Quote from: Syt on October 23, 2016, 03:31:07 AM
(https://scontent-mad1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14657258_955426461257199_2325028284197540828_n.jpg?oh=b7dbd2c1825c8748e5d8e682615dd6a5&oe=588BE284)
They still don't get it, and they never will. :lol:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 07:06:02 AM
Quote from: Syt on October 23, 2016, 03:31:07 AM
Racist image?
They still don't get it, and they never will. :lol:
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
Not even that.
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
Quote from: garbon
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
I think there are more weighty reasons for that than your voter registration system.
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
You go and vote. You don't go and vote then get back in line to vote in someone else's name, or drive elsewhere to vote in someone else's name. That's pretty fucking stupid.
Of course, we don't ask for zee papers please and then put everybody in cattle cars either and send them to ovens, so YMMV.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:10:22 PM
Of course, we don't ask for zee paper's please and then put everybody in cattle cars either and send them to ovens, so YMMV.
No, you just declare people to be "savages", sign worthless treaties, take their land and children, hand them smallpox blankets and then finally put them in "special parts of the country" where they can drink themselves to death. But eventually you'll let them vote.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 02:12:51 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:10:22 PM
Of course, we don't ask for zee paper's please and then put everybody in cattle cars either and send them to ovens, so YMMV.
No, you just declare people to be "savages", sign worthless treaties, take their land and children, hand them smallpox blankets and then finally put them in "special parts of the country" where they can drink themselves to death. But eventually you'll let them vote.
I really don't see what bringing Canadians into the discussion has anything to do with this.
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
Quote from: garbon
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
I think there are more weighty reasons for that than your voter registration system.
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
I don't see why we need to reform our voter registration system (weren't we talking about actual voting)? I also don't see why we'd need to reform our voting system either.
Oh and as for a national ID? Even here in the United Kingdom of Please Watch All That I Do on CCTV, the populace wasn't having that.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:14:41 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 02:12:51 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:10:22 PM
Of course, we don't ask for zee paper's please and then put everybody in cattle cars either and send them to ovens, so YMMV.
No, you just declare people to be "savages", sign worthless treaties, take their land and children, hand them smallpox blankets and then finally put them in "special parts of the country" where they can drink themselves to death. But eventually you'll let them vote.
I really don't see what bringing Canadians into the discussion has anything to do with this.
Preach.
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
I think there are more weighty reasons for that than your voter registration system.
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
You lost me. Why is a national ID OK and the state one not?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:14:41 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 02:12:51 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:10:22 PM
Of course, we don't ask for zee paper's please and then put everybody in cattle cars either and send them to ovens, so YMMV.
No, you just declare people to be "savages", sign worthless treaties, take their land and children, hand them smallpox blankets and then finally put them in "special parts of the country" where they can drink themselves to death. But eventually you'll let them vote.
I really don't see what bringing Canadians into the discussion has anything to do with this.
:D
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
Not really, as it's exactly the same in the UK and I'd guess some other states to.
Quote from: garbon on October 23, 2016, 02:15:35 PM
Oh and as for a national ID? Even here in the United Kingdom of Please Watch All That I Do on CCTV, the populace wasn't having that.
That's because they're a bunch of weirdos. National ID is uncontroversial in most parts of the world.
Quote from: mongers on October 23, 2016, 02:28:27 PM
Not really, as it's exactly the same in the UK and I'd guess some other states to.
Yeah, but in the UK you probably also have to bring your sword and prove your patrilineal descent from William the Conqueror to vote.
Anyway, sufficient hijacking. Do we need an "OMG it's just two steps from National ID to death camps!!11" thread?
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 02:30:23 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 23, 2016, 02:28:27 PM
Not really, as it's exactly the same in the UK and I'd guess some other states to.
Yeah, but in the UK you probably also have to bring your sword and prove your patrilineal descent from William the Conqueror to vote.
Not really, but roughly 30% are still rotten boroughs.
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
I'm not sure why. We use the following system here in Canada, which has a bunch of different ID options, and as far as I know it is completely uncontroversial.
