ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 13th June 2018, 08:02 AM   #121
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,133
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I don't necessarily agree with this but assuming it is true....

Then these are proposed rules that knowingly hurt people to fix a problem the lawmaker had no knowledge of it exists. The logical step is to measure the problem.
The problem of inaccurate voter rolls is very well known.

The alleged harm is actually poorly specified.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 08:17 AM   #122
SuburbanTurkey
Critical Thinker
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Boston, USA
Posts: 340
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That is not the case anywhere.

In some places, a CCW permit (not an NRA card) is acceptable but a student ID is not. The reason is quite straightforward, though: a CCW permit is a state-issued identification which establishes residency, a student ID does not.
Yeah, this talking point comes across as bad faith every time I hear it. My SC concealed weapons permit was state issued ID that included my full name, date of birth, height, weight, eye color, issue and expiration date, and so on. It also included all the same anti-counterfeit measures a state drivers license included and additionally required that I be fingerprinted by the state. State law required that I update my permit within 15 days if I changed address or I was guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to loss of my license. My Clemson University id was a chunk of cheap plastic that had only a picture and my name and was identical to that of my room mate who was not a SC resident and not eligible to vote in the state. No information about my legal address or expiration date. I still have it somewhere, there's no way to know I'm still not a student despite having graduated over 5 years ago.

This is not meant to be apologism for what seems clearly like Republican efforts to reduce voter turnout for their political advantage. Great strides should be taken to make it as convenient as possible for all eligible voters to cast a vote if they wish to. I would like to see more states take up vote by mail, which makes it much easier for working folks to cast a ballot.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 08:31 AM   #123
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The problem of inaccurate voter rolls is very well known.
Well known, is it now?

Care to elaborate?
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 12:36 PM   #124
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,133
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Well known, is it now?

Care to elaborate?
For example:
https://www.npr.org/2012/02/14/14682...stered-to-vote
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 12:53 PM   #125
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,518
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I think the issue is the term "problem." It is a problem in the sense that a quiz has problems on it. "It isn't a problem" that a bunch of dead people are on the rolls.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 01:01 PM   #126
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,611
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
"It isn't a problem" that a bunch of dead people are on the rolls.
It would be if they were voting!
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 01:07 PM   #127
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,518
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
It would be if they were voting!
I disagree.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 05:06 PM   #128
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 17,921
Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate View Post
You are putting the cart before the horse there. The postal information is used to send the notice.

But you have a good question. It says “change-of-address information supplied by the Postal Service through its licensees is used to identify registrants whose addresses may have changed.” I’m not sure, but looking into it more it appears that only means people who have filed a change of address with the Postal Service. That means it would not include mail returned as undeliverable, because then there is no new address. That would make this type of registration purging very limited.

This same law is echoed in 52 USC 21083(a)(4) under the title “Minimum standard for accuracy of State voter registration records.”

If I am now reading it correctly, using the Postal Service change-of-address information is just the minimum requirement. A State is required to remove ineligible borrower. At the very minimum it could meet that requirement by just getting the Postal Service data and sending notices to those people.

But that is just the minimum it needs to do to meet Federal law. The State can do other things beyond that to update its voter registrations. That is where Ohio’s “supplemental” process of sending notices to people who have not voted for two years comes in. The majority opinion says it is reasonable to assume that people who have not voted for a certain number of years may have moved because subsection (d) itself uses non-voting as a criteria that indicates a voter has moved (no voting in the next two Federal elections after the notice has been not returned.)
I haven't read the whole opinion, nor do I intend to right now. I took a quick glance at the "held" section, and read the first couple of pages of the dissent. Based on that brief reading, I have to go with the majority on this one. (Come to think of it, I usually do. I rarely disagree with Justice Kennedy, which means I'm usually in the majority.)

