Universal Voting Registration

[rudder]

Automatically registered once, votes three times, BINGO!, instant Democrat "voter turn-out".

I was thinking more like automatically registered, let ACORN rent your registration for a pack of smokes, insta Democrat voter turnout.

 

[Jhhnn]

The wnole notion of modern voter fraud is one of the great shibboleths of the rabid right. It's something they believe is true, despite having no evidence in support. The Bush Admin labored mightily to establish some credibility for the whole idea, but never came up with enough evidence nationwide to have skewed the election of a smalltown dogcatcher.

I mean, it has to be true, right? If it weren't, they'd have to question their own belief system, and that's just not possible...

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

I was thinking more like automatically registered, let ACORN rent your registration for a pack of smokes, insta Democrat voter turnout.

If one was really entrepreneurial, you could sell your vote to ACORN, the ACLU, the SEIU...all at the same time! Why limit yourself to just one vote? That's not Democratic enough!

ROCK THE VOTE (five times, VOTE DEMOCRAT)!

 

[Fenixgoon]

The wnole notion of modern voter fraud is one of the great shibboleths of the rabid right. It's something they believe is true, despite having no evidence in support. The Bush Admin labored mightily to establish some credibility for the whole idea, but never came up with enough evidence nationwide to have skewed the election of a smalltown dogcatcher.

I mean, it has to be true, right? If it weren't, they'd have to question their own belief system, and that's just not possible...

no, this is what i don't want:

So if you get welfare, food stamps, a drivers license, been in legal trouble, own property... or are on any public record or in any public database you will be registered to vote. Whether you wanted to or not.

And yes, illegals have drivers licenses, they have been put on public records via the legal system, they do receive food stamps and welfare, and in some cases own property. This legislation is also expected to give felons the right to vote. Politicians will soon have to pander to everyone.

there is no way in hell illegal immigrants should receive the right to vote in this country, let alone receive the benefits of the welfare systems setup for US citizens (but of course they do). as a result of their high crimes, felons are stripped of some of their rights, including that to vote (i suppose that is a huge deal if you actually care about voting though).

auto registration w/ proof of citizenship might not be a bad idea though.

 

[Craig234]

If one was really entrepreneurial, you could sell your vote to ACORN, the ACLU, the SEIU...all at the same time! Why limit yourself to just one vote? That's not Democratic enough!

ROCK THE VOTE (five times, VOTE DEMOCRAT)!

You're an idiot. Your paranoia knows no limits it seems. You are deluded. The ACLU selling votes?

Next you will tellus of the Democrats seizing power by fluoridating the water?

 

[GodisanAtheist]

What is this, the chewbacca defense? You used the poll to make your point, you could offer something better than "Ask Gallup."

The word "liberal" is a dirty word in American politics, unlike Conservative. I imagine you know that self-report tools of political ideology are woefully inaccurate...pretty much like ever other self-report tool. So could you find a better poll and stop putting this damn graph in every third thread, it's meaningless.

-Yeah, look at the answer choices the poll actually asks:

A) Are you Conservative or Very Conservative?
(OR)
B) Are you Moderate or Liberal (WTF?!)?
(OR)
C) Are you Very Liberal?

Then they go about casting Choice C as though it represents all liberals, Choice B as though they were all moderates and Choice A as though they've got some sort of cohesive ideology.

The poll is worthless at telling anyone anything about our political make-up.

 

[boomerang]

Jhhnn, here is the series of posts that led up to your short reply, "Incorrect. Try again."

Originally Posted by Fear No Evil
Some states don't even require a matching signature to vote.. you just SAY your name and address and thats good enough.

So which states are those?

Mine

Incorrect. Try again.

http://detroit.about.com/od/governmentpolitics/f/vophotoid.htm

Let me shine a flashlight up your ass Jhhnn so you can see a little better. First, read the last sentence of that link you posted. I'll help you with this.

If you do not have a photo identification in your possession, you will be required to fill out an affidavit attesting to such before voting.

This statement is abridged. The actual wording from the SOS website I had already quoted in post #12. The statement above is however essentially the same.

No matching signature required. I've been voting here for 37 years and there is no signature match done. All they do is match the name and address with what you write on the form with the name and address on the voter rolls.

