The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[IndyDave1776]

I kinda suspect that voter fraud is bigger than the naysayers say it is. I also don't think it's as big as Trump said it was. Hillary likely did not beat Trump by anywhere near 3 million illegal votes. But that has nothing to do with why Kut said he opposes this. It's the personal nature of the information requested. I tend to agree with that as well. Trump can go **** a tree if he needs that information to prove voter fraud. If it's happening, aggregate information should be able to establish how big the problem is.

In order to do this, you have to connect individual voters to the record indicating that they have in fact voted. Otherwise, from aggregate, you get more of the same ~50%+/- voted which could as easily mean that 25% of living voters voted and the remainder are dead/fictional, thus fraudulent.

I didn't say that. I said that it wasn't as widespread as the current administration has alleged.

Like I said before, it takes only one fraudulent vote to cancel your legitimate vote. How much of this are you willing to tolerate and to what extent are you willing to believe 'it isn't a problem'?

 

[jamil]

You and many others believe that we must continue to spend time and money to invesitgate Russia medeling in the election, even though every wittness has said there is no evidence.

What is that word you always use Kut?

oh yeah, consistency.

Are you sure you're not confusing that with the "collusion" investigation? Just about everyone who would be in a position to know the intelligence has said there's conclusive evidence that Russia meddled in the election. The thing that everyone has said there is no evidence for is collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to meddle in our elections.

I think it's as reasonable to accept that Russia meddled in our elections as it is to accept it as unreasonable to believe that Trump or even his campaign colluded with Russians. As far as importance, I guess I'll deem it more important when we stop meddling in other 1st world nation's elections.

As far as what to spend money investigating, knowing the answers to accusations have value. At this point it is quite valuable to know the answer to the collusion question. So, investigate on. Spare no expense. Leave no stone unturned, so that there is no possible way Democrats can spin their accusations as meaning anything other than a witch hunt.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Like I said before, it takes only one fraudulent vote to cancel your legitimate vote. How much of this are you willing to tolerate and to what extent are you willing to believe 'it isn't a problem'?

It's not about how much I'm willing to tolerate, it's about how much privacy I'm willing to give up. The govt can investigate voter fraud all they want, however, I draw limitations on how they "investigate" that fraud when it increasingly strays into my fourth amendment protections. I wonder if you'd hold the same opinion, if the govt said that "to better solve gun crimes," they needed to record the serial numbers of every firearm, and owner. I guess it just depends on how much you are "willing to tolerate" right?

 

[Leadeye]

I think voter fraud has always been with us and will continue, probably getting bigger every year. There's so much cash at stake now for machine politics that they'll use every chip at their disposal to protect their self interest. I don't like it but it's really an economic reality.

Always follow the money

 

[IndyDave1776]

It's not about how much I'm willing to tolerate, it's about how much privacy I'm willing to give up. The govt can investigate voter fraud all they want, however, I draw limitations on how they "investigate" that fraud when it increasingly strays into my fourth amendment protections. I wonder if you'd hold the same opinion, if the govt said that "to better solve gun crimes," they needed to record the serial numbers of every firearm, and owner. I guess it just depends on how much you are "willing to tolerate" right?

There is a huge difference between the two. In this instance, they aren't asking for anything they don't already have available other than party affiliation which is of questionable necessity--and this approach will actually work to ferret out fraud. On the other hand, they do not have a comprehensive gun registry, and have no legitimate purpose for having one not only on constitutional grounds but also on the grounds that it will do a grand total of zero in contribution to achieving the ostensible purpose. If we still enjoyed some privacy regarding our voting, I would agree with you, but I don't have a problem 'giving up' what has long since been lost if I get a tangible return on it.

 

[2A_Tom]

What is the special prosecutor investigating? Meddilng or Collusion.

How did the Russians meddle?

Did they turn Hillary voters against her?

Should we capitulate and give her the White House?

We are pouring time and money down the drain.

So, investigate on. Spare no expense. Leave no stone unturned, so that there is no possible way Democrats can spin their accusations as meaning anything other than a witch hunt.

It doesn't matter when it stuop if it ever does the D's will still pitch and moan.

 

[Kutnupe14]

There is a huge difference between the two. In this instance, they aren't asking for anything they don't already have available other than party affiliation which is of questionable necessity--and this approach will actually work to ferret out fraud. On the other hand, they do not have a comprehensive gun registry, and have no legitimate purpose for having one not only on constitutional grounds but also on the grounds that it will do a grand total of zero in contribution to achieving the ostensible purpose. If we still enjoyed some privacy regarding our voting, I would agree with you, but I don't have a problem 'giving up' what has long since been lost if I get a tangible return on it.

