Obama accuses GOP of imagining voter fraud

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Man, you ostriches do seem to love having your heads buried waaaay down in the dirt.

This, from the original post:

God forbid you read what's gone before . . .

And that proves what, exactly? How many people have committed in person voter fraud? Where have they committed that fraud? Where are the indictments?

[UncleBeer 244]

How many people have committed in person voter fraud? Where have they committed that fraud? Where are the indictments?

Since there's currently no general "card check" at the polls, there's no way to quantify this. But you guys like that. Gotta protect your right to rig elections.

Your weak argument that "granny might not get to vote!" is neatly dealt with here:

It has been argued that “granny” might not be able to vote if they make her have a voter ID. But seriously, why all the concern about taking the extra measure of a voter ID to make sure that every vote cast in a United States election is a legally qualified vote, including “granny’s”?

Worse than granny not getting to vote, without an ID she can’t even write a check. In fact, she can’t even open a bank account go get a checkbook anywhere without a photo ID. She can’t even buy Sudafed and other needed-meds at Walgreens without handing over a photo ID. And what if granny lives in a crime-ridden neighborhood where she needs a gun to scare away the bad guys? Forget it – granny can’t buy a gun either. We better hope that granny likes to walk because she’s not getting on an airplane without proof of who she is either. And watch out for grannies who smoke and look darn good for their age because they’ll be hitting you up for a cigarette now and then. Remember, she’ll be asked for a photo ID to buy tobacco – as well as liquor. Granny probably can’t even rent an apartment without proving who she is with some form of ID.

Do you honestly know any grannies who can’t prove who they are with an ID anyway? If you do, I bet they don’t have the right to vote in this country either.

Of course, there’s a study being mentioned via the media which claims that fraudulent voting isn’t a problem in this country anyway. What they aren’t broadcasting is the obvious: if a fraudulent vote is cast illegally-well, it doesn’t get caught! Or maybe people are supposed to believe that the survey-takers ask people as an exit poll: “Excuse me. Did you vote honestly?” Give me a break! There is no study that can positively detect the amount of voter fraud in this country. And another thing, anyone who believes voter fraud doesn’t exist has never been to Chicago on Election Day.

Getting back to granny, so why are there precautions for doing practically everything in this country except when it comes to allowing granny to vote? The reason is simple. It’s because some people on the “left” are pulling a fast one. Other than the alleged survey where people must allegedly admit voter fraud, the only nonsensical defense of not wanting a voter ID is that requiring granny to have an ID to vote is “picking on granny”.

Yet, these same people who claim “granny is being picked on” aren’t saying that when granny has to show an ID to get on a plane, cash a check or use a credit card at their businesses, buy a gun, enter a secured governmental building, and so much more.

The obvious reason granny needs a photo ID to vote is to make sure that granny is still alive when she’s voting – and that even if she is still alive, that the vote cast with her name is really hers.

By the current policy in most places in this country, someone could easily abuse granny’s good name and vote with it. Who would want to do such a thing? That’s easy to figure out. Someone who wants to stack votes for a candidate of their choice could show up at granny’s polling place and vote as they choose – using her name as well as showing up other places and using others’ names. People who are not American citizens with the right to vote could walk in a polling place, use granny’s name and vote for the candidate of their choice. Even the legal granny could try to get away with voting where she lived two months ago and then later in the day where she lives now. Let’s be honest: without an ID required, there are more ways to cheat than there are candidates on the ballot – for sure.

Quite unbelievably, all you have to do at most voting places is walk in, claim you are so-and-so, and vote. Can you imagine what would happen to a business in this country if the owner of a business were required to trust his customers’ use of checks and credit cards in the same manner we trust people to vote honestly? The nation’s sign-in-and-vote process is a joke.

There are people who tend to cheat at any given opportunity – and politics tends to draw the criminal nature out of such people all the more. Don’t trust granny – card her!

Let’s keep people who vote for dead people, illegal aliens, pets, and persons who like to multi-cast their votes from voting illegally so that our nation has a better chance of conducting legal elections.

I’m not in favor of any legislation that suppresses voting via restrictions regarding the days and times of voting. If a persons’ polling place has changed, make it the law to inform the person as to where the new polling place is well in advance of Election Day. Qualified voters need to have total access to the voting process. Limiting the voting process in any way is just as wrong as not asking people to simply prove that they are who they say they are before casting their ballots.

To trust everyone who simply shows up to vote on Election Day and says “I’m so-and-so; give me a ballot” is ridiculously naïve and a flawed method of conducting an honest election. The results can be much too easily skewed to be unrepresentative of what the people want the election’s outcome to be. Choosing our national lawmakers is far too serious an endeavor to not take the extra effort to guarantee that each voter is the person he says he is.

If a Party has to cheat to win, they shouldn’t even bother entering the contest!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Since there's currently no general "card check" at the polls, there's no way to quantify this. But you guys like that. Gotta protect your right to rig elections.