QuoteThere are three options to prove your identity and address
1) Show one of these pieces of ID
•your driver's licence
•your provincial or territorial ID card
•any other government card with your photo, name and current address
You can use ID with your mailing address if that address appears in your voter registration file. If you're not sure what address we have on file, check your voter registration.
or
2) Show two pieces of ID
At least one must have your current address
•health card
•Canadian passport
•birth certificate
•certificate of Canadian citizenship
•citizenship card
•social insurance number card
•Indian status card
•band membership card
•Métis card
•card issued by an Inuit local authority
•Canadian Forces identity card
•Veterans Affairs health card
•old age security card
•hospital card
•medical clinic card
•label on a prescription container
•identity bracelet issued by a hospital or long-term care facility
•blood donor card
•CNIB card
•credit card
•debit card
•employee card
•student identity card
•public transportation card
•library card
•liquor identity card
•parolee card
•firearms licence
•licence or card issued for fishing, trapping or hunting
•utility bill (e.g. electricity; water; telecommunications services including telephone, cable or satellite)
•bank statement
•credit union statement
•credit card statement
•personal cheque
•government statement of benefits
•government cheque or cheque stub
•pension plan statement
•residential lease or sub-lease
•mortgage contract or statement
•income tax assessment
•property tax assessment or evaluation
•vehicle ownership
•insurance certificate, policy or statement
•correspondence issued by a school, college or university
•letter from a public curator, public guardian or public trustee
•targeted revision form from Elections Canada to residents of long-term care facilities
•letter of confirmation of residence from a First Nations band or reserve or an Inuit local authority
•letter of confirmation of residence, letter of stay, admission form or statement of benefits from one of the following designated establishments: ◦student residence
◦seniors' residence
◦long-term care facility
◦shelter
◦soup kitchen
We accept e-statements and e-invoices. Print them or show them on a mobile device.
OR
3) If your ID does not have your current address, take an oath
Show two pieces of ID with your name and have someone who knows you attest to your address. This person must show proof of identity and address, be registered in the same polling division, and attest for only one person.
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=index&lang=e
Quote from: Malthus on October 23, 2016, 02:38:42 PM
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
I'm not sure why. We use the following system here in Canada, which has a bunch of different ID options, and as far as I know it is completely uncontroversial.
Despite attempts by Republican leadership and the RoTW to make it so, voting with no ID is completely uncontroversial in the US.
Quote from: garbon on October 23, 2016, 03:01:56 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 23, 2016, 02:38:42 PM
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
I'm not sure why. We use the following system here in Canada, which has a bunch of different ID options, and as far as I know it is completely uncontroversial.
Despite attempts by Republican leadership and the RoTW to make it so, voting with no ID is completely uncontroversial in the US.
Given that apparently something like 40% of the US population doubts the legitimacy of the voting process (because they have been actively stirred up to do so by the Trump types), I'm finding that "completely uncontroversial" bit a trifle hard to believe.
I generally hate Republican hijinks as much as anyone.
However, I can't see how a requirement for having
some sort of voter ID is "disenfranchisement" in the US, when it apparently does not have that effect anywhere else.
The Canadian example shows a reasonable halfway house, as it has various options specifically to accommodate anyone who may have problems with picture ID.
Is there any actual reason why the options described above can't work, or insisting on them would "disenfranchise" any group of voters in the US?
I get that it is gross to give in to shit-stirrers who have whipped up a "problem" of voter fraud that does not actually exist, but it seems to me one reasonable option is to adopt a system of voter ID - if only to cut the feet under the shit stirrers. As long as the system doesn't actually "disenfranchise" people, of course.
Quote from: Malthus on October 23, 2016, 04:40:30 PM
Given that apparently something like 40% of the US population doubts the legitimacy of the voting process (because they have been actively stirred up to do so by the Trump types), I'm finding that "completely uncontroversial" bit a trifle hard to believe.
Okay, I'll grant you it is controversial at the moment.
Quote from: Malthus on October 23, 2016, 04:40:30 PM
I get that it is gross to give in to shit-stirrers who have whipped up a "problem" of voter fraud that does not actually exist, but it seems to me one reasonable option is to adopt a system of voter ID - if only to cut the feet under the shit stirrers. As long as the system doesn't actually "disenfranchise" people, of course.
Seems like an additional pointless layer of bureaucracy to be figured out by all states to solve a non-issue. I'd rather my gov't not waste time trying to get people in line for that so that some folks are a little less butt hurt that the old timey, racist values that they love so much are going into the dustbin of history.
I'd agree with you that coming up with some scheme doesn't seem intrinsically bad, but placed in the context of American history and the decentralized fashion in which elections are run? Nope.
I'm not totally convinced voter fraud is a non-issue. The principle piece of evidence used to support that claim is that the states which have conducted studies of the issue (Ohio is the one I remember) said the number of documented fraud cases were negligible, and by negligible I mean tiny. But AFAICT, states don't have any systematic means of going back and checking whether a person who voted was who they claimed to be. My suspicion is states just reported the cases that managed to get caught by our very porous system. It has been bruited (and no one has attempted to refute) that there are 10 million dead people still on voter registers. Was the old Chicago joke about voting early and voting often completely without any basis in fact?
