unintended consequences

[Roosveltrepub]

I have been reading James O' Keefe may be in legal trouble again for his stunt in New Hampshire trying to prove rampant voter fraud and the need for strict ID laws. Honestly, if it was really happening in any signifigance then after 5 yrs as a doj priority 5 yrs and the vast resouces invested we would of had more than 38 prosecutions nationwide. I understand the fear is real but after 5 years it was found to be nearly nonexistent. To combat the near non existent problem we are spending millions on stricter id laws in courts and election costs. That's all fine one mans voter suppression tactic is another man's answer to a problem they honestly believe exists despite evidence to the contrary. I understand a lot of false registrations are found and tossed but those arent actual votes. Seems the actual proven instances of unlawful suppression dwarf the fraud problem Voter suppression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Either way whether you honestly believe it is a serious concern or not I do find it ironic O'keefe in his zeal to prove the need for tougher ID laws may end up having the probation he was given for bugging a U. S. Senator's office revoked and as a felon loose the right to vote in many states. because of his conspiracy to secure ballots unlawfully in New hampshire


Myself, I have a hard time believing it's really not about driving down democrat votes in places like SC when the absentee ballot requirements which increase republican total votes is left unchanged despite far more proven irregularities with absentee voting when compared to in person voting


Reguardless whether you believe it is a serious problem despite the lack of evidence I'd hope you all agree after the ridiculous edited pimp tape, the bugging of a Senator and the sex toys and the CNN anchor and an admitted conspiracy to violate state and federal voting laws O' Keefe deserves a chance to expose the federal prison system from the inside

[Gun Grape]

We almost see this eye to eye. I do believe it was and is a big waste of money. There really isn't enough voter fraud to skew the elections like some thought. But I also see no reason not to require some form of ID at the polling place. I must have ID while driving. I have to show ID to get on a military base. I have to show it to use base facilities ,PX, Commissary, Club, Gym (yea right). I have to show a photo ID to get in a bar or club. The list is very long of places you have to show a photo ID at. Why not the polling place?

I don't see it as a way to suppress the poor vote. It wouldn't take much, at least in my state, to issue photo voter registration cards. And they should be issued at no charge. And those are only needed if the person does not already have a State/Federal ID card. Florida already requires ID at the polling place. And there hasn't been a big outcry about suppressing the vote.

[dalem]

I find it quite telling that the only ones upset about the idea of making it harder for non-voters to vote are the liberals. That means it's a problem worth solving.

-dale

[Roosveltrepub]

I find it quite telling that the only ones upset about the idea of making it harder for non-voters to vote are the liberals. That means it's a problem worth solving.

-dale

Actually that doesnt bother me in the least because it isnt happening now. Spending taxes on a make believe issue is a waste of money. Do you have some evidence that the DOJ missed when it spent 5 yrs making uncovering voter fraud a high priority and found 38 cases out of what a billion cast votes or so. fraud has a severe punishment for a reason and the punishment works well to prevent it.


I assume you would agree O'keefe deserves the full weight of the law for his conspiracy to obtain ballots under false pretenses especially in light of his already being on probation for bugging a Senator's offices? Honestly if there was a shred of real evidence fraud was an issue I would feel differently but the complete failure to uncover fraud despite tremendous efforts just highlights how unneeded the changes were.

[Guest]

I find it quite telling that the only ones upset about the idea of making it harder for non-voters to vote are the liberals. That means it's a problem worth solving.

There really isn't enough voter fraud to skew the elections like some thought. But I also see no reason not to require some form of ID at the polling place.

There were enough college students who were Wisconsin residents who cast votes in the Coleman-Franken race to decide the election for Franken.

I saw a multitude of groups, as many as ten, with no IDs, no utility bills, who voted vouched for by one verifiable MN resident.

They were attending local colleges, but under MN residency laws were non-residents.

I would not classify it as voter fraud per say, but most of the thousands of out-of-state college students voting for Franken were not MN residents under the criteria set forth under MN residency laws. Not by a long shot.

[Doktor]

It is really fascinating for me you guys need Photo ID to get in a bar, but not for electing the most powerful (wo)man on Earth.
Or I am getting something wrong?

BTW all your citizens able to vote should already have Photo ID card - a driving license.

Is there any federal law that at any time a LEO should be able to make you a positive identification?

[Guest]

Is there any federal law that at any time a LEO should be able to make you a positive identification?

No, but if they have reasonable suspicion you can be detained until your identity is verified.

[Roosveltrepub]

It is really fascinating for me you guys need Photo ID to get in a bar, but not for electing the most powerful (wo)man on Earth.
Or I am getting something wrong?

BTW all your citizens able to vote should already have Photo ID card - a driving license.

Is there any federal law that at any time a LEO should be able to make you a positive identification?

the punishment for fraud is really harsh. Although if the IDs were widely available and free like having them available locally to all it would still be an unneeded additional cost but the idea it was a suppression effort would be bs. Intially Georgia was going to set up the closest available id center 75 miles from traditionally democrat Atlanta the largest city. It's hard to believe a republican state goverment that attempted to do that wasnt interested in suppressing some opposition voters. People get hit by lightning more often than voter fraud is committed here

[looking4NSFS]

Ballot fraud trial starts today - Crime Confidential - Capital Region cops and courts - timesunion.com - Albany NY

nothing to see here.

[Roosveltrepub]

Ballot fraud trial starts today - Crime Confidential - Capital Region cops and courts - timesunion.com - Albany NY

nothing to see here.

actually if you scroll back one of the reasonspeople charge voter id isnt really about fraud is the failure to address absentee balloring which actually does have evidence of fraud. Thanks for bringing that up

[Roosveltrepub]

The Iowa debacle has left a real stink in my nose. First mitt winning by 8 votes is a tie then votes and precincts are lost forever and 2 weeks later Santorum winning by 34 votes is called a tie by the republican party. It really leaves a stench like maybe it was close and their was a push by the republican party apparatus to benefit the establishment candidate. the fact they refuse to label it a santorum victory when offically he has more votes when they labeled it a Romney one after unoffical results and that the caucus is not run by the actual state but by the party itself stinks of a weighted caucus that benfitted the preferred establishment candidate. Considering how drastically the false results impacted the race and benefitted the establishment candidate over the candidate who won. It meant huge sums of money and a claim of inevietability in NH primary. Basically, that broken caucus could be the determing factor rather than voter sentiment in the eventual nominee. The potential impact of that ill run caucus probably will have far more effect on the presidential election in Nov than a few dozen bad votes. I can't get over how no one is dragging the party over the coals for calling it a tie after the offical results contrasted against the entusiastic call for Romney the night of the Caucuses. the contradiction in language and entusiam when the state party leader reported leaves no doubt of a strong bias toward one candidate at the expense of others