VoterID and Voter Fraud

From iGeek
Revision as of 17:45, 25 August 2019 by Ari (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Voter Fraud does not exist.

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.

Issue Lie Truth
VoterID and Voter Fraud

Protecting Democracy

The left wants to protect Democracy, and the right wants to undermine it. There's no problem with voter fraud. Since there are no convictions it must never happen. And demanding ID at a voting booth is just a way to oppress minorities and poor people who can't afford ID. Voter fraud swings elections. The left has gotten caught bussing people to other areas, ballot stuffing, encouraging illegal voting, discouraging legal voting, and the crux of the left's argument is that 3rd world countries like India can require ID to vote, but it's too big a hardship for Americans (who need ID for almost every basic service)?

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
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).
  • 2019 Democrat Charged with altering hundreds of ballots [2]
  • Non-citizens voting (2014) One of the strongest pieces of evidence we have, is still a bit soft on methodology. But it's an Old Dominion University study (by Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, David C. Earnest) that showed 6.4% of non-citizens voted in 2008. Using the low estimate of ≈11.5M illegal aliens, means ≈729K illegal votes. That lowball estimate is plenty to swing elections in key regional and national votes.
  • North Carolina Board of Elections Partial Audit (2017) found 508 fraudulent votes (mostly democrats)
  • James O’Keefe did underground sting where his folks asked Democrat Operatives to help him rig some elections (2016), they bragged how they'd done it before, and explained how they could do it again (for a price).
  • Via Wikileaks, journalists found John Podesta (DNC operative) emailing about how Obama flooded the caucus with ineligible voters in 2008, and they were reliving that (2015).
  • Multiple cases of voter fraud (2016) - if you consider a couple hundred people voting from wrong address, more votes than there were ballots, and other anomalies.
  • llegals and Felons voting in Philly (2015) - Public Interest Legal Foundation sued Philadelphia to get voting role, found dozens of illegals and felons had voted. Repeated it in VA found hundreds more illegals that had voted.
  • New York City’s DOI fraud test - 97% of the polling places they tried let them vote as dead, incarcerated or relocated people. Their report was ignored. (2013).
  • Suspicious Obama turnout - 140% turnout, 100% of votes in districts going to Obama, Millions of illegals estimated to have voted. Not proof of fraud, but definite proof of distrust in our elections (2008, 2012).
  • Pew Survey - 2.75M registered in 2 or more states, 24M invalid registrations, 1.8M dead people. Proof that our systems aren't safe and democrats oppose sanitizing them. Why is that? (2012)
  • True The Vote - 348,000 dead people on the rolls(2012), by cross-indexing they turned over 99 cases of felony cross state voter fraud to the fed, people voting after death in Maryland, 160 counties in 19 states have over 100 percent voter registration, 12 Indiana counties have more registered voters than residents, same in Ohio.
  • 2012 North Carolina - elections board found 35,570 with names+DOB collision with voters in another state.
  • 2012 South Carolina - elections board found 900 dead people that voted.
  • 2010 Al Franken (D) - lost a contested election by 700+ votes. Appealed, and in a series of questionable recounts (in a Democrat controlled state) "won" by 312 votes. Despite 2 counties alone showing 393 felons had illegally voted (but were counted anyways).
  • 2006 United States Election Assistance Commission Report - details hundreds of voter-fraud cases (with often many plaintiffs each), about something that Democrat leadership claims doesn't exist (or rarely happens).
  • 2000 Bush-Gore Florida - In an election with a 537 vote margin, there were ≈925,000 illegal immigrants with a ≈6% voter turnout (and 80% Democrat) means ≈44,400 likely illegal votes for Gore in Florida alone. Tell me again how voter fraud can’t swing an election.
  • 1996 Bob Dornan and Loretta Sanchez - After showing 748 (of 984 election margin) were illegal aliens, and there was another 4,700 questionable registrations affidavits to be investigated (according to the INS), amidst allegations of a cover-up or payoff, the House dropped the investigation. California had successfully obstructed long enough that Sanchez was called the winner in a corrupted election, with the help of voter fraud that the Democrats deny ever happens. And that's why they're against cleaning up the voter roles, right there. Read: Bob Dornan and Loretta Sanchez for more.
  • 1993 Motor Voter - This National Voter Registration Act of 1993 was passed with 2 of the 4 goals being to (a) protect election integrity (b) ensure states sanitize their voter roles (make them accurate). Democrats (including Obama admin) refuse to enforce (and obstruct the enforcement of) those clauses claiming it would be voter suppression if they sanitized the voter roles of illegals, dead people and felons.
  • 1982 Adlai Stevenson - Judge Frank Mc­Garr of the U.S. District Court released the federal grand jury's report and the evidence re­vealed substantial vote fraud in Chicago during the November 2, 1982 election, with over 100,000 phony votes total, and found "that similar fraudulent activities have occurred prior to 1982.”
  • 1960 JFK/Nixon - Mayor Daily was widely rumored and accepted to be blatantly corrupt. FBI agent Ernest Locker later investigations into 1982 voter fraud, lead him to believe the corruption of 1960 election was far wider than the 8,858 votes needed that swing the election. Whether true or not, the wide acceptance of voter fraud in this case is proof why we need better quality control.

And this just skims the surface.


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. more...


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


  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)