Registering as a democrat

[Timjoebillybob]

Yeah, okay.
Vote fraud
I'll start worrying about that the moment that I get killed by a unicorn sliding down a rainbow.

Intentionally violating voting law isn't voter fraud? I'll agree your chance of getting caught are virtually nil, but it's still fraud. If your chances of getting caught were the same, would stealing not be theft?

 

[oldpink]

Spare me.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Spare me.

What would you call intentionally violating voting laws?

 

[oldpink]

What would you call intentionally violating voting laws?

In the context of this, I would put it below jaywalking or sidewalk spitting...way below.
Do you make it a habit to tilt at windmills, Don Quixote?
LOL

 

[Timjoebillybob]

In the context of this, I would put it below jaywalking or sidewalk spitting...way below.
Do you make it a habit to tilt at windmills, Don Quixote?
LOL

I didn't ask where you would put it, I asked what you would call it. Notice the difference?

Do you make it a habit of being dishonest and intentionally breaking voting laws?
LOL

 

[oldpink]

I didn't ask where you would put it, I asked what you would call it. Notice the difference?

Do you make it a habit of being dishonest and intentionally breaking voting laws?
LOL

Bottom line here:
1) Indiana almost never has an impact in the prmary process.
2) As usual, the 2008 Republican primary had already been decided before it even got to Indiana, making ours a mere formality.
3) The Democrat primary was still not quite decided yet.
3) I genuinely believed that Hillary was the lesser of the two evils for the Democrat primary, so I went ahead and voted for her to slow down someone I genuinely believed (and still believe) was incredibly hostile to this nation as founded.
4) Probably because lots of other Hoosiers believed as I did, Indiana was one of the few late states to give Hillary the win over Obama.
5) I would be curious to see exactly how voting my conscience, rather than just putting a useless vote on a flawed candidate (McCain) who had already been rubber-stamped makes me a "law-breaker" or "dishonest."
Keep on tilting at those windmills, though.

 

[Mark 1911]

Thought long and hard about this but I've decided to register as a democrat. My reasoning for this is quite simple really. That way I can vote AGAINST Hillary TWICE!!

Like a black man signing up for the KKK so he can not show up for the meetings.

 

[HoughMade]

Like a black man signing up for the KKK so he can not show up for the meetings.

[video=youtube;493pL_Vbtnc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=493pL_Vbtnc[/video]

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Bottom line here:
1) Indiana almost never has an impact in the prmary process.
2) As usual, the 2008 Republican primary had already been decided before it even got to Indiana, making ours a mere formality.
3) The Democrat primary was still not quite decided yet.
3) I genuinely believed that Hillary was the lesser of the two evils for the Democrat primary, so I went ahead and voted for her to slow down someone I genuinely believed (and still believe) was incredibly hostile to this nation as founded.
4) Probably because lots of other Hoosiers believed as I did, Indiana was one of the few late states to give Hillary the win over Obama.
5) I would be curious to see exactly how voting my conscience, rather than just putting a useless vote on a flawed candidate (McCain) who had already been rubber-stamped makes me a "law-breaker" or "dishonest."
Keep on tilting at those windmills, though.

1)Doesn't matter.
2)See one
3)See one
4)See one
5)How you would be breaking the law? I posted the IC above, per the code did you vote in the primary you were supposed to? If not you broke the law. As for dishonest, if you didn't know the law you weren't being dishonest. If you know the law and willfully disregard it, then you would be dishonest by voting in the primary you were not supposed to.

 

[oldpink]

1)Doesn't matter.
2)See one
3)See one
4)See one
5)How you would be breaking the law? I posted the IC above, per the code did you vote in the primary you were supposed to? If not you broke the law. As for dishonest, if you didn't know the law you weren't being dishonest. If you know the law and willfully disregard it, then you would be dishonest by voting in the primary you were not supposed to.

That little IC you keep waving around is about as clear as mud, and impossible to understand for anyone but a legalese ninja.
Again, I say bull.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

That little IC you keep waving around is about as clear as mud, and impossible to understand for anyone but a legalese ninja.
Again, I say bull.

You have a problem understanding this? Seriously? This is far from legalese ninja stuff.

