OT: Election Fraud

Presidential elections are
extremely important. Voting for a
president is serious business.
Everyone knows that.

Is there some special rule that
stops only Democrats from getting an ID?

Stealing elections through fraud does not
take a many illegitimate votes.
Ultimately, the 2000 election of
president Bush was decided by 537
individual votes. So how much voter fraud
does it take for it to be a problem?


--
"'Personal responsibility' there addressess [sic] people who feel a personal
responsibility to help others... "
- The Dictionary According to Beldin

"~M~" <~M~@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:S5WdnQHmLa5Pi17TnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@giganews.com...
Presidential elections are
extremely important. Voting for a
president is serious business.
Everyone knows that.

Is there some special rule that
stops only Democrats from getting an ID?


The argument is, they are poorer, and more likely to have difficulty
obtaining one, or possibly be afraid of the issuing agencies.

Yeah. it's mostly bullshit

Stealing elections through fraud does not
take a many illegitimate votes.
Ultimately, the 2000 election of
president Bush was decided by 537
individual votes. So how much voter fraud
does it take for it to be a problem?
That statement, too, is bullshit.

GENERALLY elections in the various states are nowhere near that close. The
margin of error counting is usually many thousands of votes



--
"'Personal responsibility' there addressess [sic] people who feel a
personal responsibility to help others... "
- The Dictionary According to Beldin

M fails reading comprehension as usual, by taking a comment out of context
(as usual)

On Nov 15 2011 5:50 PM, ~M~ wrote:

Presidential elections are
extremely important. Voting for a
president is serious business.
Everyone knows that.

Is there some special rule that
stops only Democrats from getting an ID?

Stealing elections through fraud does not
take a many illegitimate votes.
Ultimately, the 2000 election of
president Bush was decided by 537
individual votes.

Actually it was decided by the lack of votes that Jeb Bush illigally
blocked. At least according to the judge:


Quietly Florida Admits 2000 Election Fraud
By The Associated Press
April 26, 2002 | Filed at 10:17 p.m. ET

MIAMI (AP) -- A federal judge has approved a settlement between Leon
County and civil rights groups that sued over widespread voting problems
in the 2000 presidential election in Florida.

The state and six other counties remain in the case brought by the NAACP
and four other groups who sued in a dispute that grew out of the
long-uncertain results of Florida's vote for president.

"There was nothing they were seeking that was impossible to achieve," Ion
Sancho, Leon County supervisor of elections, said Friday. "I've been a
proponent of settlement from the moment the lawsuit was filed."

Thomasina Williams, one of the attorneys for voters, said settlement talks
are under way with other counties, and she was optimistic that some will
follow Leon's move. Trial is set for Aug. 26.

State lawmakers changed election laws in response to complaints after the
2000 election, but critics said the changes didn't go far enough.

In the biggest departure from current procedures, Leon agreed to give a
written explanation to voters whose ballots are rejected. The idea to make
that a state standard was discarded by the Legislature.

The groups that sued agreed that the settlement "achieves some if not all
of the relief" they could have obtained at trial, according to the court
order dropping Leon from the lawsuit last week.

The county agreed to address disputes over voting, voter registration and
voting lists and will meet with community groups to boost registration,
with special efforts targeting minorities and college students. Sancho
said he was doing all of that before.

Many voters said their votes didn't count or they were turned away from
polls due to mistakes on voter lists, busy telephone lines at election
headquarters, punch-card voting machine foul-ups and other problems.

Statewide, the largest numbers of voting problems were found in precincts
with high proportions of black and elderly voters.

Under the settlement, both sides will work to restore voters who were
wrongly removed from voters lists in the 2000 election. Many law-abiding
voters across the state said their names were dropped because they were
mistakenly pegged as ex-cons, who generally aren't allowed to vote in
Florida.

The county also agreed to improve communication and training for staffers
who work on election day.

Leon County includes the state capital of Tallahassee.

http://www.truthout.com/docs_02/04.28A.Election.Fraud.htm

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/ap/595805781.html?did95805781&FMTBS&FMTST&datepr+27%2C+2002&authorATHERINE+WILSON&pubssociated+Press&desc=Leon+County%2C+Fla.%2C+settles+lawsuit+over+2000+presidential+election>%20Click

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Election-Lawsuit.html











So how much voter fraud
does it take for it to be a problem?


--
"'Personal responsibility' there addressess [sic] people who feel a personal
responsibility to help others... "
- The Dictionary According to Beldin

-------- 

Pepe Papon wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:50:10 -0500, "~M~" <~M~@gmail.com> wrote:

Stealing elections through fraud does not
take a many illegitimate votes.
Ultimately, the 2000 election of
president Bush was decided by 537
individual votes. So how much voter fraud
does it take for it to be a problem?

Speaking of 2000, a better question would be how much voter
suppression does it take for it to be a problem?


This shows the fundamental problem with your position. Voter
suppression is a form of voter fraud, they are not different things.
Illegal votes are another form of voter fraud. All forms of voter fraud
taint elections and impinge on our right to vote.

An honest person who is concerned with, and opposed, voter suppression
would also be concerned with, and oppose, illegal voting.

I oppose both, along with other forms of voter fraud such as casting
votes for dead people and improper purging of lists of registered voters.

Had there been no voter fraud of any kind, in any State, Al Gore
probably would have been elected President in 2000. Yet you repeatedly
state that voter fraud is not a problem.



--
TruthSeeker

On 11/17/11 10:20 PM, Pepe Papon wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:39:37 -0700, TruthSeeker
<TruthSeeker@nospam.us> wrote:

Pepe Papon wrote:
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:50:10 -0500, "~M~"<~M~@gmail.com> wrote:

Stealing elections through fraud does not
take a many illegitimate votes.
Ultimately, the 2000 election of
president Bush was decided by 537
individual votes. So how much voter fraud
does it take for it to be a problem?

Speaking of 2000, a better question would be how much voter
suppression does it take for it to be a problem?


This shows the fundamental problem with your position. Voter
suppression is a form of voter fraud, they are not different things.

Bullshit. It's a very easy distinction to make in the context of the
discussion. Obscuring the difference is just more of your
intellectual dishonesty.


You are so locked into your ideological position, and have so deeply
bought into the propaganda on this issue, that you attack exposure of
that as "intellectual dishonesty." Noted.


--
Truthseeker

On 11/20/11 12:03 AM, Pepe Papon wrote:

Looked in a mirror lately? I've posted facts. I linked to a study
on the subject. You've posted vague generalities and denials. Par
for the course.


Your link was to a questionable study that dealt with a wide range of
issues, and from it you concluded that needing to show a photo ID would
result in "millions" of eligible voters not voting. Not facts at all,
just utter bullshit.


--
Truthseeker