If I Ignore It, It Doesn't Exist

[Scat]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...back-john-fund

Critics of voter ID and other laws cracking down on voter fraud claim they’re unnecessary because fraud is nonexistent.

According to county documents, Richardson’s absentee ballot was accepted on Nov. 1, 2012 along with her signature. On Nov. 11, she told an official she also voted at a precinct because she was afraid her absentee ballot would not be counted in time.

“There’s absolutely no intent on my part to commit voter fraud,” said Richardson. . . .

The board’s documents also state that Richardson was allegedly disruptive and hid things from other poll workers on Election Day after another female worker reported she was intimidated by Richardson. . . .

During the investigation it was also discovered that her granddaughter, India Richardson, who was a first time voter in the 2012 election, cast two ballots in November.

This is one person in a moderately sized city. If you extrapolate this across the country I suspect that voter fraud is much more common than Democrats want to admit.

[One Brow]

Critics of voter ID and other laws cracking down on voter fraud claim they’re unnecessary because fraud is nonexistent.

Negligible, not non-existant.

Proven voter fraud, statistically, happens about as often as death by lightning strike.

People still die by lightning strike.

So, you support proposals that would disenfranchise thousands in Cincinnati, because of fewer than 20 votes, and pretend it's about integrity?

[Hartsock]

I'm sure it exists, I'm also sure it doesnt affect anything

[Stoked]

Negligible, not non-existant.



People still die by lightning strike.

So, you support proposals that would disenfranchise thousands in Cincinnati, because of fewer than 20 votes, and pretend it's about integrity?

That has already been addressed repeatedly. Hollow arguement.

[candrew]

John Fund is a douchebag. He's put so much time and effort in this voter fraud ******** that he'll be singing this tune until Rush Limbaugh needs another book ghost written by him.

[Scat]

So, you support proposals that would disenfranchise thousands in Cincinnati, because of fewer than 20 votes, and pretend it's about integrity?

Are they really being disenfranchised if they have already voted?

[One Brow]

That has already been addressed repeatedly. Hollow arguement.

Addressed, but answered. The reality is that, at the time of voting, many people will be denied the right to vote, no matter how many precautions are taken. The reality is that this is a feature, not a bug.

[babe]

Negligible, not non-existant.



People still die by lightning strike.

So, you support proposals that would disenfranchise thousands in Cincinnati, because of fewer than 20 votes, and pretend it's about integrity?

Well, Mr. Evidence, what facts support your "negligible" estimate?

"proven voter fraud" is one thing. . . . voter fraud is another thing entirely. Are you saying if it's not proven, it hasn't happened? But wait. . . . lightning strikes always make the six o'clock news cycle, or the ten o'clock on a statewid basis, and the statistics are I believe compiled by the coroners' offices around the country, and incorporated in the statistical reports insurance underwriters keep as well. Who's doing that with "proven voter fraud" cases?

I'm pretty sure that proven voter fraud is at least a thousand times the lightning strike deaths. So stop already with the feel-good propaganda, and just remember Brower County, Florida in the year 2000, OK? Can't you at least remember what you said about that?

And the unknown, or unproven rate of voter fraud is I suspect about a thousand times the discovered fraud, because in fact both major parties have agreed to not make it an issue, at least in the last election. There is no mainstream media project to out whatever fraud there is, and no party efforts either.

So, basically, you're saying that millions of gun owners shouldn't be disenfranchised because a neglible number of our millions of kids' right to life is compromised by some random shooter nutjobs. . . . OK, looks like we're making real "progress" here. . . .

I think voter fraud shoud require mandatory jail time, of a minimum of five years. Because unlesss we're just going to be a bunch of warlord packs running around defending our civil rights at gunpoint, we need an absolutely sacred right to vote, and any kind of fraud that impacts the meaning of our votes is on the same level as murder one. well, maybe at least grand theft.

If it's the vote counters who do the fraud, I say death penalty. That's equivalent to terrorism at least.

[babe]

Addressed, but answered. The reality is that, at the time of voting, many people will be denied the right to vote, no matter how many precautions are taken. The reality is that this is a feature, not a bug.

So how about a fixed "Registration Day", or "Registration Month", where anyone who will be allowed to vote must appear with specified documents supporting citizenship. . . . birth record, naturalization papers,. . . . . to secure a place in the voter registration rolls, and a driver's license type pic card with a unique number bar coded on, like a credit card, which can only be used once on election day, and which must be scanned with the absentee ballot application. . . .. pretty sure we have the technology to make sure nobody can vote who isn't eligible, and nobody can vote twice. . . .

citizenship has a minimum entry level bar. . . . you have to care enough to do something. . . . or you forfeit your "right" to vote.

and then if the local honchos find some way to prevent you from voting when you have followed the requirement, make it a very serious criminal offense on the part of officials who conspire to deny voter rights.

[One Brow]

Well, Mr. Evidence, what facts support your "negligible" estimate?

You mean, prove that fraud which has never been discovered doesn't exist? What's a method of proof you would accept?

Who's doing that with "proven voter fraud" cases?

Criminal databases. Voter fraud is a crime in every jurisdiction, to my knowledge.

I'm pretty sure that proven voter fraud is at least a thousand times the lightning strike deaths. So stop already with the feel-good propaganda, and just remember Brower County, Florida in the year 2000, OK? Can't you at least remember what you said about that?

I don't recall anything that relates to voter ID.

So, basically, you're saying that millions of gun owners shouldn't be disenfranchised because a neglible number of our millions of kids' right to life is compromised by some random shooter nutjobs. . . . OK, looks like we're making real "progress" here. . . .

I have not argued in favor of removing their rights, but only for finding way to reduce the bullets wile preserving their rights. So, "progress" in the sense that Straw One Brow is now closer to One Brow, sure.

... and any kind of fraud that impacts the meaning of our votes is on the same level as murder one. well, maybe at least grand theft.

There would be a lot of dead Republican operatives.

[One Brow]

..., where anyone who will be allowed to vote must appear with specified documents supporting citizenship. . . . birth record, naturalization papers,

Because you so consistently call for more government oversight and control, right? Because if you can't locate your papers, or were sick that day, or just don't have a television and/or radio so you didn't know about registration day, you don't deserve to vote?

[Stoked]

Because you so consistently call for more government oversight and control, right? Because if you can't locate your papers, or were sick that day, or just don't have a television and/or radio so you didn't know about registration day, you don't deserve to vote?

I have to say that the bolded part is pretty narrow minded of you One Brow. Don't be petty. T hat is how that comes across.

Arguing against government control in one area does not mean we are against all government control. There are areas where government control is very much the right approach.

[SaltyDawg]

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...back-john-fund





This is one person in a moderately sized city. If you extrapolate this across the country I suspect that voter fraud is much more common than Democrats want to admit.

Voter id would have prevented this? How?

This is the problem with voter id, it disenfranchises lots of people, and doesn't even solve the "problem" it's supposedly meant to solve.

[One Brow]

I have to say that the bolded part is pretty narrow minded of you One Brow. Don't be petty. T hat is how that comes across.

Arguing against government control in one area does not mean we are against all government control. There are areas where government control is very much the right approach.

I try to treat everyone as an individual. I don't recall babe, specifically, calling for more government control in any other area of life.

[Stoked]

I try to treat everyone as an individual. I don't recall babe, specifically, calling for more government control in any other area of life.

So that makes you an expert on his positions? It came off petty, that's all I am saying.