A voter may vote at a primary election:
(1) if the voter, at the last general election, voted for a majority of the regular nominees of the political party holding the primary election; or
(2) if the voter did not vote at the last general election, but intends to vote at the next general election for a majority of the regular nominees of the political party holding the primary election; as long as the voter was registered as a voter at the last general election or has registered since then.

I'll break it down for you in nice simple terms.

1)If you voted in the last general, get the primary ballot for the party you voted the most for.
2)If you didn't vote in the last general, get the primary ballot for the party you intend to vote the most for.

Understand now?

 

[oldpink]

You have a problem understanding this? Seriously? This is far from legalese ninja stuff.


I'll break it down for you in nice simple terms.

1)If you voted in the last general, get the primary ballot for the party you voted the most for.
2)If you didn't vote in the last general, get the primary ballot for the party you intend to vote the most for.

Understand now?

Yeah, everybody just tots up which party he voted the most for, then picks the appropriate party ballot for the following primary, otherwise out come the thumbscrews and iron maiden.
*eyeroll*

 

[cobber]

When you're quoting laws like this, you also need to cite to the penalties section.

What is the penalty for voting across party affiliation in Indiana. Since you already have the IC open to the relevant Chapter.

And from another thread:

Last time I checked, legally laws have to be written so that that every day person can understand them.

EDIT:
There isn't a penalty at law. The most that can happen is you can be challenged at the polling place by a worker who is of the same affiliation as the party whose ballot you seek to vote. But how would they know how you vote in the general? And you still get to cast a provisional ballot.

It's not fraud. Look up the definition of fraud, which is a criminal offense. Voter fraud would constitute presenting false ID at the polling station, or purporting to be eligible to vote when you aren't.
For fraud generally and specifically, see IC 35-43-5. If this were fraud, Title 3 would either provide that or would direct you to the relevant section of Title 35.

But here's a case of Democrats committing election fraud in '08, involving false signatures on petitions to place obama on the ballot:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...son-for-08-ballot-fraud-in-obama-clinton.html

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Yeah, everybody just tots up which party he voted the most for, then picks the appropriate party ballot for the following primary, otherwise out come the thumbscrews and iron maiden.
*eyeroll*

For some reason I don't think you would have a problem figuring out which party you voted the most for.
Even if you seem to have a difficult time understanding simple law and consider it something you would need a legalese ninja to figure out.

When you're quoting laws like this, you also need to cite to the penalties section.

What is the penalty for voting across party affiliation in Indiana. Since you already have the IC open to the relevant Chapter.

And from another thread:



EDIT:
There isn't a penalty at law. The most that can happen is you can be challenged at the polling place by a worker who is of the same affiliation as the party whose ballot you seek to vote. But how would they know how you vote in the general? And you still get to cast a provisional ballot.

It's not fraud. Look up the definition of fraud, which is a criminal offense. Voter fraud would constitute presenting false ID at the polling station, or purporting to be eligible to vote when you aren't.
For fraud generally and specifically, see IC 35-43-5. If this were fraud, Title 3 would either provide that or would direct you to the relevant section of Title 35.

As for that quote from the other thread, you do know that he admits he's never seen that listed as a law, and that it's pretty much his opinion. Try reading the fed tax code and tell me the average person can understand it.

And what could be the penalty. As I stated it would be virtually impossible to prove, but I'd guess it could fall under.

IC 3-14-2-9
Unregistered or unauthorized voting
Sec. 9. A person who knowingly votes or offers to vote at an
election when the person is not registered or authorized to vote
commits a Level 6 felony.
As added by P.L.5-1986, SEC.10. Amended

What I posted earlier is what it takes to be an eligible voter in the primary, if your not eligible you would not be authorized to vote.

 

[cobber]

For some reason I don't think you would have a problem figuring out which party you voted the most for.

[And this would be the government's business why?]

Even if you seem to have a difficult time understanding simple law and consider it something you would need a legalese ninja to figure out.

As for that quote from the other thread, you do know that he admits he's never seen that listed as a law, and that it's pretty much his opinion. Try reading the fed tax code and tell me the average person can understand it.

[I was poking fun at the other thread.]

And what could be the penalty. As I stated it would be virtually impossible to prove, but I'd guess it could fall under.


What I posted earlier is what it takes to be an eligible voter in the primary, if your not eligible you would not be authorized to vote.

