Voter Fraud is just a myth...right?

[Thor]

The funny thing is that California requires ID to vote, and unlike Indiana they also charge for the privilege;

Welcome to Socialist Republik of Kalifornia Komrad.

Apparently, they've run out of other peoples money to spend.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

ID is required right here in Indiana. Where's the outcry of unfair? I vote every election - not once have I seen anyone protesting the polls as unfair.

ID is required for just about everything already. If you don't have one, you're living completely off the grid, illegal, or already voted.

 

[Expat]

It wouldn't be fair to prevent more than 100% of a precinct from voting for Obama would it?

 

[Thor]

Like that's never happened...

 

[Mr Evilwrench]

I've missed maybe two primaries since I was eligible to vote. Heck, I've been first in line at the polling place before. I drive myself there, and I don't mind showing my license to vote. I've had to leave just short of a wiener print to get fargin decongestants. That's a lot less important than an election. There are forms of ID available, and if the state isn't willing to make some kind of card free of charge or for a nominal (printing) charge, it just makes it obvious that they're not willing to address the voting fraud issue.

 

[MCgrease08]

Election Official Rigged Election Results For Democrats, Constituted ‘Significant Percentage Of The Total Votes,’ DOJ Says

"After receiving payments ranging from between $300 and $5,000 per election from the consultant, DeMuro would add fraudulent votes on the voting machines, also known as ringing up votes, for the consultant’s clients and preferred candidates thereby diluting and distorting the ballots that were cast by actual voters,” McSwain continued. “DeMuro would add these fraudulent votes to the totals during election day and then he would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate. He would add the fraudulent votes by literally standing in the voting booth and voting over and over and over again as fast as he could when he thought that the coast was clear.”

“In May 2014, DeMuro stuffed the ballot box with 27 fraudulent ballots during the primary election. In May 2015, he padded the ballot box with 40 fraudulent votes. In 2016, it was 46 fraudulent votes,” McSwain said. “Now these numbers may sound relatively small, but they made up a significant percentage of the total votes that were cast at the polling place. In 2014, 118 total ballots were reported in the 36th Division of the 39th Ward. That means that DeMuro’s fraudulent votes accounted for over 22% of the total voting in that division in 2014. In 2015, his fraud accounted for over 15% of the total votes in the division. In 2016, his fraud accounted for over 17% of the votes.”

 

[OakRiver]

Election Official Rigged Election Results For Democrats, Constituted ‘Significant Percentage Of The Total Votes,’ DOJ Says

Was his interference enough to overturn any results?

 

[spencer rifle]

Was his interference enough to overturn any results?

Shouldn't matter.

 

[OakRiver]

Shouldn't matter.

My point is, if the amount of votes he cast was enough to change the results of the election then it is my opinion that the results be reviewed/overturned, and he suffer the criminal penalties for voter fraud. If he did not cast enough votes to affect the election results then he should suffer the criminal penalties for voter fraud.

 

[Leadeye]

I wonder how these guys come up with the number to sell votes for? Who does the negotiation?

Always follow the money

 

[BugI02]

Not everyone has an ID, or at least a valid one. Many senior citizens who don't drive don't have them or just never renewed their expired license. We already have voter registration, that's what it's for. Are they going to start asking for fingerprints? How about a retinal scan? That is the expansion of government that I'm worried about, and it is always used politically. I really don't think that either party honestly cares about the crime itself, it's just a ploy to keep Americans out of the polls in fear of losing the election. It's a problem that's so tiny but always overblown. It's statistically a non-issue, no instance of voter fraud has ever been enough to change the outcome of an election, or even come close to putting a dent. I just don't see the point, the government can spend its money and time on more pressing issues. I don't want to not prevent electoral fraud, it is a crime. However like I said it happens so rarely in such small numbers that in the end it makes no difference. Anyone who is guilty of it should be punished.

I think the actual numbers of people 'disenfranchised' by voter ID is every bit as miniscule as you wish to paint the fraud problem, providing you use the same standard of 'proven incidents'. Why can't all citizens abide by the same, preferably strict, rules and go from there? It is better for the system to require proof that some people were unable to vote without recourse which can be ameliorated, than it is for ineligible people to vote which cannot

If we can't deal with voter fraud because it is a 'tiny, overblown non-issue' shouldn't those crying disenfranchisement be required to furnish proof that it exists beyond those same 'tiny, overblown non-issue' criteria before they receive a remedy for what might turn out to not be a problem. No special people, no special rights, level playing field

ETA: Just noticed the date on necropost I responded to, but the point is still valid in light of the resurrecting posts