If I were to try and game the system, I think it wouldn't be that hard. Find out the name and last known address of a dead person, then go to a poll and claim to be that person. Or even easier, apply for an absentee ballot in that person's name. You could do the same thing with people who are registered but you know just can't be arsed to vote. Also, AFAIK, there is no systematic check for citizenship at time of registration.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:09:25 PM
I'm not totally convinced voter fraud is a non-issue. The principle piece of evidence used to support that claim is that the states which have conducted studies of the issue (Ohio is the one I remember) said the number of documented fraud cases were negligible, and by negligible I mean tiny. But AFAICT, states don't have any systematic means of going back and checking whether a person who voted was who they claimed to be. My suspicion is states just reported the cases that managed to get caught by our very porous system. It has been bruited (and no one has attempted to refute) that there are 10 million dead people still on voter registers. Was the old Chicago joke about voting early and voting often completely without any basis in fact?
If I were to try and game the system, I think it wouldn't be that hard. Find out the name and last known address of a dead person, then go to a poll and claim to be that person. Or even easier, apply for an absentee ballot in that person's name. You could do the same thing with people who are registered but you know just can't be arsed to vote. Also, AFAIK, there is no systematic check for citizenship at time of registration.
´
But you would have to organize it to get an effect from it and that's where the difficulties come in I guess.
Quote from: Liep on October 23, 2016, 05:12:09 PM
But you would have to organize it to get an effect from it and that's where the difficulties come in I guess.
All you would need are some precinct captains who know people who don't mind cheating.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:09:25 PM
I'm not totally convinced voter fraud is a non-issue. The principle piece of evidence used to support that claim is that the states which have conducted studies of the issue (Ohio is the one I remember) said the number of documented fraud cases were negligible, and by negligible I mean tiny. But AFAICT, states don't have any systematic means of going back and checking whether a person who voted was who they claimed to be. My suspicion is states just reported the cases that managed to get caught by our very porous system. It has been bruited (and no one has attempted to refute) that there are 10 million dead people still on voter registers. Was the old Chicago joke about voting early and voting often completely without any basis in fact?
If I were to try and game the system, I think it wouldn't be that hard. Find out the name and last known address of a dead person, then go to a poll and claim to be that person. Or even easier, apply for an absentee ballot in that person's name. You could do the same thing with people who are registered but you know just can't be arsed to vote. Also, AFAIK, there is no systematic check for citizenship at time of registration.
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 23, 2016, 02:10:22 PM
Of course, we don't ask for zee papers please and then put everybody in cattle cars either and send them to ovens, so YMMV.
Let's not gloat prematurely.
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:18:16 PM
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
I don't think we have any system in place that would catch 1%.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:22:04 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:18:16 PM
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
I don't think we have any system in place that would catch 1%.
Sure we have. You go and vote for the dead guy. Given that the fraud is so widespread as to affect elections, someone else could've already voted for your dead guy. So at that point you're kinda caught.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:22:04 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:18:16 PM
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
I don't think we have any system in place that would catch 1%.
I just described the system.
You claim that people go and vote for people they are not - what happens when that person actually then goes and votes?
The system in place would certainly catch those - unless you have faith that the system of voting for other people is so perfect that nobody ever accidently votes for someone they are not who then actually goes and tries to vote.
You have an extraordinary claim - that you KNOW that there is a system of voting fraud that is 99.9% successful - it is so incredibly good that nobody EVER catches anyone doing it.
You provide zero evidence though - this is a textbook case of the demand to prove a negative. You create a hypothesis that there is a way of voting illegally that is 99%+ foolproof, and the evidence that it is so is that nobody has caught anyone. Even though doing so is self evidently trivial.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:09:25 PM
I'm not totally convinced voter fraud is a non-issue. The principle piece of evidence used to support that claim is that the states which have conducted studies of the issue (Ohio is the one I remember) said the number of documented fraud cases were negligible, and by negligible I mean tiny. But AFAICT, states don't have any systematic means of going back and checking whether a person who voted was who they claimed to be. My suspicion is states just reported the cases that managed to get caught by our very porous system. It has been bruited (and no one has attempted to refute) that there are 10 million dead people still on voter registers. Was the old Chicago joke about voting early and voting often completely without any basis in fact?
If I were to try and game the system, I think it wouldn't be that hard. Find out the name and last known address of a dead person, then go to a poll and claim to be that person. Or even easier, apply for an absentee ballot in that person's name. You could do the same thing with people who are registered but you know just can't be arsed to vote. Also, AFAIK, there is no systematic check for citizenship at time of registration.
From where do you get the 10 million dead voters? Trump quoted a much lower number of 1.8 million.
Not driving is unamerican.
Have the states that implemented ant-fraud laws actually caught a larger number of people trying to fraudulently vote?