It seemed like the majority said, "It meets the letter of the law." In the absence of some constitutional issue, that ought to be the end. In the dissent, the argument seemed to be, at least in the first two pages, that since the law said states couldn't use non-voting as a reason to unregister voters, then non-voting could not play any role in the process. The argument seemed to be that since non-voting might trigger then postcard, then non-voting was the reason for removing someone from the rolls. That doesn't make any sense to me at all, especially since, as noted above, non-voting is actually part of the process in the actual law.

The second part of their argument was basically that it was a bad idea because it could disenfranchise people. Fine and dandy, but that's a policy disagreement. The act of registration itself has occasionally been challenged as some sort of unconstitutional measure because people who fail to register are disenfranchised, but it has never been challenged successfully because the requirement to register required such minimal effort that it was not a real impediment to voting. To my mind, the Ohio requirements for maintaining registration also doesn't impose any meaningful restrictions on anyone's right to vote.

That is not to say that those who support the process did not do some political calculus to decide that it would hurt the other team more than it would hurt them, but the truth is it will barely hurt either team anyway, and it's just not a significant burden, nor can I imagine a much simpler or less intrusive way of maintain some minimal standard of accuracy in the voter registration rolls. I'm perfectly ok with the ruling, in the absence of any additional information.

Again, Devil's Advocate, thanks for the explanations.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:08 PM   #129
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 40,314
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
How do you know the system is poor?
Because the side he does not like wins.....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:14 PM   #130
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader
TLA Dictator
 
Foolmewunz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pattaya, Thailand
Posts: 38,601
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That doesn't follow. The system is very poor at detecting voter fraud, so the fact that little is detected is insufficient to conclude that there is little of it.
The system is also very poor at detecting Venusian Vote Buying so the fact that little is detected (well, other than on Fox & Friends) is insufficient to conclude that there is little of it. When will we stop our neighbors from Venus from tampering with our freedomz?
__________________
Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele

It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.
Foolmewunz is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:48 PM   #131
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15,560
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We know that there is very little voter fraud in the USA - or at least very little detectable fraud so there really isn't a need to worry too much about how accurate the voter lists are.
We keep hearing this but the fierce resistance to voter ID actually tells me the opposite. I mean, I could for a second try to believe this happy horsecrap about how many eligible voters don't have any form of ID. But then I'd laugh and say that you've gotta be pulling my leg.

I'm reminded of the kindly old shopkeeper who's convinced that nobody ever shoplifts in his store. But his son does the books for him and he realizes that the inventory is far lower than it should be. So he convinces his dad to put in those highly visible sensors at the door that will ring if anybody tries to steal something. Two months later the dad proudly announces that he was right--nobody was shoplifting because the sensors have rarely gone off. But the son shows the dad that the inventory for the last few months is much more in alignment with their sales and receipts than before the sensors went in.

The problem here is that there really is little way of checking if voter fraud is going on currently in states that don't require voter ID, and one assumes that requiring voter ID sends a strong signal that you're not going to get away with it (much like those sensors at the door).
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 06:58 PM   #132
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,518
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
We keep hearing this but the fierce resistance to voter ID actually tells me the opposite. I mean, I could for a second try to believe this happy horsecrap about how many eligible voters don't have any form of ID. But then I'd laugh and say that you've gotta be pulling my leg.

I'm reminded of the kindly old shopkeeper who's convinced that nobody ever shoplifts in his store. But his son does the books for him and he realizes that the inventory is far lower than it should be. So he convinces his dad to put in those highly visible sensors at the door that will ring if anybody tries to steal something. Two months later the dad proudly announces that he was right--nobody was shoplifting because the sensors have rarely gone off. But the son shows the dad that the inventory for the last few months is much more in alignment with their sales and receipts than before the sensors went in.

The problem here is that there really is little way of checking if voter fraud is going on currently in states that don't require voter ID, and one assumes that requiring voter ID sends a strong signal that you're not going to get away with it (much like those sensors at the door).
Do you have any objection to the methodology employed by people who researched this issue?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th June 2018, 11:36 PM   #133
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15,560
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Do you have any objection to the methodology employed by people who researched this issue?
Details?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2018, 01:22 AM   #134
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,748
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
We keep hearing this but the fierce resistance to voter ID actually tells me the opposite. I mean, I could for a second try to believe this happy horsecrap about how many eligible voters don't have any form of ID. But then I'd laugh and say that you've gotta be pulling my leg.

