Not even Spicer will defend this claim....

[Seattle Husker]

Such a pleasant poster to interact with.

The comment deserved the expletive because it's a consistently made up trope that completely characterizes the progressive arguments advanced on this board. At some point you need to be honest about the argument rather than making up the oppositions position to fit a personal narrative.

 

[Horn6721]

What iyo opinion is the argument?
The previous opinions expressed have been there is no voter fraud.

 

[Seattle Husker]

What iyo opinion is the argument?
The previous opinions expressed have been there is no voter fraud.

No, that is not the argument. "No" voter fraud? That's a strawman argument.

 

[Horn6721]

OK SH
What IS the argument?

 

[Seattle Husker]

OK SH
What IS the argument?

Voter fraud is rare and not widespread. Ot certainly doesn't occur enough to put draconian measures in place to prevent interested voters from exercising their right.

Can we agree that Kobach from Kansas has been the poster child for this issue? Over 75% of the cases of fraud he's found in Kansas were elderly people voting on behalf of deceased spouses. The rest? People voting in multiple states. Of the cases he's found they measure a few hundred of millions of votes cast. Last I checked, he had yet to discover a single illegal alien casting a vote.

 

[Joe Fan]

Judicial Watch sued LA County and successfully forced them to purge 1.5 Million names from their voter rolls. Their"registration rate" was 112% of the entire population of the county
Go figure

California, L.A., to Purge 1.5 Million Inactive Voter Registrations

 

[4th_floor]

Judicial Watch sued LA County and successfully forced them to purge 1.5 Million names from their voter rolls. Their"registration rate" was 112% of the entire population of the county
Go figure

California, L.A., to Purge 1.5 Million Inactive Voter Registrations

"The entire state of California had a registration rate of 101 percent of age-eligible citizens, the lawsuit said, citing data published by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission."

Why even have elections if you are going to create voters out of thin air?

 

[Joe Fan]

"The entire state of California had a registration rate of 101 percent of age-eligible citizens, the lawsuit said, citing data published by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission."
Why even have elections if you are going to create voters out of thin air?

Isn't it also a concession by Democrats that they recognize they cannot win elections without cheating?

 

[Monahorns]

It in Democrats DNA to cheat in elections. It's a tradition so to speak.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Monahorns]

The ghosts of LBJs past say hello.

 

[Joe Fan]

The ghosts of LBJs past say hello.

Yeah, probably even higher than that number
Think how bad it would be if we allowed those door-to-door "vote collectors" like they do in Calif?

"Knock, knock. Free stuff now!. Just sign this card. Check this box. Oh you cant do it? Here, let me do that for you. You're welcome. Vaya con dios"​

 

[Horn6721]

I wonder if the posters on here who typically say voter fraud does not happen OR that the incidence of it is so small as to not matter will say.

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Joe Fan]

I wonder if the posters on here who typically say voter fraud does not happen OR that the incidence of it is so small as to not matter will say.

There is audio of their reaction ....

 

[Garmel]

I wonder if the posters on here who typically say voter fraud does not happen OR that the incidence of it is so small as to not matter will say.

If you have noticed these are the same people who haven't been right about a damn thing since the 2016 election. I apologize for being harsh but it's true.

 

[Joe Fan]

If you have noticed these are the same people who haven't been right about a damn thing since the 2016 election. I apologize for being harsh but it's true.

Since even before. We had the primaries, we had the Brexit vote ..... They have quite the string going

 

[Joe Fan]

 

[Seattle Husker]

I wonder if the posters on here who typically say voter fraud does not happen OR that the incidence of it is so small as to not matter will say.

This comment didn't age well.

 

[Garmel]

This comment didn't age well.

Instead of 95,000 it looks like it's 75,000. Maybe it gets down more. Still too early for you to gloat.

 

[NJlonghorn]

I wonder if the posters on here who typically say voter fraud does not happen OR that the incidence of it is so small as to not matter will say.

I imagine you are referring to me, among others. For starters, I will note that I've never said voter fraud doesn't happen or isn't significant. What I have said is that I've never seen proof of any recent, widespread voter fraud. I've also said that I have no reason to think that the fraud that does exist is biased in favor of one party or the other. And I've said I'd welcome a fair-minded (i.e. nonbiased) investigation, as opposed to the voter-suppression campaigns that are being pushed by the right under the guise of detecting and punishing fraud.

So, what do I make of the assertion a month ago that there are 95,000 improperly registered voters in Texas, of whom over 58,000 voted? Two things:

1. That is NOT what the Texas Secretary of State said at the time. He said he had questions about the citizenship status of 95,000 registered voters, and he ordered each county election official to investigate those voters. The potential number of improperly registered voters was somewhere between 0 and 95,000. Anyone who looked at this as proof of voter fraud has a serious case of confirmation bias.
2. Since then, County officials have been working on their investigations, and what they've found so far is that most of the questioned voters were valid U.S. citizens. Link. In fact, the Texas Secretary of State has retracted his tweet. Link. Might there still be some voter fraud going on here? Perhaps even widespread voter fraud? Sure. But to the best of my knowledge, there is zero evidence of that so far.