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:55:18 PM
I just described the system.
You claim that people go and vote for people they are not - what happens when that person actually then goes and votes?
The system in place would certainly catch those - unless you have faith that the system of voting for other people is so perfect that nobody ever accidently votes for someone they are not who then actually goes and tries to vote.
You have an extraordinary claim - that you KNOW that there is a system of voting fraud that is 99.9% successful - it is so incredibly good that nobody EVER catches anyone doing it.
You provide zero evidence though - this is a textbook case of the demand to prove a negative. You create a hypothesis that there is a way of voting illegally that is 99%+ foolproof, and the evidence that it is so is that nobody has caught anyone. Even though doing so is self evidently trivial.
You described a result, not a system. "1% of cheaters get caught" is not a system.
I made no claim about the frequency of voting fraud. The claim I made is that it would be relatively easy to do.
I'd be okay with voter ID laws if they came in a package, along with minimum standards for voting precinct capacity, absentee ballots, early voting, and audit trail. If you're going to improve the election process, do it wholesale, rather than do parts that selectively target black people and fail to do other parts which coincidentally also targets black people. We certainly could use some legitimate improvements to the voting process.
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:55:18 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:22:04 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:18:16 PM
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
I don't think we have any system in place that would catch 1%.
I just described the system.
You claim that people go and vote for people they are not - what happens when that person actually then goes and votes?
That's why you vote in the name of a dead person, and you coordinate it with others, so that 2 people don't try to vote in the name of the same dead person. Or you just fraudulently register in the name of a person who doesn't actually exist (and requiring ID wouldn't necessarily catch this trick, because you could probably get fake ID with that name on it).
There's definitely voter fraud that goes on. I don't know to what degree, and I'm reasonably certain that the extent of fraud varies from place to place around the country. My sense is that showing up at the polls and voting in someone else's name is a very small part of it, though.
Quote from: dps on October 23, 2016, 08:17:25 PM
That's why you vote in the name of a dead person, and you coordinate it with others, so that 2 people don't try to vote in the name of the same dead person. Or you just fraudulently register in the name of a person who doesn't actually exist (and requiring ID wouldn't necessarily catch this trick, because you could probably get fake ID with that name on it).
Seems like on awful lot of organization is required. And yet no one ever busts such conspiracy rings. They must run very deep, deep enough to keep FBI off their backs.
The Elder's of Zion strike again! If you weren't so secular DG, you could get in on this.
Quote from: dps on October 23, 2016, 08:17:25 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:55:18 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:22:04 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:18:16 PM
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
I don't think we have any system in place that would catch 1%.
I just described the system.
You claim that people go and vote for people they are not - what happens when that person actually then goes and votes?
That's why you vote in the name of a dead person, and you coordinate it with others, so that 2 people don't try to vote in the name of the same dead person. Or you just fraudulently register in the name of a person who doesn't actually exist (and requiring ID wouldn't necessarily catch this trick, because you could probably get fake ID with that name on it).
There's definitely voter fraud that goes on. I don't know to what degree, and I'm reasonably certain that the extent of fraud varies from place to place around the country. My sense is that showing up at the polls and voting in someone else's name is a very small part of it, though.
Of course that is your sense, because I just pointed out that if it happened to any signifcant degree, even with a very high success rate, we would have ample evidence that it was occuring.
Your "sense" of what voter fraud is happening, along with Yi's (although his sense apparently adjusts based on his hypothesis being shot down), seems to be completely based on what you can imagine might happen that could not be proven.
You might as well say you sense that there is rampant voter fraud by space aliens changing the voting totals with undetectable cosmic rays.
:lol: Just a matter of time.
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 10:41:04 PM
Quote from: dps on October 23, 2016, 08:17:25 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:55:18 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:22:04 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 23, 2016, 05:18:16 PM
But if people did that, then in fact there WOULD be lots of evidence of voter fraud.
If you had, say, 1,000,000 people go and vote in someone elses name, and that was 99% successful, we would see 10,000 cases of people showing up to the polls to vote only to find that someone had already voted for them.
Which would clearly raise a rather serious alarm - something is not right!
If you had a million people case ballots in dead people names, and in only 1% if those cases did someone notice, we would have massive numbers of cases, in the thousands and thousands, of people investigating clearly illegal voting activity.
Instead what we see is like 100 odd cases, and when investigated 98 of them are completely explainable (dead guy voted before dieing, mistaken identity, etc., etc.).
I don't think we have any system in place that would catch 1%.
I just described the system.
You claim that people go and vote for people they are not - what happens when that person actually then goes and votes?
