Need to do a better job at ensuring proper people can vote

#1
These mid term elections are extremely close to call, which makes it even more necessary to ensure that the people who are voting are legally supposed to be casting a ballot, regardless of candidate you are voting for. Ohio 12th is a prime example of where the vote is very close and automatically triggers a recount. However in the Ohio 12th race apparently 170 votes were cast by people who were at least 116 years old. The problem with that is the oldest recorded person living is 115 and they live in Japan. This could very well be a mistake when filling out voter registration cards or whatever, but it should be cleaned up ASAP, or the votes need to be thrown out.

Scores Of Registered Voters Over 116 Years Old Found In Ohio’s 12th District, Report Claims
 
#2
These mid term elections are extremely close to call, which makes it even more necessary to ensure that the people who are voting are legally supposed to be casting a ballot, regardless of candidate you are voting for. Ohio 12th is a prime example of where the vote is very close and automatically triggers a recount. However in the Ohio 12th race apparently 170 votes were cast by people who were at least 116 years old. The problem with that is the oldest recorded person living is 115 and they live in Japan. This could very well be a mistake when filling out voter registration cards or whatever, but it should be cleaned up ASAP, or the votes need to be thrown out.

Scores Of Registered Voters Over 116 Years Old Found In Ohio’s 12th District, Report Claims
Report: Trump commission did not find widespread voter fraud
 
#3
I never said it was wide spread voter fraud.. But the example I stated above could be the difference between the outcome of an election. Same in Kansas where the result is too close to call. In Frisco, on a non voting year, if you get 3000 people to vote for a candidate or proposition, it would pass with ease. Think about that 3000 people out of a city of 155,000 is all you need to get things done.
 
#4
Yep, agree. Don’t care which way the outcome goes - if there are obvious discrepancies or abnormalities in voting it should be investigated thoroughly. If the 116+ y/o status true then I think that warrants a closer look.

You don’t need to hack machines or change votes to alter an election outcome.
 
#5
The right wingers must be getting scared if they are already trying to delegitimize the November election.
The report comes from the Government Accountability Institute, one of its directors is Steve Bannon.

Just because the Ohio district has poor record keeping practices and 116 year old voters are still on the voter rolls, that does not mean people are voting using those registrations. Although the Steve Bannon propaganda wants you to think that’s happening.

I agree all election systems should be cleaned up in every district. We should have good oversight as well.

HOWEVER, the reality is that you don’t flip elections illegally “at” the ballot box one illegal vote at a time, you do that by stealing the ballot box, or hacking the electronic ballot box. These reports are misleading, no investigation has found individual voter fraud in significant numbers... anywhere in the US.

Even Trump’s team of Election Investigation people, some of whom said it was a massive waste of time and money, found nothing like Trump was claiming.
 
Last edited:
#6
If you read the article it isn't that voters are still on the voter role, they had 170 votes cast in Ohio by people who are 116 or older. This could be the difference between the Republican candidate winning and the Democratic candidate winning because the election is that close.
 
#9
If you read the article it isn't that voters are still on the voter role, they had 170 votes cast in Ohio by people who are 116 or older. This could be the difference between the Republican candidate winning and the Democratic candidate winning because the election is that close.
Sorry, that is not what It says... that’s what Steve Bannon and Eric Eggers want to mislead you into thinking.

It says that there are 170 registered voters...”on the voter rolls” not 170 votes cast by 116 year old voters. BIG DIFFERENCE!

I bet there is not one district in the US that does not have dead people on the voter roles. That does not mean that someone is voting for them. It does make great BS propaganda though.

Here is the actual text from your link...
Eric Eggers, the research director at the Government Accountability Institute (GAI), reports that GAI accessed voter rolls in Ohio’s 12th Congressional District last August and found "170 registered voters listed as being over 116 years old [that] still existed on the [voter] rolls."
 
Last edited:
#10
Sorry, that is not what It says... that’s what Steve Bannon and Eric Eggers want to mislead you into thinking.

It says that there are 170 registered voters...”on the voter rolls” not 170 votes cast by 116 year old voters. BIG DIFFERENCE!

I bet there is not one district in the US that does not have dead people on the voter roles. That does not mean that someone is voting for them. It does make great BS propaganda though.

Here is the actual text from your link...
Good call out Mac, no issue in the Ohio 12th district with improper cast votes.
 
#11
It only matters if dead people are on the voter rolls if someone tries to impersonate that dead person at the polls. Everything else is just administrative issues that we should probably be better at handling but that is very low priority because occurrences of in-person voter fraud are so rare that it's not worth all the time and effort to go through all the trouble.

Conflating voter rolls with actual votes cast is a cynical way to confuse people into supporting voter suppression efforts like purging, caging, and voter ID.
 
#13
It

Conflating voter rolls with actual votes cast is a cynical way to confuse people into supporting voter suppression efforts like purging, caging, and voter ID.
Still haven't heard a decent explanation as to why having ID to vote is bad but virtually every other governmental function requires you to present identification. Could you help us understand why having an ID to vote is a bad thing? Isn't the potential for fraud rampant without asking for identification?

ETA: "Purging and Caging" sounds like something we shouldn't discuss in mixed company Lil W. What kind of websites do you go to in your free time?
 
