paulg_68 posted:

---

Because they're hard to find when people aren't required to show photo ID.

---

Groucho48 posted:

---

So, your argument that lack of voter fraud cases proves there is voter fraud?

---

paulg_68 posted:

---

No. You're the one saying that the lack of people getting caught is proof of something.

It's not. Reason is obvious.

---

Quote:

---

By now, it's abundantly clear that a number of the U.S. attorneys whom Gonzales's minions sent packing didn't live up to Karl Rove's expectations in one crucial particular: They had failed to ring up convictions, or even mount prosecutions, for voter fraud. As Dan Eggen and Amy Goldstein reported in Monday's Washington Post, five of the 12 federal prosecutors either sacked or considered for sacking last year had been singled out by Rove and other administration officials for nonperformance on voter fraud. Amazingly, all five came from states -- Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, and Wisconsin -- where Republicans were embroiled in tight election contests.

With the home office in Washington breathing down their necks, why did these experienced prosecutors fail to bring voter fraud indictments? The crime, after all, had become a major Justice Department concern. Starting in 2002, Justice required every U.S. attorney to designate a district election officer, whose job it would be to end this epidemic of electoral fraud. These officers' attendance was required at annual training seminars, where they were taught how to investigate, prosecute and convict fraudulent voters. The statutes were adequate; the investigators were primed, well-funded and raring to go.

And nothing happened. For the simple reason that when it comes to voter fraud in America, there's no there there. Voter fraud is a myth -- not an urban or rural myth, as such, but a Republican one.

As a report authored this spring by Lorraine Minnite, a political science professor at Barnard College of Columbia University, for the voter-rights program Project Vote makes unmistakably clear, the government's failure to prosecute or convict more than a handful of people for voter fraud isn't for lack of trying. Since 2002, the Justice Department's Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative has, as Gonzales put it, "made enforcement of election fraud and corruption offenses a top priority." And yet between October 2002 and September 2005, just 38 cases were brought nationally, and of those, 14 ended in dismissals or acquittals, 11 in guilty pleas, and 13 in convictions.

---

IMHO posted:

---

---

Groucho48 posted:

---

I say that to start requiring picture ID there needs to be some evidence that the current way of doing things isn't working. No one has been able to show the current way isn't working.

---

IMHO posted:

---

This is like the thread I made titled, "Help Me Understand".

You guys are so blind.

Just so you know Groucho I am not blind to what you said. You are in denial that ANY BODY in the world can vote in American elections. That is why I asked the question I did. I wanted to set a baseline in our beliefs. If you think that non US citizens can vote then I guess we don't have anything more to talk about.

---

Aerlinthian posted:

---

BS, unions, ACORN (now renamed).


Oh and BTW, I am vehemently against computer systems used in voting. Anyone who thinks those are a good idea is an abject ignoramus.

---

paulg_68 posted:

---

The problem is that we can't detect fraud. You say we shouldn't put fraud detection in place until we detect massive amounts of fraud.

You seriously can't see the error in your logic?

You asked for how one would commit fraud and it took me 2 seconds to come up with a very easy way. Either you must think I'm a super genius or you have to admit that it would be pretty easy for other people to come up with such simple plans.

---