That's why you vote in the name of a dead person, and you coordinate it with others, so that 2 people don't try to vote in the name of the same dead person. Or you just fraudulently register in the name of a person who doesn't actually exist (and requiring ID wouldn't necessarily catch this trick, because you could probably get fake ID with that name on it).
There's definitely voter fraud that goes on. I don't know to what degree, and I'm reasonably certain that the extent of fraud varies from place to place around the country. My sense is that showing up at the polls and voting in someone else's name is a very small part of it, though.
Of course that is your sense, because I just pointed out that if it happened to any signifcant degree, even with a very high success rate, we would have ample evidence that it was occuring.
Your "sense" of what voter fraud is happening, along with Yi's (although his sense apparently adjusts based on his hypothesis being shot down), seems to be completely based on what you can imagine might happen that could not be proven.
You might as well say you sense that there is rampant voter fraud by space aliens changing the voting totals with undetectable cosmic rays.
I think you're missing my point. What I'm saying is that while voting fraud no doubt goes on, someone actually showing up at a polling place and voting in someone else's name
doesn't happen to any significant degree. In other words, I agree with you that it's not really a problem
My "sense" of what actually goes on is that a lot of voting fraud that does happen (or maybe I should say what used to happen) is just plain old-fashioned ballot stuffing. Just put an extra 50 or however many ballots marked for your candidate in the ballot box without having anyone physically show up to cast those ballots. You don't have to get nearly as many people involved. As I said, that's how it used to happen; with paper ballots largely a thing of the past, you can't quite do it that way anymore, I suppose, but I'm sure someone somewhere has figured out a way to do it electronically (which might be even harder to detect and probably takes even fewer people).
Quote from: dps on October 23, 2016, 11:53:47 PM
I think you're missing my point. What I'm saying is that while voting fraud no doubt goes on, someone actually showing up at a polling place and voting in someone else's name doesn't happen to any significant degree. In other words, I agree with you that it's not really a problem
My "sense" of what actually goes on is that a lot of voting fraud that does happen (or maybe I should say what used to happen) is just plain old-fashioned ballot stuffing. Just put an extra 50 or however many ballots marked for your candidate in the ballot box without having anyone physically show up to cast those ballots. You don't have to get nearly as many people involved. As I said, that's how it used to happen; with paper ballots largely a thing of the past, you can't quite do it that way anymore, I suppose, but I'm sure someone somewhere has figured out a way to do it electronically (which might be even harder to detect and probably takes even fewer people).
Ballot stuffing would be hard to pull off. You need to match up total ballots cast with the same number of signed affidavits.
Quote from: garbon on October 23, 2016, 01:41:22 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
No wonder the Secret Masters have entrusted you with running the world - they would pick the country where election fraud is the easiest. :yes:
Quote from: garbon on October 23, 2016, 01:41:22 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
Ok? Did that make you feel good little buddy? :console:
Quote from: Zoupa on October 24, 2016, 06:14:13 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 23, 2016, 01:41:22 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
Ok? Did that make you feel good little buddy? :console:
Oh you here to talk about your one insignificant country after another?
I guess my thinking on this is have every new voters registration be a photo ID and just grandfather the old ones in for awhile until eventually everybody is moved over. That would solve the issue without being overly burdensome I would think.
Quote from: Valmy on October 24, 2016, 08:02:31 PM
I guess my thinking on this is have every new voters registration be a photo ID and just grandfather the old ones in for awhile until eventually everybody is moved over. That would solve the issue without being overly burdensome I would think.
I would think this would create equal protection issues.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Maybe it is because of the PFD, but Alaska that isn't the case to my knowledge.
QuoteWhen entering your polling place, the election worker will ask you for a piece of identification. The following documents may be used for identification:
voter ID card, driver's license, state ID card, or military ID card;
passport, hunting or fishing license; or
other current or valid photo identification.
You may also present one of the following forms of identification if it includes your name and current address:
current utility bill or pay check;
government check or bank statement; or
other government issued document.
Quote from: garbon on October 24, 2016, 06:27:21 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 24, 2016, 06:14:13 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 23, 2016, 01:41:22 PM
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 23, 2016, 01:35:19 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 01:33:57 PM
Quote from: Zoupa on October 23, 2016, 11:45:59 AM
What do you need to bring to vote in the US? The voter thingie you get in the mail?
It operates on the honor system, basically. You give them your name and address, and if it matches a name and address on the voter register, and someone at the poll doesn't know that's not you, you can vote.
Utterly baffling from the perspective of the rest of the world.
And that's why the rest of you get a puny little portion and we run the game with the whole lot.
Ok? Did that make you feel good little buddy? :console:
Oh you here to talk about your one insignificant country after another?