So you've got nothing. That's what I thought.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Since there's currently no general "card check" at the polls, there's no way to quantify this. But you guys like that. Gotta protect your right to rig elections.

Your weak argument that "granny might not get to vote!" is neatly dealt with here:

Bow out with some dignity man.

[JohnR! 5,495]

And that proves what, exactly? How many people have committed in person voter fraud? Where have they committed that fraud? Where are the indictments?

It proves what everyone already knows that voter fraud is virtually non-existent other than in the minds of the TBs, who would rather chase rainbows than get to do the work for which they were elected.

[UncleBeer 244]

So you've got nothing. That's what I thought.

To the contrary: I've provided a mountain of links from which you've 'demurred'. Your choice, of course.

... in the minds of the TBs,

Please remind us all of what "TB"s are?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

To the contrary: I've provided a mountain of links from which you've 'demurred'. Your choice, of course.

You provided a mountain of links that contained ZERO evidence of any in person voter fraud actually having occurred. None. Nothing. Nada.

[JohnR! 5,495]

You provided a mountain of links that contained ZERO evidence of any in person voter fraud actually having occurred. None. Nothing. Nada.

You make it sound as though op-eds and blogs can't be considered factual...

[UncleBeer 244]

You make it sound as though op-eds and blogs can't be considered factual...

That simply shows that you didn't read any of the many, many news reports I posted.

Brag about your willful ignorance.

[Peikko 1,575]

If there is so much voter fraud that favors the Democrats, how did the House get to be majority Republican? Surely that couldn't happen if a significant number of elections are successfully rigged to favor the Democratic candidate.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

That simply shows that you didn't read any of the many, many news reports I posted.

Brag about your willful ignorance.

You do that kind of bragging so well no one would ever even consider trying to compete with you on that front. Fact is and has been that you haven't read these reports either or you haven't been able to discern from reading them that none contained any factual evidence of any in person voter fraud whatsoever.

If there is so much voter fraud that favors the Democrats, how did the House get to be majority Republican? Surely that couldn't happen if a significant number of elections are successfully rigged to favor the Democratic candidate.

Stop making sense, okay?

[UncleBeer 244]

If there is so much voter fraud that favors the Democrats, how did the House get to be majority Republican?

It's what's called an overwhelming majority. Guess the Dems couldn't rouse quite enough dead people.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It's what's called an overwhelming majority. Guess the Dems couldn't rouse quite enough dead people.

You are aware that the House majority represents a minority of the electorate, yes? In 2012, Democrats received 54.3 million votes for their candidates while Republicans scored 53.8 million for their candidates. The majority of the electorate voted for Democrats and yet Republicans have a rather comfortable majority of seats in the House. And that's not because of some imaginary overwhelming majority, it's because of gerrymandering. THAT is why you have a Republican House majority. It's the only reason you have that majority there. Sorry for confronting you with reality yet again.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Here's a nice demonstration of how North Carolina Republicans skew the election results by gerrymandering. They're a minority party yet they are sending 2/3 of the Congressional delegation to Washington. The will of the voter be damned.

North Carolina is a particularly illustrative case. A majority of the electorate voted for a Democratic House of Representatives candidate in 2012, yet its House delegation ended up having more than twice as many Republicans as Democrats:

How did this happen? Well, look at how North Carolina's districts were drawn:

Pay particular attention to the long, snakelike districts — the 12th, in pink, and the 4th, in purple. In defiance of geographic logic, these districts cut through most of the state and encompass multiple urban centers that aren't even close to each other. So a great deal of the state's Democratic-voting population is packed into these two districts.

North Carolina Republicans created three of these incredibly Democratic districts, but a larger number of districts where Republicans had a somewhat smaller advantage, as you can see below:

Much of the state's Democrats are crammed into those top three districts that Democrats won by 48 points or more. Then, there are nine districts that Republicans managed to win fairly comfortably (6-26 points). Finally, there is one true swing district at the bottom, that could have gone to either party.

This is a very successful partisan gerrymander: it managed to turn a Democratic-voting majority into a 9-4 Republican-dominated delegation.

http://www.vox.com/cards/gerrymandering-explained/how-does-gerrymandering-work

Edited April 15, 2014 by Mr. Big Dog

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Both sides use "voter fraud" to their advantage.There are very few isolated incidents of voter fraud, but it is not a large scale problem in the least bit. Republicans use voter fraud to rile up their base and get their people to the polls. The dems use the claims of voter fraud as an attack against the poor and an effort to keep them from voting. Fact is there are much more pressing problems to worry about, but both sides would rather keep everyone focused on non-existent problems like voter fraud rather than deal with reality.

and abortion, prayer in school, Fences on the border, handing out more and more entitlements, giving amnesty to illegals.

ALL BS designed to garner votes

Still showing an ID to vote should not be that big of a deal.