I'm reminded of the kindly old shopkeeper who's convinced that nobody ever shoplifts in his store. But his son does the books for him and he realizes that the inventory is far lower than it should be. So he convinces his dad to put in those highly visible sensors at the door that will ring if anybody tries to steal something. Two months later the dad proudly announces that he was right--nobody was shoplifting because the sensors have rarely gone off. But the son shows the dad that the inventory for the last few months is much more in alignment with their sales and receipts than before the sensors went in.

The problem here is that there really is little way of checking if voter fraud is going on currently in states that don't require voter ID, and one assumes that requiring voter ID sends a strong signal that you're not going to get away with it (much like those sensors at the door).
Then require voter ID and make a federal ID card that's easy and free to get for all citizens, no matter where or how they live.

You cannot do one without the other without disenfranchising people.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2018, 06:27 AM   #135
The Greater Fool
Illuminator
 
The Greater Fool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posts: 3,551
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
We keep hearing this but the fierce resistance to voter ID actually tells me the opposite. I mean, I could for a second try to believe this happy horsecrap about how many eligible voters don't have any form of ID. But then I'd laugh and say that you've gotta be pulling my leg.
We keep hearing this but the fierce advocacy of voter ID actually tells me the opposite. I mean, I could for a second try to believe this sad horsecrap about how few eligible voters have barriers to getting any form of ID. But then I'd laugh and say that you've gotta be pulling my leg.
__________________
- "Who is the Greater Fool? The fool? Or the one arguing with the Fool?" [Various; Uknown]
- "The only way to win is not to play." [Tsig quoting 'War Games']
The Greater Fool is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2018, 10:50 AM   #136
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15,560
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Then require voter ID and make a federal ID card that's easy and free to get for all citizens, no matter where or how they live.

You cannot do one without the other without disenfranchising people.
Arizona offers a photo ID, but.... it costs 12 whole dollars! I mean, who has $12 to spend?

Even more shocking, is that they waive the fee for seniors. That's right, the people who are more likely to be Rethuglicans get it for free. Could they be any more honest about being dishonest?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2018, 11:41 AM   #137
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,287
I don't. Every cent has a tag on it, sometimes multiple. Not swapping out my Colorado ID for Arizona turned out a savings when I was sent back after failing to secure even an employer call-back.
__________________
Normal is just a stereotype.
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th June 2018, 04:23 PM   #138
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 15,560
Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey View Post
I don't. Every cent has a tag on it, sometimes multiple. Not swapping out my Colorado ID for Arizona turned out a savings when I was sent back after failing to secure even an employer call-back.
And this prevented you from voting in Arizona?
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 04:45 AM   #139
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 10,900
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Arizona offers a photo ID, but.... it costs 12 whole dollars! I mean, who has $12 to spend?
I once went 4 months riding my bicycle without a seat (and I rode my bike for more than an hour every day) after the seat was stolen because I didn't want to spend the $10 for a new seat.

If I remember right eventually my sister bought me one.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 04:50 AM   #140
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,748
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Arizona offers a photo ID, but.... it costs 12 whole dollars! I mean, who has $12 to spend?
Not everyone? Or are people with less than $12 to spend simply not interesting in your version of democracy?

Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Even more shocking, is that they waive the fee for seniors. That's right, the people who are more likely to be Rethuglicans get it for free. Could they be any more honest about being dishonest?
That's good, but it's not enough. It should be free for everyone. And it should be easy to get. Also, it should be federal, not just state. Solve those issues and then we can talk about voter ID, ok?
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 05:22 AM   #141
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 28,415
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Solve those issues and then we can talk about voter ID, ok?
Unless you're offering some really amazing conversations on the topic, that doesn't seem like a worthwhile trade.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 05:57 AM   #142
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,133
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Arizona offers a photo ID, but.... it costs 12 whole dollars! I mean, who has $12 to spend?
States with voter ID requirements all provide voter ID's for free.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 05:58 AM   #143
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 40,133
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
That's good, but it's not enough. It should be free for everyone.
It is. In every state with voter ID requirements.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 01:38 PM   #144
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NeverLand
Posts: 14,541
Tsukasa Buddha has a birthday
And here comes Sessions:

Quote:
One day after the Supreme Court upheld voter purging in Ohio, the Justice Department decided to get in on the action. The department sued the state of Kentucky on Tuesday to force it to “systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the registration records”—and Kentucky quickly agreed to comply.

...

If not done with proper safeguards, voter purges can cause eligible voters to be removed from the rolls. In 2006, a state court in Kentucky blocked an effort by then-Secretary of State Trey Grayson, a Republican, to purge the voter rolls, finding that more than 8,100 eligible Kentucky voters had been removed.

Wrongful purging has swung close elections in Republicans’ favor. This happened most notably during the 2000 election in Florida, when the state wrongly labeled 12,000 eligible voters as ex-felons and purged them from the voter rolls. That was 22 times Bush’s 537-vote margin of victory over Al Gore.

In addition to the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Kentucky, Republicans have already sought to use the Supreme Court’s Ohio decision to their advantage in other ways. On Wednesday, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the former vice chair of the now-defunct Election Integrity Commission, took to federal court to try to reinstate a Kansas law requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote. The law blocked one in seven eligible voters who attempted to register and was put on hold by the courts.
Linky.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 03:25 PM   #145
bobtaftfan
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 381
The Ohio law is perfectly reasonable. If you don't vote in two years, you get a mailer from the state with a prepaid return envelope asking you to verify your address. If you don't return the mailer *and* you don't vote in the next two elections, *then* your name gets removed from the rolls.

And, if by chance you were on a six-year vacation and you come back and find you're not registered, all you gotta do is just re-register.

The Democrats don't like any law that in any way inhibits voter fraud.
__________________
Mike Griffith. Real Issues Home Page.
bobtaftfan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 05:14 PM   #146
Random
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 2,946
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
We keep hearing this but the fierce resistance to voter ID actually tells me the opposite. I mean, I could for a second try to believe this happy horsecrap about how many eligible voters don't have any form of ID. But then I'd laugh and say that you've gotta be pulling my leg.

I'm reminded of the kindly old shopkeeper who's convinced that nobody ever shoplifts in his store. But his son does the books for him and he realizes that the inventory is far lower than it should be. So he convinces his dad to put in those highly visible sensors at the door that will ring if anybody tries to steal something. Two months later the dad proudly announces that he was right--nobody was shoplifting because the sensors have rarely gone off. But the son shows the dad that the inventory for the last few months is much more in alignment with their sales and receipts than before the sensors went in.

The problem here is that there really is little way of checking if voter fraud is going on currently in states that don't require voter ID, and one assumes that requiring voter ID sends a strong signal that you're not going to get away with it (much like those sensors at the door).
Actually, it is pretty easy to determine if voter fraud is going on, after the election anyway. While no one is keeping track of who voted for who, the government does keep track of who voted in which election, that's how they can figure out if someone has voted in the last two elections. All you have to do is randomly pick a statistically significant selection of people on the rolls who showed up to vote, then investigate those individuals after the election to see if they are valid voters.

If they are all valid voters, then you probably don't have a problem. If there is a large number of votes from people who were dead or wrongly registered, then you probably do have a problem.

Granted, this process won't tell you who those fraudulent voters voted for, but it would be a pretty good indicator whether or not fraud was occurring and how much.
__________________
"...Am I actually watching Big Bird argue with the Egyptian God of the Dead? Is PBS sending some kind of weird religious message here?"
Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 06:18 PM   #147
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,262
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What? No. This is wrong. It is bad, immoral.

This is the most literally fascist thing I have read on this forum. I denounce it, and I denounce you.

