Voter fraud is a myth

I dont see how any adult besides the homeless can function without ID and it's probably hard on them, even.

 

A few? In Georgia, alone, 300,000 voters were purged.

There is no fraud, and the studies prove it.

There is no fraud because fraudsters are motivated by profit, and there is no profit in voter fraud.

There is voter suppression, because, for republicans, the long range benefits make it easier for them to say in power.

 

You cannot prove there was no fraud without violating freedom of privacy.

 

Voters are purged all the time! People move and need to be purged from the voter roles. Redistricting (gerrymandering) is required by law so stop making that out to be a problem.

 

I"ve posted a number of studies employing a variety of methods.

Before you stick your foot in your mouth, which you have just done, you should review a few of them.

 

You can't do it because it is impossible without violating the first amendment. I don't care how studies you have or how many variety of methods. You have to know who voted and how they voted to absolutely determine voter fraud. You cannot get that information without violating their right to privacy and secret ballots.

 

Did anybody read that OP?

Jeeze….try and be a little briefer next time buddy...

 

Correction. 300,000 names were purged.

 

since one cannot delete human beings in a purge, yours is a distinction without a difference. You know what I meant.

There are voters behind those names, believe it or not.

 

Are you claiming that each and every one of them was a legal voter?

 

Open borders
Sanctuary cities
Give illegals a driver's license and register them to vote while they're at it
Fight like hell to prevent a voter ID card

Even Stevie Wonder can see through that one.

 

Oh, I dunno, I'll bet the vast majority of them are. voter impersonation hardly exists as a problem.

 

It was my understanding they were clearing the rolls of people who were deceased, felons and who had moved out of state. If you do not do that periodically, you are inviting voter fraud.

 

Well, if you can refute the following studies and court opinions derived from studies and plaintiffs unable ot prove fraud, all of which prove that fraud is not a problem that needs solving as there is no where near enough fraud the affect the outcome of an election, you are welcome to do it..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...le-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/
https://votingrights.news21.com/article/election-fraud/
https://votingwars.news21.com/voter-fraud-is-not-a-persistent-problem/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ts-cast-in-the-2016-election-were-fraudulent/
http://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/Politics_of_Voter_Fraud_Final.pdf
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/elj.2013.0231
https://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665966.pdf
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/10/29/the-voter-fraud-myth
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/facpubs/2165/
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/analysis-noncitizen-voting-vanishingly-rare
Court opinion: “only two convictions for in-person voter impersonation fraud out of 20
million votes cast in the decade” before Texas passed its law.
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/2016.07.20_En Banc Opinion.pdf
Court opinion: “failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing inperson voter fraud in North Carolina.”
http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf
Court opinion: “that impersonation fraud — the type of fraud that voter ID is designed to prevent — is extremely
rare” and “a truly isolated phenomenon that has not posed a significant threat to the integrity of
Wisconsin’s elections.”
https://www.aclu.org/legal-document...=legal-document/frank-v-walker-motion-granted
Supreme Court opinion: “contains no evidence of any [in-person voter impersonation] fraud actually
occurring in Indiana at any time in its history.” They upheld, but later, after the ruling, they stated they regretted their ruling.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-21.ZO.html

 

If I was going to design a voting system that invites fraud, I would use the democrat's model. Don't purge the voter rolls so that there are a lot of names to use and then don't require voter ID so that anyone can use one of those names.

 

I have already refuted them. You can't absolutely identify voter fraud without violating the first amendment. You would have to know who voted and how they voted. Anything else, is just guessing.

 

Because state governments blue and red absolutely refused cooperate and without cooperation from state governments there was no data to search.

 

Like I said, it is not necessary to refute them. You cannot absolutely determine voter fraud without knowing who voted and how they voted and that violates the first amendment. Otherwise, they are just guessing.

All the studies in the world would not prevent me from picking a name of a deceased person and walk into the polling place and identify myself as that person and cast my vote. And it would be undetectable unless someone recognized me.

 

Voter fraud: Not a myth to the millions disenfranchised/purged by Democrats

 

I backed up my claims. You have not.

 

Oh, it's detectable, there are discrepancies. You have to register, and there are a number of controls to insure the integrity of the process. All ballots are 'signature matched', with the one on the ballot and the one on the registration.

Apparently you do not know much about this subject.

Such a case happened in Texas, and a guy is in jail.

Specious logic. What *you* or anyone, could do, IF you could do it ( and get away with it, which I doubt ) doesn't refute what has been done. It has happened, but it is rare.

Moreover, anecdotal evidence doesn't refute the massive studies done on the subject.

Incompetent rebuttal. You have not supported your claim, although I have mine.

 

You haven't, all you accomplished is an assortment of incompetent rebuttals.

I'll file yours in the ' wishful thinking and unknowledgeable on the subject ' file.

 

All states purge their rolls. The issue is, are they doing it fairly? That's the issue.

The studies prove you are wrong, and you haven't even looked.

Therefore, one more incompetent rebuttal.

 

If we had a bunch of signature experts running the polls, that might be true, but a vague resemblance is generally enough. Certainly that would be true for my signature.

But you have not proven me wrong.

 

But the fact they purged 300,000 names is meaningless. The only thing is meaningful is how many were purged which should not have been purged. I have not seen that number.