Actually I was talking about yours in this thread, because I'm curious about other countries and not an insecure faggot.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2016, 08:05:06 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 24, 2016, 08:02:31 PM
I guess my thinking on this is have every new voters registration be a photo ID and just grandfather the old ones in for awhile until eventually everybody is moved over. That would solve the issue without being overly burdensome I would think.
I would think this would create equal protection issues.
Would it? It would be the exact same document as before just with a photo on it.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 23, 2016, 05:15:48 PM
Quote from: Liep on October 23, 2016, 05:12:09 PM
But you would have to organize it to get an effect from it and that's where the difficulties come in I guess.
All you would need are some precinct captains who know people who don't mind cheating.
how do you organize this to have a material impact without the plan getting revealed?
Quote from: LaCroix on October 24, 2016, 10:26:06 PM
how do you organize this to have a material impact without the plan getting revealed?
I don't.
He doesn't.
All you need to justify racial vote suppression is a fig leaf of plausibility. It doesn't need to actually hold up to thought or reason, since people who are in favor of racially driven voter suppression are generally neither thoughtful or reasonable.
It all falls apart very quickly once you put a modicum of objective analysis into the issue.
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
They don't need a national ID program, the States are running the election process. All they need is a state wide ID for all states. Even in Canada, we don't have a well administered national ID program, we have id papers from our provinces that we use for all elections. Passport can work too, but that's not really for internal use, so I wouldn't count it as national ID.
The States do issue IDs, they are just difficult to get for some people and cost money. Hence the problem.
Quote from: viper37 on October 25, 2016, 08:13:26 AM
Quote from: Jacob on October 23, 2016, 02:06:14 PM
Bottom line, I think, is for the US to reform the voter registration system fairly it would need a well administered national ID program of some sort. If that's not in place then any call for ID to vote basically boils down to partisan attempts at voter disenfranchisement.
They don't need a national ID program, the States are running the election process. All they need is a state wide ID for all states. Even in Canada, we don't have a well administered national ID program, we have id papers from our provinces that we use for all elections. Passport can work too, but that's not really for internal use, so I wouldn't count it as national ID.
There are state IDs but you have to pay for them.
edit: V beat me! :hug:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 24, 2016, 10:41:07 PM
Quote from: LaCroix on October 24, 2016, 10:26:06 PM
how do you organize this to have a material impact without the plan getting revealed?
I don't.
I don't believe in "strike as unresponsive" because experts have argued that looks weak in front of a jury :P
The election could be rigged (http://www.zdnet.com/article/in-battleground-pennsylvania-claims-of-a-rigged-election-may-be-impossible-to-disprove/)
In some dozen states, the electronic voting machine leave no paper trail, nothing to audit. So if a participant claims there is voter's fraud, in say Pennsylvania, it will be impossible to prove or disprove the fraud.
QuoteIn 58 of the state's 67 counties, including those comprising its two largest cities -- Philadelphia and Pittsburgh -- once a vote is cast, it exists only in electronic format. That means if the election is close -- and Clinton fails to sweep the state by a landslide margin -- Trump's claim that the system is "rigged" will be virtually impossible to disprove.
There have been a number of accusations of fraud in previous elections - 1960 in particular. Anyone know off hand what the GOP accused Daley/LBJ of having actually done?
Quote from: viper37 on October 25, 2016, 08:34:59 AM
The election could be rigged (http://www.zdnet.com/article/in-battleground-pennsylvania-claims-of-a-rigged-election-may-be-impossible-to-disprove/)
In some dozen states, the electronic voting machine leave no paper trail, nothing to audit. So if a participant claims there is voter's fraud, in say Pennsylvania, it will be impossible to prove or disprove the fraud.
QuoteIn 58 of the state's 67 counties, including those comprising its two largest cities -- Philadelphia and Pittsburgh -- once a vote is cast, it exists only in electronic format. That means if the election is close -- and Clinton fails to sweep the state by a landslide margin -- Trump's claim that the system is "rigged" will be virtually impossible to disprove.
This was all brought up before with the 2004 election--how Diebold paperless voting machines could be fucked with using Microsoft Access on YouTube, just when the President and CEO of Diebold promised at an RNC fundraiser to "deliver Ohio" for Bush.
But all that was blown off as ZOMG URAPARANOID LEFTY crazy talk. Nobody gave a shit then, nobody should be giving a shit now. So I don't want to hear a single goddamned motherfucking thing about rigged fucking elections.
Quote from: LaCroix on October 25, 2016, 08:19:21 AM
I don't believe in "strike as unresponsive" because experts have argued that looks weak in front of a jury :P
Are conspiracies invariably revealed once they reach a certain size? Or does some percentage of conspiracies always reveal themselves?
Material can mean as little as 2,000 votes, the difference in Florida in 2000.