But let me guess, out of the statement that FNE made, you deem the latter portion to be of the most importance. Thus, you feel justified in essentially splitting hairs.

Whether an individual would say their information or put it in writing is immaterial. There is no signature matching done.

What is important is that under the system in my state an individual who attempts to vote must have a matching record on the voter roles for that township. My issue is that under the blanket voter registration being proposed an individual could be registered in two or more different townships. That individual could cast a vote in any or all.

Do you agree that every individual eligible to vote is entitled to one vote, or do you think they should be entitled to vote as many times as possible in a given election?

 

[Cstefan]

Requiring ID to vote is racist.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Any legislation which would register voters needs to have adequate means to check citizenship.

We're told that 15 days doesn't infringe on the Second Amendment. Ok, the government has 15 days to research who's applying.

No citizenship= no enfranchisement.

 

[Jhhnn]

I stand corrected, boomerang.

Which doesn't change the usual rightwing raving about voter fraud from horsepucky to gold in the slightest. Show actual examples of the fraud you allege. It's easy enough to chase down, and the Bush Admin sicced the FBI on it, didn't uncover squat. Links to the reality here-

http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3265

Just one more conspiracy theory wrapped in in a blanket of self righteous indignation and denial.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I stand corrected, boomerang.

Which doesn't change the usual rightwing raving about voter fraud from horsepucky to gold in the slightest. Show actual examples of the fraud you allege. It's easy enough to chase down, and the Bush Admin sicced the FBI on it, didn't uncover squat. Links to the reality here-

http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3265

Just one more conspiracy theory wrapped in in a blanket of self righteous indignation and denial.

I really don't care about the right and left crap going on here. If someone registers to vote, then they need to provide evidence of citizenship and identity.

 

[boomerang]

I stand corrected, boomerang.

Which doesn't change the usual rightwing raving about voter fraud from horsepucky to gold in the slightest. Show actual examples of the fraud you allege. It's easy enough to chase down, and the Bush Admin sicced the FBI on it, didn't uncover squat. Links to the reality here-

http://www.ombwatch.org/node/3265

Just one more conspiracy theory wrapped in in a blanket of self righteous indignation and denial.

What initially appeared to be a sincere apology that I would have readily accepted has turned out to be yet more horseshit.

I have made no allegations of fraud. No specific allegations - none. I'm saying it's possible - nothing more. That's all I've been saying in every post of substance in this thread. You are so partisan in your thinking that you are blind to what myself and others are saying in this thread.

The problem lies with you sir.

BTW, I'm not raving by any means. Not everyone that you disagree with is raving.

As Hayabusa Rider has said, this is not a Left or Right issue, it's a matter of dealing with voter registration in the proper manner.

 

[Jhhnn]

Does this process sound conducive to orchestrating voter fraud?



I'll answer for whomever may be interested. You bet your ass it is. The way the legislation has been presented thus far is that the the States are to use existing lists to register voters. Property owners, driver license holders, people who have signed up for benefits, etc. The biggest means for fraud I see is that these existing lists may not contain correct addresses for how many individuals? I don't know about where the rest of you live, but the unemployment rate is sky high here. People are losing and walking away from their homes in droves.

What are the chances of the same individual ultimately being registered under two addresses? Very,very good here. Who will investigate this? I can tell you - no one. There are no funds available and no manpower to do so.

This legislation will be presented with an extremely positive spin. There is nothing positive about the way this will be implemented. It's more deck stacking on the part of the Dem's. The 2010 elections are not looking good for the Dem's when they're cramming their ideals down the throats of the American people.

It would sure be handy to have a whole bunch of votes to pull out of a magic bag if needed.

I predict the legislation will pass.

Your opening post in this thread, boomerang, dripping with partisan innuendo and accusations... But now, well, now it's not about partisanship, but about "possibilities" and "no specific allegations" and about you trying to distance yourself from your own remarks when you can't back them up...

If "voter fraud" could be a big problem in the future, why aren't there numerous examples of it in the recent past?

Reminds me of the whole song and dance wrt the mythical Iraqi WMD's and how they "could" give them to terrorists...