 

[NJlonghorn]

Instead of 95,000 it looks like it's 75,000.

Where did you see that? The articles I've read say that over half have been proven to be citizens, and that the investigations are still ongoing. I have a couple of links above, but there are oodles of articles easy to find on Google.

What I find particularly ironic is that many of those under challenge were registered to vote at their naturalization ceremonies. It's hard to get better proof of citizenship than that.

 

[Garmel]

Where did you see that? The articles I've read say that over half have been proven to be citizens, and that the investigations are still ongoing. I have a couple of links above, but there are oodles of articles easy to find on Google.

What I find particularly ironic is that many of those under challenge were registered to vote at their naturalization ceremonies. It's hard to get better proof of citizenship than that.

According to the Texas Tribune. Texas secretary of state apologizes for how he rolled out voter citizenship review. But he still supports the effort.

Also, wasn't the "over half" just for Harris County? You do know these sources are left wing rags, right? We have to be cautious as taking these things as fact.

 

[Garmel]

And I've said I'd welcome a fair-minded (i.e. nonbiased) investigation, as opposed to the voter-suppression campaigns that are being pushed by the right under the guise of detecting and punishing fraud.

Really? Good grief.

 

[NJlonghorn]

Really? Good grief.

The anti-fraud campaigns in various states (off the top of my head, I think it has included KA, WI, and a few other states) have been very quick to remove people from voter rolls, only to find later that most of the voters were legit. The number of legit votes blocked has been several orders of magnitude higher than the number of illegitimate voters caught. To me, that does not override the need to search for and stop fraud, which I've always supported. But can't we agree that the current efforts are overzealous?

 

[Garmel]

From NJ's link:
Election officials in Harris County, home to Houston, said they received 30,000 names — the largest single batch of potential noncitizen voters — from the secretary of state’s office on Monday. By Tuesday afternoon, they had determined that roughly 400 of those names were duplicates and 60 percent so far of the others were United States citizens.

“We are not willing to conclude at this point that we know of anybody on this list who is not a United States citizen,” Douglas Ray, special assistant attorney for Harris County, said. “We may determine that at a later time, and we are going to investigate that very carefully, but as you can tell by the numbers, so far things ain’t looking good for this list,” referring to the state’s claim."



Maybe I'm being cynical but I have a feeling that many in the other 40% in Harris county that are not US citizens are going to mysteriously become citizens when Mr. Ray and his crew are done.

 

[Garmel]

I think it has included KA, WI, and a few other states) have been very quick to remove people from voter rolls, only to find later that most of the voters were legit.

Got a link? I've read that most were not legit but a few innocent voters were left off.

 

[NJlonghorn]

According to the Texas Tribune. Texas secretary of state apologizes for how he rolled out voter citizenship review. But he still supports the effort.

Correct. His original public statement lead people to conclude that there were 95,000 ineligible registered voters, when the truth was simply that there were 95,000 voters whose eligibility needs to be investigated. I have no problem with the investigation effort, and think it should continue. What I have a problem with is jumping to a conclusion about what it may show.

Also, wasn't the "over half" just for Harris County?

The point I'm making is not the "over half" -- it is the fact that the numbers aren't in and they aren't going to be anywhere near the originally reported number of 95k. Might I have overestimated by a bit? Perhaps, but I doubt it.

The largest number of investigations was in Harris County, where the number was over 60%. The figures varied for the other counties that are mentioned in the articles, and only a small fraction of counties were reported on at all. I did some rough approximating of a weighted average of what was reported on, and I concluded that it seems to be over half. I can't swear to that, but it seems pretty solid as a compilation of what has been reported.

You do know these sources are left wing rags, right? We have to be cautious as taking these things as fact.

Of course. Both the original reporting and the rebuttals are biased sources that can't be taken at face value.

 

[NJlonghorn]

Got a link? I've read that most were not legit but a few innocent voters were left off.

Gotta run. I'll try to remember to look into this tomorrow.

But I'll part with a reminder that many Courts have issued orders halting or undoing voter purges upon proof that they were not being done carefully. I recall one Court order (Virginia???) determining that a sizable fraction (20%??) of purged voters were lawful voters.

 

[Garmel]

Gotta run. I'll try to remember to look into this tomorrow.

But I'll part with a reminder that many Courts have issued orders halting or undoing voter purges upon proof that they were not being done carefully. I recall one Court order (Virginia???) determining that a sizable fraction (20%??) of purged voters were lawful voters.

That's still a minority amount and not "most". Okay, I'll quit arguing semantics but didn't the system work? Those 20% probably had a false positive for a reason and was not a nefarious plot by the right to get them off the rolls.