Yi, is there any particular reason to think there is this conspiracy to commit voter fraud?
Quote from: Valmy on October 25, 2016, 08:15:34 AM
The States do issue IDs, they are just difficult to get for some people and cost money. Hence the problem.
What's the level of difficulty and cost point?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:03:06 PM
Yi, is there any particular reason to think there is this conspiracy to commit voter fraud?
My original position was that I am not as confident as some other posters that the volume of voting fraud is negligible. I already mentioned as my reasons ease, historical precedent, and a lack of a systematic detection protocol. Motive I think is self-evident.
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:17:24 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 25, 2016, 08:15:34 AM
The States do issue IDs, they are just difficult to get for some people and cost money. Hence the problem.
What's the level of difficulty and cost point?
:rolleyes:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 25, 2016, 05:20:22 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:03:06 PM
Yi, is there any particular reason to think there is this conspiracy to commit voter fraud?
My original position was that I am not as confident as some other posters that the volume of voting fraud is negligible. I already mentioned as my reasons ease, historical precedent, and a lack of a systematic detection protocol. Motive I think is self-evident.
Your historical precedent was as you said "the old Chicago joke". You also quoted a number of dead people on the voter rolls without backing it up when questioned.
Your demonstrated "ease" of committing fraud seems rather difficult to do in practice. Besides the significant amount of research that is required, the government has some mechanism to remove dead voters from the roles, so presumably the speculative fraud ring would sometimes cast invalid ballots that would be investigated resulting in the fraudsters being discovered.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:38:49 PM
Your historical precedent was as you said "the old Chicago joke". You also quoted a number of dead people on the voter rolls without backing it up when questioned.
Your demonstrated "ease" of committing fraud seems rather difficult to do in practice. Besides the significant amount of research that is required, the government has some mechanism to remove dead voters from the roles, so presumably the speculative fraud ring would sometimes cast invalid ballots that would be investigated resulting in the fraudsters being discovered.
So why did you ask me for my reasons again when you already knew them?
Quote from: Hamilcar on October 25, 2016, 05:17:24 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 25, 2016, 08:15:34 AM
The States do issue IDs, they are just difficult to get for some people and cost money. Hence the problem.
What's the level of difficulty and cost point?
Cost is relatively small but you have to realize we have a very ugly history of poll taxes being used as a form of racial vote suppression so it looks really bad to tie that to voting rights.
The level of difficulty can be insurmountable to some people depending upon when and where they were born. Or it could be no problem at all. That is another issue.
Incidentally I've been without photo ID for over a year, I lost my driving license; today I found it in a box of old vinyl. :)
Did I miss or need it during that time, no. And I voted in the general election and referendum. :cool:
Quote from: mongers on October 25, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
Incidentally I've been without photo ID for over a year, I lost my driving license; today I found it in a box of old vinyl. :)
Did I miss or need it during that time, no. And I voted in the general election and referendum. :cool:
I would be screwed without an ID when grocery store cards me. Also, not flying for a year? Yuck.
garbon's on the So Fly List.
Quote from: garbon on October 25, 2016, 06:51:48 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 25, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
Incidentally I've been without photo ID for over a year, I lost my driving license; today I found it in a box of old vinyl. :)
Did I miss or need it during that time, no. And I voted in the general election and referendum. :cool:
I would be screwed without an ID when grocery store cards me. Also, not flying for a year? Yuck.
Still pertending you only look 19-20 I see. :P
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 25, 2016, 03:15:46 PMAre conspiracies invariably revealed once they reach a certain size? Or does some percentage of conspiracies always reveal themselves?
Material can mean as little as 2,000 votes, the difference in Florida in 2000.
especially in the modern era with social media, wikileaks-type organizations, etc.? yes, I'd say all conspiracies are revealed once they reach a certain size.
"material" is way more than 2,000, because the fact 2,000 happened to be enough to swing a state in one election doesn't mean, realistically, it's enough to swing a state in other elections.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 25, 2016, 05:40:29 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 25, 2016, 05:38:49 PM
Your historical precedent was as you said "the old Chicago joke". You also quoted a number of dead people on the voter rolls without backing it up when questioned.
Your demonstrated "ease" of committing fraud seems rather difficult to do in practice. Besides the significant amount of research that is required, the government has some mechanism to remove dead voters from the roles, so presumably the speculative fraud ring would sometimes cast invalid ballots that would be investigated resulting in the fraudsters being discovered.
So why did you ask me for my reasons again when you already knew them?
I thought maybe they got better, or you had a source for the 10 million dead voters on the rolls.
