Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Wild Hoss]

Trump call Hilary the devil:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...clinton-226544

Dat woman, she da Debil!

[Mike]

Yeeeeah. Not exactly invoking images of W, atop a pile of rubble with his arm around a FDNY Chief.

That was a proud moment. Presidenting at it's finest.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Thanks much Mike. The WaPo wouldn't let me read the article since I had used up my "free" reads for July.

As I suspected, the 14 number was the number referred for prosecution. The total number of persons registered in multiple states was around 5,000,000. That makes more sense. 5.95% of the 84,000,000 are registered in duplicate states. Of course, this does not count persons registered in multiple precincts in a single state. I've seen the number of 7% used for this type of fraud. Of course, this does not include other types of fraud such as single registrations for dead persons, and non-citizen voting. The number I've seen most often has been 10% of votes actually cast being fraudulent. I understand the "nothing here, let's move on" rhetoric, but 10% fraud is a large number, and it flows overwhelmingly toward the Democrat party. Terry McAluife (sp) pardoning 200,000 felons the week after the VA legislature recessed. That's just another method of the party of big government violating the law in order to remain in power.

Where do you get your evidence that 10% of all votes actually cast are fraudulent?

[froot loops]

It's rigged man. A liberal conspiracy

[CGVT]

It might be rigged. I'm not saying it is, but that's what people are writing. I don't know, but people say it's rigged. I don't know. You tell me. You decide.

[WingsFan]

[Ghengis Jon]

How many duplicates are accidental? For 2 election cycles, my area had me down on the voter rolls twice. First time it was "which street do you live on?" I replied both, and get rid of the old adress. The poll worker scratched off both names and made a note. The next cycle when I voted, I watched the worker look up my name, and sure enough it appeared twice. Again, I told them which one was correct (I had moved from village to township) and asked to have the other one scratched. Since then, I'm only listed once.

My point is, it occasionally happens. So what? The vast, vast majority of data shows voter fraud is exceedingly rare. Sure, groups with an agenda manufacture studies that show zero or massive fraud, but the legit ones show it is an insignificant amount. I read somewhere that there have been 7 cases of voter fraud prosecuted in the last 35 years. Nationwide. Its not an issue. The days of Tammany Hall are over. If Mike and a few of his friends each get a couple hundred votes, he might affect a dog catcher election but not a Presidential one. Its a non-issue. I think the bigger (insignificant) problem would be the buying of votes, not having multiple votes.

I don't like voter ID laws for comfort reasons. I live in a very rural area. I like being able to walk into my polling station and have a 50% chance of knowing the poll worker. Even if I don't know them, I like telling them my name without ID and be handed my ballot with a smile. Thats the America I love. Trust not suspicion, acceptance not rejection. To be forced to provide ID to combat a non-existant problem is repellent. I do not use my driver's license because I don't want the barcode to be swiped. I don't sign the form because they do not need yet another signature from me. I hand them my CPL, they check off my name and to the booth I go. But that I have to show any ID is ridiculous. Not checking has worked just fine for over 200 years. To create such a law that's sole purpose is to disenfranchise your political party's oppponent's voters is unAmerican. Its absolutely appalling that those types of laws get any support.

[Mike]

Well said, Jon. It's actually easier to buy an assault rifle than it is to vote in much of this country. Only one of the two requires registration and identification - and it's to vote.

[Dr. Strangelove]

This could change but as of right now, Trump has caused Utah to become a swing state

http://kutv.com/news/local/utah-could-vote-democrat-for-president-for-first-time-in-50-years

[iam416]

You don't need ID to buy assault rifles in the US? And I'd consider a background check pretty much "registration" -- a confirmation that you're able to buy the gun.

At least here in Columbus voting couldn't be easier. I show up, present one of numerous acceptable forms of ID and vote. If I show up early, I can be done in 5 minutes. So, buying an "assault" rifle must be SUPER EASY.

[Mike]

It is. In most states there is no background check for long guns. It's like buying a sack of groceries. No registration either.

[iam416]

When I was lived in Cleveland, I was registered to vote by groups/persons other than myself under 5 separate names. John Doe. Jon Doe. Jon Dooe. John Dow. And then my real registration. The registrations were for my work address. I'm fairly certain I could have voted 5 times absentee.

I really don't get the problem with providing some sort of identification to vote. Especially when combined with the remarkably awesome early voter laws and "absentee" ballots that allow you to vote from home even if you aren't going to be absentee.

Also, having read the 4th Circuit opinion, it's clear that no southern state can ever impose any voting restriction that will have a disparate impact on voter turnout. You have a long history of being racist and this law has a disparate impact -- you MUST have racial animus (a requirement to overturn a neutral law). I actually had to look at the judges after reading the opinion -- and, heh, wasn't surprised.

[iam416]

It is. In most states there is no background check for long guns. It's like buying a sack of groceries. No registration either.

Uh, there's a background check required for every sale from a licensed gun dealer, which account for the significant majority of gun sales in the US. So, that necessarily involves presenting an ID of some sort and a background check.

[Mike]

For long guns?

[iam416]

The Federal requirement doesn't seem to discriminate. It's all guns. I mean, it's FBI's background check system or whatever, so I guess it takes 30-60 seconds.

I'll confess -- I'm not particularly learned on this subject as I haven't bought a gun nor am I plotting ways to get through "loopholes." But if history has taught us anything it's that the interwebs is definitive.