Hillary Clinton lies...

[Scratchtown]

I'm curious about how many lefties are still just gunna vote left because its their party...regardless of who their worthless candidate is. They like to say that the GOP voters only vote GOP because it's anti left, but c'mon quit trying to bolster yourselves as some kind of purist. It's annoying and honestly makes you ridiculous.

 

At least own up to it, instead of taking the left's "educated, free spirit, humanitarian" lie of a motto.

 

If I had a nickle every time I heard a lib say they are "educated" and thats why they vote the way they do, I'd retire at 28 years old.

 

Both parties are garbage, and it's about damn time people start realizing that neither one of these candidates are going to further the progress of the country. It's just going to make the rift wider once all this is over. Not that the vote actually matters. Voter fraud is rampant. Ridiculously.

[Lil' Red]

Not that the vote actually matters. Voter fraud is rampant. Ridiculously.

What evidence do you have of voter fraud?

[Lil' Red]

Double post

[Scratchtown]

 

Not that the vote actually matters. Voter fraud is rampant. Ridiculously.

What evidence do you have of voter fraud?

 

I suppose these guys were paid off because foxnews has an agenda....correct?

 

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5093055134001/eric-shawn-reports-shocking-election-fraud-cases/?#sp=show-clips

 

 

[huskerfan2000]

 

Not that the vote actually matters. Voter fraud is rampant. Ridiculously.

What evidence do you have of voter fraud?

 

 

 

 

[knapplc]

You are more likely to be struck by lightning than find in-person voter fraud.

 

Seriously. Enough with the boondoggle about voter fraud. It's so uncommon it's laughable.

[huskerfan2000]

You are more likely to be struck by lightning than find in-person voter fraud.

 

Seriously. Enough with the boondoggle about voter fraud. It's so uncommon it's laughable.

 

So are comments like these.. The comment comes from New Jersey Democrat Cory Booker..

[BigRedBuster]

I always get frustrated about the voter fraud issue. Yes, there have been very few cases prosecuted of voter fraud. However, there is very little in the way of system to catch it also. If I knew someone died in my district, I could walk in and vote on their ballot easily.

 

It's like taking all the police off the streets and then claiming no drivers speed. Well....none have been caught so there must not be any speeding.

 

So, do I know fraud is happening on the high level. No....but how would I know if it is happening?

[knapplc]

The analysis comes from Politifact.

 

 

Booker said, "You're more likely to get struck by lightning in Texas" than to find in-person voter fraud.

 

Since 2002, there have been a total of 85 election fraud prosecutions, not all of which have resulted in conviction. Only a small number of those cases -- four or possibly fewer -- included allegations of in-person voter fraud, also called voter impersonation. Those are the kinds of cases the voter ID law in Texas is aimed at preventing, and Booker is right that they have been less frequent than lightning strikes. Overall, we rate his statement True.

 

[knapplc]

I always get frustrated about the voter fraud issue. Yes, there have been very few cases prosecuted of voter fraud. However, there is very little in the way of system to catch it also. If I knew someone died in my district, I could walk in and vote on their ballot easily.

 

It's like taking all the police off the streets and then claiming no drivers speed. Well....none have been caught so there must not be any speeding.

 

So, do I know fraud is happening on the high level. No....but how would I know if it is happening?

 

 

You know if it's happening because people investigate it.

 

 

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/nation/2016/08/23/investigation-finds-little-evidence-voter-fraud-key-voter-id-states/89210620/

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/09/7-papers-4-government-inquiries-2-news-investigations-and-1-court-ruling-proving-voter-fraud-is-mostly-a-myth/

 

http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/2016-Voting-Rights-Report-FOR-WEB.pdf

 

 

But no investigations have found even statistically significant levels of voter fraud.

 

That's why the "struck by lightning" analogy is so apt.

[BigRedBuster]

Minnite goes on to distinguish between election fraud — which includes fraud perpetrated by other parties involved in elections, such as advocacy groups or election officials — and voter fraud, which is a subset of election fraud committed specifically by voters.

Booker’s press secretary said he was referring only to in-person voter fraud, or voter impersonation, which is the type targeted by voter ID laws, and given the full context of Booker’s comments, that makes sense. Looking at the kind of fraud that voter ID laws aim to prevent excludes certain categories of fraud, such as those involving absentee ballots.

 

So, his analysis is only about people actually walking into the voting place and committing fraud. It does not include absentee ballots or other possible types of election fraud.

[zoogs]

Good stuff, from knapp.

I like that word, boondoggle. You have to be able to tell when there's a 'there' there. In the never-ending season of political spectacle, everything gets hyped up as this huge thing. Sometimes because it is a huge thing. Often because it's just easy pickings as something that sounds bad enough to sway people.

Voter fraud is clearly the latter. We all know what the purpose of these initiatives is. It's been admitted a couple of times.

[BigRedBuster]

 

I always get frustrated about the voter fraud issue. Yes, there have been very few cases prosecuted of voter fraud. However, there is very little in the way of system to catch it also. If I knew someone died in my district, I could walk in and vote on their ballot easily.

 

It's like taking all the police off the streets and then claiming no drivers speed. Well....none have been caught so there must not be any speeding.

 

So, do I know fraud is happening on the high level. No....but how would I know if it is happening?

 

 

You know if it's happening because people investigate it.

 

 

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/nation/2016/08/23/investigation-finds-little-evidence-voter-fraud-key-voter-id-states/89210620/

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/09/7-papers-4-government-inquiries-2-news-investigations-and-1-court-ruling-proving-voter-fraud-is-mostly-a-myth/

 

http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/2016-Voting-Rights-Report-FOR-WEB.pdf

 

 

But no investigations have found even statistically significant levels of voter fraud.

 

That's why the "struck by lightning" analogy is so apt.

 

Serious question.

 

How do they catch them if they are committing it?

[knapplc]

Yes, the "voter fraud" thing is actually thinly-veiled voter suppression. It's nefarious in intent, and has nothing at all to do with stopping some nonexistent "fraud."

[BigRedBuster]

To be clear, I am not claiming it's a significant issue or that I know it's affected elections.

 

I just don't understand how they catch people in voter fraud if it is even being committed. So, the first article Knapp posted claims there were 2,068 alleged cases of in person voter fraud with very few of those being prosecuted. How did those 2,068 cases come to be? How did someone suspect someone was voting illegally?

Also, how is it maintained through absentee ballots like what was discussed in Foxnews video? Are those cases being prosecuted? If not, then isn't that a case where there were people voting illegally without it showing up in the statistics?

 

It's a little bit like the whole issue with Trump claiming Syrian refugees are going to flood our country with no back ground checks and their all going to be terrorists in hiding. Meanwhile, a little education will show that the refugees actually go through about a two year process of back ground checks before they ever get into our country.

Well....if there is a process to make sure there isn't vote fraud, maybe that needs to be communicated to the public so the discussion can be squashed.