#14
Still haven't heard a decent explanation as to why having ID to vote is bad but virtually every other governmental function requires you to present identification.
Still haven't heard a decent explanation as to why people without a photo ID suddenly need to jump through a bunch of hoops to get one solely for the purpose of exercising their Constitutional rights.

No one has been able to explain to me why we need to pass laws to address a problem (in-person voter fraud) that for all intents and purposes does not exist, especially when those laws create an undue burden on American citizens who simply want to make their voices heard.

"Purging and Caging" sounds like something we shouldn't discuss in mixed company Lil W. What kind of websites do you go to in your free time?
Har har. Disenfranchising Americans is hilarious!
 
#15
Still haven't heard a decent explanation as to why people without a photo ID suddenly need to jump through a bunch of hoops to get one solely for the purpose of exercising their Constitutional rights.

No one has been able to explain to me why we need to pass laws to address a problem (in-person voter fraud) that for all intents and purposes does not exist, especially when those laws create an undue burden on American citizens who simply want to make their voices heard.


Har har. Disenfranchising Americans is hilarious!
It takes the same amount of effort that all their neighbors go to to get an ID. Stop lying.

The burden is not undue. It is standard operating procedure day in and day out. Stop lying.
 
#16
I support photo ID to vote. What’s the problem? I don’t think it would change much of anything in the polls and the GOP would finally stfu about it. Of course then there would be an investigation into widespread fake photo ID use....

And the wheel would keep on turning. But we have to keep giving politicians hyperbole to distract from real issues, right? We owe it to them.
 
#17
It takes the same amount of effort that all their neighbors go to to get an ID. Stop lying.
If you don't have a photo ID already, what do you think that means? It means you don't have a driver's license. What does that mean? It means you don't have a car. If you don't have a car, what does that mean? It takes a whole lot more effort to get your photo ID.

This is such transparent bull💩 that it amazes me anyone continues to play stupid about what these bills are really about.

Texas has no driver's license offices in almost a third of the state's counties. Meanwhile, close to 15 percent of Hispanic Texans living in counties without driver's license offices don't have ID. A little less than a quarter of driver's license offices have extended hours, which would make it tough for many working voters to find a place and time to acquire the IDs. Despite this, the Texas legislature struck an amendment that would have reimbursed low-income voters for travel expenses when going to apply for a voter ID, and killed another that would have required offices to remain open until 7:00 p.m. or later on just one weekday, and four or more hours at least two weekends.
We know for a fact that these laws place burdens on low income and minority voters that do not apply to others (read: oblivious middle to upper class voters like TCM who either don't understand or pretend not to understand what it's like to be poor and/or rely on public transportation). We know for a fact that they claim to address a problem that simply does not exist.

The only logical conclusion is the one the courts have come to time and time again. The laws aren't designed to prevent in-person voter fraud. They're designed to prevent certain kinds of people from voting.

If they actually cared about in-person voter fraud they'd be doing everything they could to ensure that every qualified voter got an ID. Instead, they fight tooth and nail against any amendments that would ease the burden on those most impacted.

And again, you've offered no explanation for why we need these laws. In-person voter fraud doesn't exist in any meaningful capacity, so what problem are you trying to solve?

I support photo ID to vote. What’s the problem?
The problem is it's a solution to a problem that barely exists and the completely intentional "side effect" is the disenfranchisement of American voters.
 
#18
I don’t have a problem with a photo ID but I do have a problem with passing a photo iD requirement a couple of months before an election. If all states want a photo ID by November 1, 2020 that’s not a bad idea, it gives people two years to get an ID.

People can form a nonprofit organization to help folks without an ID to get one. No big deal.
Problem solved. These are not difficult problems.
 
#19
And again, you've offered no explanation for why we need these laws. In-person voter fraud doesn't exist in any meaningful capacity, so what problem are you trying to solve?


The problem is it's a solution to a problem that barely exists and the completely intentional "side effect" is the disenfranchisement of American voters.
Way to play the class warfare game, I'm impressed!!!

Here's the explanation but you won't listen. Any voter fraud is bad. It can change an election. The simplest way to do that is to claim to be someone your not and vote for them. This only happens when no ID is required.

Now go post your little crybaby response but all your doing is lying to us again Wedgie.
 
#20
Way to play the class warfare game, I'm impressed!!!
Forcing poor people to undergo an undue and unequal burden to cast their votes is class warfare. You still can't even acknowledge that you don't understand the basic burdens of transportation that affect poor people, so your argument remains flawed to its core.

Here's the explanation but you won't listen. Any voter fraud is bad. It can change an election. The simplest way to do that is to claim to be someone your not and vote for them. This only happens when no ID is required.
Then why do Republicans do everything they can to make it harder for certain people to get that ID? If the objective was to combat in-person voter fraud then they should be working extra hard to get those IDs in the hands of as many people as possible.

Instead they're doing the equivalent of taking the handicap ramp out of every polling place. Meanwhile, people like you stand by and say everyone still has equal access, and if people in wheelchairs really want to vote they can drag themselves up the stairs. After all, if it's so important to them why shouldn't they accept this burden?