If you can find a Title 3 definition that says ineligible = unauthorized, please post it.

Ditto that unauthorized/unregistered voting is the same as taking the other party's ballot in a primary election.

Please note that IC 3-10-1 and 3-14-2 are in the same neighborhood only, i.e. they concern voting. I could cite plenty of Title 35 stuff from different Articles. Doesn't mean they're the same law or even related, except insofar as they all relate to criminal offenses. Try e.g. IC 35-42-1 and IC 35-43-1. Right next to each other in the code even!

Not eligible to vote? Because you take the other party's ballot? I'm guessing that would never go to the Court of Appeals assuming this were correct a correct reading of the law, b/c the government has no compelling interest (i.e., business) in ensuring that people vote for Party A and not for Party B. Except in Illinois.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

If you can find a Title 3 definition that says ineligible = unauthorized, please post it.

Ditto that unauthorized/unregistered voting is the same as taking the other party's ballot in a primary election.

Please note that IC 3-10-1 and 3-14-2 are in the same neighborhood only, i.e. they concern voting. I could cite plenty of Title 35 stuff from different Articles. Doesn't mean they're the same law or even related, except insofar as they all relate to criminal offenses. Try e.g. IC 35-42-1 and IC 35-43-1. Right next to each other in the code even!

Not eligible to vote? Because you take the other party's ballot? I'm guessing that would never go to the Court of Appeals assuming this were correct a correct reading of the law, b/c the government has no compelling interest (i.e., business) in ensuring that people vote for Party A and not for Party B. Except in Illinois.

Eligible,authorized,ineligible, and unauthorized are not defined.

Article 14 is the offenses section of Title 3. There are no other offenses listed through out the rest of Title 3 that I can find.

Yes not eligible to vote because you did not follow what the law states is required to be eligible. Which I posted several times. To be eligible to vote in the primaries, you have to vote in the primary of the party you cast the most votes for in the last general. If you did not vote in the last general, you vote in the primary for the party of which you intend to cast the most votes for. Do you agree that is accurate?


Compelling interest is not required in this. You have fundamental right to vote in a parties primary that you are not a member of, as defined by state law? How many states have closed primaries? How are they able to do so? IN has a closed primary, but how it is set up it is virtually impossible to enforce. Heck the primaries themselves are due to state law.

 

[oldpink]

 

[cobber]

Eligible,authorized,ineligible, and unauthorized are not defined.

Article 14 is the offenses section of Title 3. There are no other offenses listed through out the rest of Title 3 that I can find.

Yes not eligible to vote because you did not follow what the law states is required to be eligible. Which I posted several times. To be eligible to vote in the primaries, you have to vote in the primary of the party you cast the most votes for in the last general. If you did not vote in the last general, you vote in the primary for the party of which you intend to cast the most votes for. Do you agree that is accurate?


Compelling interest is not required in this. You have fundamental right to vote in a parties primary that you are not a member of, as defined by state law? How many states have closed primaries? How are they able to do so? IN has a closed primary, but how it is set up it is virtually impossible to enforce. Heck the primaries themselves are due to state law.

Okay. Have it your way. Not going to spend ten pages arguing with you on this.

BTW, can Libertarians vote in the primary if the LP doesn't have any contested races?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Okay. Have it your way. Not going to spend ten pages arguing with you on this.

BTW, can Libertarians vote in the primary if the LP doesn't have any contested races?

You could at least state if you agree or disagree with what I posted is accurate re eligibility to vote.

If they meet the eligibility requirements outlined, yes. The LP (and others) are not included in the IN primaries, they select their candidates strictly at convention. If they get at least 10% of the votes for sec of state they are required to be in the primaries(In IN no idea about other states). I do not know if they are allowed to be in the primaries if they get under 10% though.

ETA I'm not a repub, I'd probably be considered a independent. I vote in the R primary because that is what I'm eligible for under the IC.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Anything to add other than your very sad attempt and wrong use of snark? Tilting at windmills is a phrase that means attacking imaginary enemies. The IC is not imaginary my friend, as much as you may wish it was. It's very real, and other than your inability to comprehend basic law(nothing that requires a legal ninja that is) I'm not quite sure what to say. It's not my fault if you violate state election laws and commit a felony. Or if you dislike that it is pointed out to you that you are doing so.