I want to make it absolutely clear that you do not represent my politics in any way, shape, or form.
Oh. Are you just now realizing certain obvious truths about people who share your political views?

Last edited by Fudbucker; 15th June 2018 at 06:20 PM.
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 06:24 PM   #148
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 13,518
Originally Posted by bobtaftfan View Post
The Ohio law is perfectly reasonable. If you don't vote in two years, you get a mailer from the state with a prepaid return envelope asking you to verify your address. If you don't return the mailer *and* you don't vote in the next two elections, *then* your name gets removed from the rolls.

And, if by chance you were on a six-year vacation and you come back and find you're not registered, all you gotta do is just re-register.

The Democrats don't like any law that in any way inhibits voter fraud.
What makes that reasonable?
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th June 2018, 06:40 PM   #149
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NeverLand
Posts: 14,541
Tsukasa Buddha has a birthday
Originally Posted by Random View Post
Actually, it is pretty easy to determine if voter fraud is going on, after the election anyway. While no one is keeping track of who voted for who, the government does keep track of who voted in which election, that's how they can figure out if someone has voted in the last two elections. All you have to do is randomly pick a statistically significant selection of people on the rolls who showed up to vote, then investigate those individuals after the election to see if they are valid voters.

If they are all valid voters, then you probably don't have a problem. If there is a large number of votes from people who were dead or wrongly registered, then you probably do have a problem.

Granted, this process won't tell you who those fraudulent voters voted for, but it would be a pretty good indicator whether or not fraud was occurring and how much.
You don't even need to do that. All you need are the rolls and registration and look for anomalies, like we've done in other fields for fraud and abuse:

Quote:
Voter Rolls as an Effective Tool to Combat Electoral Fraud

Our method of using low propensity and orphan voters to recognize and measure
electoral fraud has several strengths. It can identify anomalies created by
even small amounts of electoral fraud. It picks up many types of election
fraud regardless of whether they were done by mail-in ballot, early voting, or
election-day voting. It also measures these forms of fraud, whether done by
only a few individual voters, a campaign operative, a vote broker, or even a
corrupt election official.

Application of our method across different types of elections in different
states and in different election years shows no evidence of election fraud
beyond confirmation of one case of known election fraud in Daggett County,
Utah. Anomalous data patterns regularly crop up in a few cases, but in each
case, innocent explanations, rather than fraud, provide the best explanation of
the patterns. Our results suggest that there is little evidence to support the
claim that voter ID laws are needed to combat electoral fraud.

...

The easiest measure that governments can take to ensure ballot integrity is
not voter ID laws or even cleaning up voter registration lists, but rather
increasing the access and comprehensiveness of information contained in
registration rolls and voting histories. This information becomes even more
useful when states report the type of ballot that was cast as well as the date on
which the ballot was cast. States could also make available not only the current
voter registration list but also the voter registration list that was current
as of the day of a specific election. States could also facilitate access to the
rolls by reducing fees and eliminating restrictions on the use of the rolls for
political or research purposes (Cooper, Haspel, & Knotts, 2009).
Linky.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 08:43 AM   #150
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,935
Originally Posted by This is The End View Post
The solution to that is easy. Just make sure they are only voting once per election (or once per election cycle) and if you do that it doesn't really matter where they chose to set up camp during any particular election.

And to do that, we need a federal ID system like every single other first world country has. Or consolidate the state ID systems.
Another idea is...a national right to vote. Which the US currently does not have, and which is why we see things like felon disenfranchisement in many states along with lopsided law enforcement, various states passing onerous ID laws, and then closing down areas to get ID (along with voting locations!) in college/minority areas, and the like.

The preclearance section of the VRA helped but did not eliminate this, until the Roberts court struck it down under the laughable idea that nobody would ever try to racially restrict voting rights these days, only to be proven wrong mere hours later.

