The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[BugI02]

Never-minding my issue with the notion of widespread fraud being "perpetrated for decades,"... Sure, have the federal govt instruct the states to audit and implement practices that would ensure reliability of their election, rather than place that power in the federal govt creating a clearinghouse of every American citizen where the potential for abuse is staggering.

That's a fair question, and would be difficult, no doubt, but do I need to surrender my privacy so the govt can figure out a better way to prevent voter fraud?

Kut (hopes you see, other arguments that would apply if you say yes)

Again, from the original WaPo cite I made in #439

Under federal law, each state must maintain a central file of registered voters. States collect different amounts of information on voters. While the files are technically public records, states usually charge fees to individuals or entities who want to access them. Political campaigns and parties typically use these files to compile their massive voter lists.

Way to close the privacy barn door after the horses are long gone. Or do you trust a political party creating that clearing house for every american citizen? At least you have tools to exercize some transparency and control over the gov't, a political party - not so much

I also have yet to find a source for the commission wanting your criminal or military records, or more than last four of SSN. Cite please

 

[Kutnupe14]

Again, from the original WaPo cite I made in #439




Way to close the privacy barn door after the horses are long gone. Or do you trust a political party creating that clearing house for every american citizen? At least you have tools to exercize some transparency and control over the gov't, a political party - not so much

I also have yet to find a source for the commission wanting your criminal or military records, or more than last four of SSN. Cite please

lol... Timestamp 8:22PM

 

[BugI02]

I stand corrected, Kut

View attachment 56926View attachment 56927


Please note that, as I surmised, it specifies only whether and which elections you participated in since 2006 - not how you voted. Also specifically states wants military "status" which likely would be used to compare if you were deployed and voted absentee and look for fraud in your home district (i.e.: someone voting in your name). Also note it only asks about "felony convictions" not complete criminal record, again germane because a felony pop makes you ineligible to vote in many states (despite terry McAuliffe's efforts to the contrary

Please also note the WaPo link makes plain that a lot of this is already public data, although it's pay to play. I just don't see the overreach, but then I'm not part of the 'resistance'

 

[Kutnupe14]

I stand corrected, Kut

View attachment 56926View attachment 56927


Please note that, as I surmised, it specifies only whether and which elections you participated in since 2006 - not how you voted. Also specifically states wants military "status" which likely would be used to compare if you were deployed and voted absentee and look for fraud in your home district (i.e.: someone voting in your name). Also note it only asks about "felony convictions" not complete criminal record, again germane because a felony pop makes you ineligible to vote in many states (despite terry McAuliffe's efforts to the contrary

Please also note the WaPo link makes plain that a lot of this is already public data, although it's pay to play. I just don't see the overreach, but then I'm not part of the 'resistance'

You get a responses for doing a standup thing, not often seen.

 

[Steel and wood]

Why would anyone have Facebook when this site and this thread is outstanding

 

[BugI02]

You get a responses for doing a standup thing, not often seen.

View attachment 56930

 

[SSGSAD]

No your wrong, That's a cop-out.. You don't have to vote for him. If Republicans were just an itty bitty tiny bit more responsible they could have actually voted for a better candidate in the first place. But no, go ahead and cop-out, because frankly if you ask me that's exactly how he got this far in the first place. So you voted for him, well then take responsibility for it and stop your D*** whining.

However if now that you really think what you voted for has turned out to be unacceptable well then do something about it. I'm just so tired of hearing all of the excuses whether it be for Trump's behavior or for why you felt compelled to vote for such a despicable human being.

THAT, is difficult, when "they" put up 16 different people to run,

and the "R" say if my guy or gal, doesn't make it, then I am NOT voting .....

The "R", are always split like that .....

The "d", however, get behind whatever person, is put up .....

Maybe NOT last year, but usually .....

 

[hoosierdoc]

what is the privacy concern with what the feds are requesting? They are not asking for who you voted for. The rest should be available, they're just asking states to compile the data for them, right?

 

[jamil]

Trump voter fraud commission will only get some info on Indiana voters

 

[actaeon277]

Well, I have to admit, I don't like it.
But.. isn't most of that data already available when you register to vote?
I don't remember. I haven't had to register in decades.

 

[Birds Away]

Anyone with any intellectual honesty will admit there has been rampant voter fraud for many years. It has been one of the cornerstones of the Chicago machine. But, it is also true that if any other gubmint entity asked for this information we would be getting out the torches and pitchforks.

 

[BugI02]

Well, I have to admit, I don't like it.
But.. isn't most of that data already available when you register to vote?
I don't remember. I haven't had to register in decades.

Do a quick google search of your full name. Your voting history and party affiliation (if any) will likely come up in the first few pages. Your home state/district has already been selling data to all comers (with a sufficiently large checkbook)

I actually wonder if some of the objections aren't economic, I definitely know some are virtue signaling (As in "We won't give this information to a Presidential commission, but we'll sell it to anybody")

 

[2A_Tom]

I agree with Kut in principle, however the info is already kept by States and should be available throigh FOIA. Therefor aside from the resistancs (democrats and MSM) I don't see how to stop it.

Years ago I was going through a tough time and I went to some county agency for assistance. The first thing they did was pull my voting records and told me that I was not eligible because I had missed voting in several small local elections ( NWI local elections = Democrats running unopposed) the fact that I am registered Republican did not enter into it at all.

From the articles posted it seems that it is the democrat states that are balking. I am prejudiced, so that is where I expect to see a lot of dead people, individuals voting several times and illegal aliens voting,

 

[Kutnupe14]

I agree with Kut in principle, however the info is already kept by States and should be available throigh FOIA. Therefor aside from the resistancs (democrats and MSM) I don't see how to stop it.

Years ago I was going through a tough time and I went to some county agency for assistance. The first thing they did was pull my voting records and told me that I was not eligible because I had missed voting in several small local elections ( NWI local elections = Democrats running unopposed) the fact that I am registered Republican did not enter into it at all.

From the articles posted it seems that it is the democrat states that are balking. I am prejudiced, so that is where I expect to see a lot of dead people, individuals voting several times and illegal aliens voting,

Some of that information. Releasing name, voting district, and address is ok... political affiliation, military service, voting history, and other thing are most certainly NOT ok. And it's not just the Democrat states.... unless Alabama and Mississippi, amongst others, have had one hell of a political swing in past few months. I would ask, why do you think even "red" states oppose this?

 

[2A_Tom]

The same reason I am opposed to it. I would rather not have a national registration of anything, Voters, guns, gun owners, or much else.

 

[jamil]

Some of that information. Releasing name, voting district, and address is ok... political affiliation, military service, voting history, and other thing are most certainly NOT ok. And it's not just the Democrat states.... unless Alabama and Mississippi, amongst others, have had one hell of a political swing in past few months. I would ask, why do you think even "red" states oppose this?

I generally agree with this. The things that are personal about voting is none of the fed's business. And I see no reason it should have that information to investigate voter fraud. It seems to me the most usefulness for that information anyway would be for nefarious purposes. I don't think the value of that information to investigate voter fraud is all that high. So why do they want it?

 

[jamil]

The same reason I am opposed to it. I would rather not have a national registration of anything, Voters, guns, gun owners, or much else.

 

[indiucky]

You get a responses for doing a standup thing, not often seen.

See Kut....Not only is Trump Making America Great Again but he is helping me and Bug with our integrity and manners....

 

[ghitch75]

Democratic Bill Lays the Groundwork to Remove Trump From Office - NBC News

 

[ghitch75]

Protesters Rally in Dozens of Cities to Call for Trump's Impeachment - NBC News