016) will be the day after a work party that turned into a drunken orgy. You try to shower and wash clean the fuzzy memories of what just happened, and have the fortitude and denial required to make eye contact with your coworkers the next day... but you all share each other's guilt and shame.

Dornan, Sanchez and Election Fraud

Sanchez.jpg
The anecdote about Bob Dornan and Loretta “Dirty" Sanchez, and how illegal aliens stole an election in my district. Which is why when folks deny that it happens or that it matters, I just shake my head. I saw it first hand.