Stop the Steal

[Speedwell]

How? Walk me through that. If there is no ID to confirm ID, I could register as anyone I wanted...potentially even multiple times. How would an audit catch that without ID?

So why is only polling place ID an issue with the Right?

 

[98cwitr]

. So how would that work, exactly? The miscreant would have to,
1. Know the name and address of an individual, a registered voter who he knew was not going to vote.
2. Be able to reproduce the signature of that individual to the satisfaction of an election official.
3. Provide the name and address and forge the signature of another real individual.

Do you really think that happens on a significant scale?



LOL!

1. Easy to look up since our voter registration is open to the public via website

2. Not for in person, no. Signature verification does not happen on all ballots even during an audit.

3. See #1

IDK...we have no way to PROVE it is (without Voter ID)

 

[Arcangl86]

Doesn't that power also require a Congressional Amendment?

No. It's already in the text of the Constitution. When it comes to Congressional Elections, the only thing that Congress cannot regulate is the "Place of chusing the Senate".

 

[98cwitr]

So why is only polling place ID an issue with the Right?

Because dead people are prone to vote blue.

I'd appreciate an answer to my question though.

 

[Albion]

So why is only polling place ID an issue with the Right?

It isn't (the only issue with the Right as concerns fair elections). However, it is the most easily justified (knowing who the person showing up to vote actually is!). And yet the Democratic legislators in state after state are determined not to allow even this safeguard to exist.

 

[Speedwell]

1. Easy to look up since our voter registration is open to the public via website

How does our miscreant know which of them is certain not to vote? How does he learn to reproduce the individual's signature?

2. Not for in person, no. Signature verification does not happen on all ballots even during an audit.

It should. I walked my 'mail-in' ballot over to the election office myself and saw that they were quite particular about it. If it's not happening with all mail-in ballots a slipshod job is being done. That is not an argument against mail-in voting as such.

3. See #1

IDK...we have no way to PROVE it is (without Voter ID)

Good luck. There is too much history of imposing polling place ID requirements at the last minute before an election which has made people suspicious. Until the Right gets interested in establishing ID at registration nobody is going to see polling place ID requirements as anything but an attempt to limit the vote. If I wanted to cast a fraudulent vote, I wouldn't go to all of the trouble of impersonating an existing voter, I would just register under a false name to begin with.

 

[Speedwell]

Because dead people are prone to vote blue.

LOL!

I'd appreciate an answer to my question though.

The answer is yes, you could register as anyone you want. Polling place ID requirements won't prevent that. That was my point.

 

[Albion]

I walked my 'mail-in' ballot over to the election office myself and saw that they were quite particular about it.

Well, that is what the Pelosi types are demanding be eliminated. Instead, party workers will come to your house and collect your ballot, whether already filled-out or not, and deliver it to the election office. If they choose to do so, that is.

Good luck. There is too much history of imposing polling place ID requirements at the last minute before an election which has made people suspicious. Until the Right gets interested in establishing ID at registration nobody is going to see polling place ID requirements as anything but an attempt to limit the vote.

They've tried to have that done. Many times. It's always shot down by the other side with that "voter suppression" mantra.

 

[Albion]

LOL!

The answer is yes, you could register as anyone you want. Polling place ID requirements won't prevent that. That was my point.

What's the argument against instituting ANY safeguards at all, simply because we can think of some other way to vote fraudulently, even if that way is much less likely?

 

[98cwitr]

The answer is yes, you could register as anyone you want. Polling place ID requirements won't prevent that. That was my point.

It would certainly prevent the illegal vote though.

You laugh, but it's true. It's not funny IMO...it's sad.

 

[98cwitr]

How does our miscreant know which of them is certain not to vote? How does he learn to reproduce the individual's signature?

Because the record, public to all, shows voter history. There's probability of voting (or not)...not for certain, but why not take the risk if you are motivated for your party to win bad enough to commit fraud?

The signature doesn't matter. Don't get hung up on it.One would just have to make sure they either have the auditors in their pocket, and even if they don't, and EVEN if there is an audit, the likelihood of the fraudulent ballot being checked is low.

It should. I walked my 'mail-in' ballot over to the election office myself and saw that they were quite particular about it. If it's not happening with all mail-in ballots a slipshod job is being done. That is not an argument against mail-in voting as such.