One note about these mailers that many people fail to discuss, and I didn't see here - they're often designed specifically to look like some piece of random junk mail. Guess why.
Mumbles is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 01:18 PM   #151
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,815
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I've seen an awful lot of laws, proposals, initiatives, to change the way people become eligible to vote in America, and the one, universal, thing that is true about all of them is that they are supported by whichever party would get a net gain in votes from it. Actually making it more likely for more citizens to vote is never the issue, nor is reducing the nearly non-existent problem of voting fraud. It's all about making it easier for our team to vote, and making it harder for the other team to vote.

<snip>

What voter initiatives supported by Democrats make it harder for non-Democrats to vote? The ones I am familiar with seem designed to make it less burdensome for anyone eligible to vote, without regard to party. If more of those individuals happen to be inclined to vote for Democrats, then that is a happy consequence for them, but their initiatives are not exclusionary.

Which is a stark contrast to Republican supported initiatives, which are clearly and almost exclusively targeted to reduce voter participation by demographic segments they believe are less likely to vote for Republicans.

One Federal court regarding a case in North Carolina was more than normally blunt about such efforts.

Quote:
The state offered little justification for the law, the court said. Those who defended the law said they were doing so to prevent voter fraud. “Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist,” the court said.

It added: “We can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent.”
The above mentioned provisions were taken from a laundry list of typical Republican efforts to stifle voter segments which might not favor them.

What seems to be universal is actually that Republican efforts to change voting laws are almost invariably exclusionary, and Democratic ones are not.

If inclusionary voting measures coincidentally happen to be beneficial to Democrats then fine. There might be a message there which Republicans would rather not hear, and that is that when the playing field is level ... they lose.

They know this, though. Which is why they consistently and desperately try to exclude as many legitimate voters as they can, so long as those voters are not likely to be Republicans.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 01:21 PM   #152
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,815
Originally Posted by bobtaftfan View Post
The Ohio law is perfectly reasonable. If you don't vote in two years, you get a mailer from the state with a prepaid return envelope asking you to verify your address. If you don't return the mailer *and* you don't vote in the next two elections, *then* your name gets removed from the rolls.

And, if by chance you were on a six-year vacation and you come back and find you're not registered, all you gotta do is just re-register.

The Democrats don't like any law that in any way inhibits voter fraud.

In what way does this law do anything meaningful to reduce voter fraud, a proven non-problem which seems to be a code phrase for 'keeping people from voting who might support a Democrat.'
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th June 2018, 04:32 PM   #153
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,237
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
It's all about making it easier for our team to vote or making it harder for the other team to vote.
FTFY. Of course, the current general (but strong) trend is Democrats favoring more people voting (our overall voting participation rate in this country is actually pretty bad, after all) and the Republicans trying to make it harder for people to vote (and more than a couple have outright admitted it over the years). Either way, it's worth noting that losing 1000 valid votes for every 1 invalid vote removed (to be overwhelmingly optimistic about the effects of the actual Republican efforts) is a huge loss with regards to election integrity, not a gain.

Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I try to avoid thinking that way, and so I just try to do things that sound sensible to me. Register to vote while getting a driver's license? That sounds pretty darned sensible. Have to show ID? Sounds pretty darned sensible.

So I can't get bent out of shape about a law to purge dead people from voting rolls, regardless of whose team wins from it, and regardless of the fact that the people who passed the law did so specifically because they thought their team would be the ones who benefit, while undoubtedly talking about "integrity" or something. It's a bunch of hogwash, but when all is said and done, it's pretty reasonable.

And I certainly can't imagine how such a law could be unconstitutional. I doubt I'll read this particular Supreme Court opinion, but I can't see how four justices would say that it violates the constitution. If someone could give a couple of sentences of summary about why that might be, it might pique my interest enough to pursue it, but for the moment I can't imagine what provision of the constitution it supposedly violated.
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Purging voter roles is just one example of electoral fraud. Why shouldn't you be registered for life?
Removing dead and ineligible voters from the voter roles is something useful and tends to enjoy broad, though weak, support. What's not supported is when any group pointedly tries to abuse that need for decent bookkeeping to disenfranchise eligible voters, especially when they do things inconsistently and with obvious underlying political intent.