I think the reason dead voters was more prevalent back in the day is because it was much easier to do without getting caught. these days, there's way more flows of information than fifty years ago. that shit is just harder to pull off now without people talking about it. I don't think people got moral about rigging elections. it's just harder to make it work to the same extent. (and, to be fair to raz, 10 million dead voters does seem like a pretty unrealistic number even in the 1800s/way early 1900s. that's like 10-20% of the US population.)
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 25, 2016, 10:34:58 AM
Quote from: viper37 on October 25, 2016, 08:34:59 AM
The election could be rigged (http://www.zdnet.com/article/in-battleground-pennsylvania-claims-of-a-rigged-election-may-be-impossible-to-disprove/)
In some dozen states, the electronic voting machine leave no paper trail, nothing to audit. So if a participant claims there is voter's fraud, in say Pennsylvania, it will be impossible to prove or disprove the fraud.
QuoteIn 58 of the state's 67 counties, including those comprising its two largest cities -- Philadelphia and Pittsburgh -- once a vote is cast, it exists only in electronic format. That means if the election is close -- and Clinton fails to sweep the state by a landslide margin -- Trump's claim that the system is "rigged" will be virtually impossible to disprove.
This was all brought up before with the 2004 election--how Diebold paperless voting machines could be fucked with using Microsoft Access on YouTube, just when the President and CEO of Diebold promised at an RNC fundraiser to "deliver Ohio" for Bush.
But all that was blown off as ZOMG URAPARANOID LEFTY crazy talk. Nobody gave a shit then, nobody should be giving a shit now. So I don't want to hear a single goddamned motherfucking thing about rigged fucking elections.
the article is not about the possibility of fraud. They do say it's very improbable there would be a fraud on these machines. What they say is, if someone claims there's a fraud, because a candidate won by a narrow margin, there is no way to prove or disprove the fraud. And that could get messy with a bunch of die hard Trumpers.
Quote from: mongers on October 25, 2016, 07:28:57 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 25, 2016, 06:51:48 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 25, 2016, 06:37:08 PM
Incidentally I've been without photo ID for over a year, I lost my driving license; today I found it in a box of old vinyl. :)
Did I miss or need it during that time, no. And I voted in the general election and referendum. :cool:
I would be screwed without an ID when grocery store cards me. Also, not flying for a year? Yuck.
Still pertending you only look 19-20 I see. :P
I definitely don't asked to be carded and nor do I think I look under 25. Maybe it is a gimmick here to try and make people feel better?
I was in my early 30s when I lived in the US, and I got carded all the time. It was quite puzzling tbf.
I still get carded, and I am in my 40s now.
There are plenty of places who simply card everyone, no matter what.
Quote from: Berkut on October 26, 2016, 01:22:58 PM
There are plenty of places who simply card everyone, no matter what.
Not in Sweden. :)
Quote from: Eddie Teach on October 25, 2016, 09:24:19 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on October 25, 2016, 06:52:20 PM
garbon's on the So Fly List.
With Mono.
I was thinking about it and I think I've flown somewhere at least once most of years of my life from the age of 10. When my family moved to Mass when I was 10, that started up our yearly pilgrimage to California. And while I attended college in California, I know I went home for summer in '04 then lived in Chicago in '06*. Looked at maybe '05 or '08 as years I might not have flown (as was in SF and couldn't think of trips) but in both instances I visited my immediately family on the East Coast.
So yeah, no time in the last two decades without at least one plane flight per year (and I recall at least 4 separate years before 10 where I flew on a plane).
*10 years since I saw Meri and Max! :o
Quote from: LaCroix on October 25, 2016, 07:50:06 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 25, 2016, 03:15:46 PMAre conspiracies invariably revealed once they reach a certain size? Or does some percentage of conspiracies always reveal themselves?
Material can mean as little as 2,000 votes, the difference in Florida in 2000.
especially in the modern era with social media, wikileaks-type organizations, etc.? yes, I'd say all conspiracies are revealed once they reach a certain size.
"material" is way more than 2,000, because the fact 2,000 happened to be enough to swing a state in one election doesn't mean, realistically, it's enough to swing a state in other elections.
The thing is, you don't need 2000 conspirators to get 2000 fraudulent votes. I'd say half a dozen to a dozen people who actually know the voting system in use in a particular state could probably fabricate considerably more votes than that under the right circumstances.
I guess I should point out that a lot of what I know about voting fraud I told off the record by people who were involved in election campaigns in WV back in the late 70s and 80s. And during that time, WV was still basically a 1-party Democratic state, where the real election was the primary. Ballot stuffing in a general election would have been a bit dicey, because by law both major parties had voting officials in each polling place. But since officials from one party weren't observing voting in the other party's primary, ballot stuffing in a primary election would have relatively easy to pull off.