Such a scenario is in the vast minority. Most mail-in ballots are mailed in. How was your signature verified btw?

Good luck. There is too much history of imposing polling place ID requirements at the last minute before an election which has made people suspicious. Until the Right gets interested in establishing ID at registration nobody is going to see polling place ID requirements as anything but an attempt to limit the vote. If I wanted to cast a fraudulent vote, I wouldn't go to all of the trouble of impersonating an existing voter, I would just register under a false name to begin with.

Is there? Virginia and Georgia both have Voter ID laws...albeit the Democratic portions of each legislatures are seeking to have that law repealed.

 

[Ringo84]

The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud
Ringo

 

[Speedwell]

It would certainly prevent the illegal vote though.

You laugh, but it's true. It's not funny IMO...it's sad.

No, not really. It's really more expedient to get a fake ID good enough to fool an untrained polling place official in a false name than in the name of an existing person. As long as it is possible to register without an ID that is certainly the more likely avenue of fraud.

 

[98cwitr]

The False Narrative of Vote-by-Mail Fraud
Ringo

False? Anything but....

Political insider explains voter fraud with mail-in ballots

Texas official and 3 others indicted on 134 felonies in mail-in ballot fraud case

15 Election Results That Were Tossed Over Fraudulent Mail-In Ballots

Widespread Fraud in New Jersey Mail-In Election | RealClearPolitics!

 

[Speedwell]

Because the record, public to all, shows voter history. There's probability of voting (or not)...not for certain, but why not take the risk if you are motivated for your party to win bad enough to commit fraud?

Like the vote-harvesting fraud the Republicans tried to pull of in NC last mid-terms?

The signature doesn't matter. Don't get hung up on it.One would just have to make sure they either have the auditors in their pocket, and even if they don't, and EVEN if there is an audit, the likelihood of the fraudulent ballot being checked is low.

?

Such a scenario is in the vast minority. Most mail-in ballots are mailed in. How was your signature verified btw?

By comparing the signature on the mail-in ballot envelope with the signature on my voter registration card--just as is done at in-person voting when you sign in.

Is there? Virginia and Georgia both have Voter ID laws...albeit the Democratic portions of each legislatures are seeking to have that law repealed.

The devil is in the details. One would have to look at the laws themselves.

 

[Ringo84]

False? Anything but....

Political insider explains voter fraud with mail-in ballots

Not a reputable source of information.

Texas official and 3 others indicted on 134 felonies in mail-in ballot fraud case

All the information I've found says alleged; not convicted.

Also: Complaint filed over Texas AG Ken Paxton's tactics to limit mail-in voting

Widespread Fraud in New Jersey Mail-In Election | RealClearPolitics!

Hasen argues that it’s not cause for concern, however, noting there were only 491 prosecutions related to absentee ballots nationwide between 2000 and 2012.

491 prosecutions in 12 years, which is miniscule.

Mail-in voting is not ripe for fraud; that's a false narrative from the same people that want to make it harder to vote.

Additional: Violated my own rule by responding to this post, so this will be my last response.
Ringo

 

[98cwitr]

Not a reputable source of information.

Content is valid, regardless of the source; unless you have evidence to disprove it.

All the information I've found says alleged; not convicted.

Also: Complaint filed over Texas AG Ken Paxton's tactics to limit mail-in voting

Yep, but you don't get indicted for nothing and without sufficient evidence. Not saying he's guilty, but saying there is pause for concern.

491 prosecutions in 12 years, which is miniscule.

Enough for me to demand from my legislators that voting reforms are needed. That's only 491 that were found and proven; obviously there are some that were not discovered.

Mail-in voting is not ripe for fraud; that's a false narrative from the same people that want to make it harder to vote.
Ringo

Disagree. Most of us have IDs...lets use them to vote to confirm our identity. For those that don't have them, they're provided at no-cost. The "harder to vote" claim is moot and debunked.

 

[Ringo84]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/03/22/republican-vote-restriction-turnout/
Ringo

 

[98cwitr]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/03/22/republican-vote-restriction-turnout/
Ringo

Cool. Let it backfire then.

 

[Albion]

Before anyone gets too starry-eyed over this power-grab, HR1, they should read the following in order to get a view of the bill beyond the few elements in it that are always discussed --

Klobuchar should, for the public trust, amend the For the People Act | MinnPost