Either way, one can certainly support the former while ruling that the latter is unconstitutional.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What? No. This is wrong. It is bad, immoral.

This is the most literally fascist thing I have read on this forum. I denounce it, and I denounce you.

I want to make it absolutely clear that you do not represent my politics in any way, shape, or form.
And logger's views are becoming ever more prominent and mainstream for the right, unfortunately, by the look of it. It used to be that I could respect mainstream conservatives, even if I frequently disagreed with them. That becomes ever more difficult, though, with the direction that far too many of them seem to be trending.

Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Democrats act like making somebody show ID proving they have the right to vote is a horrific injustice. Removing people from the rolls for failing to vote? It's another Selma! It's almost like there were never crooked politicians who found a way to get the dead to vote.
No. You're horribly misrepresenting the actual issues in play. But you knew that by now and likely just don't care.

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Additional efforts to detect extensive voter fraud have also failed.
Some of them did make for fine propaganda, though! There's a lot of people with the first name John, after all. Many of them even have the same last name as another John! In fact, there are Johns with matching last names who voted in every state! That's clear evidence of voter fraud actually occurring to people that believe in millions of cases of voter fraud.

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
I think the issue is the term "problem." It is a problem in the sense that a quiz has problems on it. "It isn't a problem" that a bunch of dead people are on the rolls.
That it leaves open an avenue for abuse is certainly a problem.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 16th June 2018 at 04:55 PM.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 04:34 AM   #154
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,858
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
I once went 4 months riding my bicycle without a seat (and I rode my bike for more than an hour every day) after the seat was stolen because I didn't want to spend the $10 for a new seat.

If I remember right eventually my sister bought me one.
Bah, he can't imagine being actually poor so the poor don't exist. Republican logic, if it doesn't happen to me it doesn't happen.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 04:36 AM   #155
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,858
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
States with voter ID requirements all provide voter ID's for free.
But of course they don't need to be provided in some location that is actually accessible to people with 4 jobs. That would be asking way to much.

They are freely available in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 04:39 AM   #156
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,858
Originally Posted by bobtaftfan View Post
The Ohio law is perfectly reasonable. If you don't vote in two years, you get a mailer from the state with a prepaid return envelope asking you to verify your address. If you don't return the mailer *and* you don't vote in the next two elections, *then* your name gets removed from the rolls.

And, if by chance you were on a six-year vacation and you come back and find you're not registered, all you gotta do is just re-register.

The Democrats don't like any law that in any way inhibits voter fraud.
Exactly homeless vets don't deserve the right to vote ever. They shouldn't even have any human rights. Better strip a 100,000 people of their rights than let 1 person vote improperly.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2018, 01:35 PM   #157
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 17,799
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Exactly homeless vets don't deserve the right to vote ever. They shouldn't even have any human rights. Better strip a 100,000 people of their rights than let 1 person vote improperly for the other party.
FTFY
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th June 2018, 12:05 AM   #158
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,237
Hey, look, a piece on voter purges from the very progressive Daily Kos.

Quote:
Done right, purges are a perfectly reasonable way to make sure voter rolls are up to date and accurate by removing the dead, people who have moved, duplicate names, and those who are otherwise ineligible to vote. But there is no national standard for such purges, and this is also true of many states, where purges are left up to local election officials setting their own standards. Those often reflect little more than intentional bias.

As a decade-old Brennan report points out, purges often depend on lists filled with errors. This includes notices of deaths of people who are still alive. Voters are purged secretly and without notice, meaning they can show up on election day and find they aren’t on the rolls and not entitled to a ballot. Bad “matching” criteria makes voters vulnerable to manipulated and abusive purges (like the Florida 2000 purge that cleared the rolls of anyone if 80 percent of the letters of their last names were the same as those of persons with criminal convictions).
Shockingly, there's agreement that voter purges done well are a good thing! There's also a number of very valid concerns raised about how they very frequently aren't done well, not that you'll be likely to hear anything about the actual stances and valid issues raised by these people on right-wing opinion media.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; 27th June 2018 at 12:07 AM.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.