Yes, there is a HUGE difference between the two. Here's your counter example: if every gun as tracked, by serial number, after it was sold, you'd have a very valuable tool in solving crimes where firearms are used. You could simply cross reference caliber of weapons with those in a given area, and you have a great starting point. While I disagree with the govt ever having such information, I'd question your opinion of non-legitimacy (when compared to voter fraud), as I'm sure you know that crimes involving firearms, and the actual negative effect (i.e. murders/shootings) are exponentially higher than proven cases of voter fraud.
Further, the Constitution provides that the States preserve the integrity of their elections, not the Federal Govt, so since the feds can't exactly do a thing, in that regard, it begs the question "why is this information needed?" I think most people, upon further inspection, and seeing the moron who is running this voter commission clown show, will come to the conclusion that the information, if provided, would be used to push a "numbers narrative," of what is possible, but not come close to being proven. i.e. there are 100 John Smith's in a given area, and 50 of them are elderly and don't vote. One John Smith who who is magically aware of the 50 namesakes that son't vote, decides to cast 50 fraudulent ballots since he shares the same name.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Yes, there is a HUGE difference between the two. Here's your counter example: if every gun as tracked, by serial number, after it was sold, you'd have a very valuable tool in solving crimes where firearms are used. You could simply cross reference caliber of weapons with those in a given area, and you have a great starting point. While I disagree with the govt ever having such information, I'd question your opinion of non-legitimacy (when compared to voter fraud), as I'm sure you know that crimes involving firearms, and the actual negative effect (i.e. murders/shootings) are exponentially higher than proven cases of voter fraud.
Further, the Constitution provides that the States preserve the integrity of their elections, not the Federal Govt, so since the feds can't exactly do a thing, in that regard, it begs the question "why is this information needed?" I think most people, upon further inspection, and seeing the moron who is running this voter commission clown show, will come to the conclusion that the information, if provided, would be used to push a "numbers narrative," of what is possible, but not come close to being proven. i.e. there are 100 John Smith's in a given area, and 50 of them are elderly and don't vote. One John Smith who who is magically aware of the 50 namesakes that son't vote, decides to cast 50 fraudulent ballots since he shares the same name.

You have apparently never worked in an election. Both parties have access to the complete voter registrations so the representative of each party in the registration office would know about all 50 John Smiths. If you take away the threshold of a .gov photo ID, then I could walk in the door claiming to be John Smith. One could order absentee ballots for the 49 non-voting John Smiths. If John actually received his ballot he didn't order, one could make a point of sending a trusted person to 'help' him vote. This works really well at nursing homes as well--a certain former sheriff would 'help' the old folks vote straight ticket the party of his preference, all while enjoying the complete trust of those he was 'helping'. When you have more votes than there are people in some places, how do you sort that out unless you have a way to compare registered voters with actual people who live there?

Back to your gun analogy--while murder is obviously not a good thing, it has only one victim. When a corrupt individual is installed in office by election fraud you have anywhere from hundreds of victims in the case of a trustee in a small township to hundreds of millions of victims in the case of a presidential election.

Again, I will point out that this does not involve giving up any information we haven't already given up, just not in an election fraud study-friendly format.

 

[jamil]

Given up to whom? It's bad enough if local election officials have whatever they have. It doesn't need to go to the feds.

 

[bwframe]

All we're talking about is public information anyway. Your driver's license or state ID info. Unless, of course, your state has decided that this is too much to ask for to verify you haven't already voted a dozen other times that day...

...hmm...

 

[hoosierdoc]

All we're talking about is public information anyway. Your driver's license or state ID info. Unless, of course, your state has decided that this is too much to ask for to verify you haven't already voted a dozen other times that day...

...hmm...

I agree. They are simply asking for aggregated info they can get themselves. Check the rolls, flush the fraud.

 

[Kutnupe14]

41 states will not comply with the request. What are these states hiding?

 

[KLB]

41 states will not comply with the request. What are these states hiding?

Good.

I think you are right. I think if Obama had tried this that there would have been much wailing and gnashing of teeth by those that are in favor of it now.

 

[jamil]

41 states will not comply with the request. What are these states hiding?

Indiana didn't tell Trump to **** all the way off. Maybe 60% though.

Well. Okay. She's probably really doesn't really give a flying **** about privacy, but is only following state law:

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

Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson won't provide information about voters' Security numbers, birthdates, political affiliation or voting history.

She said in a statement Friday that state law only allows her to share voter names, congressional districts and addresses.


I kinda get the feeling that some Trumpers would like to change the State law to help Trump get our info. We're in a weird place these days on INGO.

 

[indiucky]

I kinda think Christie is almost as disliked by the right, as he is the left.

Remember Kut that a hardcore NJ Republican couldn't run as a Blue dog Democrat in the Midwest because deep down we know he's a gun grabbing hippie with mob ties...Just sayin'.......

 

[indiucky]

You and many others believe that we must continue to spend time and money to invesitgate Russia medeling in the election, even though every wittness has said there is no evidence.

What is that word you always use Kut?

oh yeah, consistency.

It's my word to describe Kut...It is "Sir Kut the Consistent" and I call him that when he takes a stance true to his beliefs in spite of going against what folks often see as the grain of Kut....He does it quite often and is one of the reasons that although I may often disagree with Kut, I respect Kut....

You know there is a real human being behind the Thongs and the Zima...Just a red clay Alabama man trying to get by in this crazy world that judges thongs and Zima drinkers......

 

[IndyDave1776]

Given up to whom? It's bad enough if local election officials have whatever they have. It doesn't need to go to the feds.

The only thing in that list that the feds don't already have is our party affiliation. Their problem is that the information, as they have it, is formatted for dealing with us individually rather than as parts of a particular system, in which case it is much more workable all the way around for them to simply start with the system they are investigating. I am not saying that I like it, but I am going to take what good is available from a situation I don't like, much in the same way that even though I am not a believer in redistribution through taxation, if I am going to have my money forcibly taken, I am going to take back what I can get as opposed to refusing to do so on principle even though I already paid for it.

 

[SSGSAD]

I am going to interrupt,


WIBC, is broadcasting a Ronald Reagan speech .....

It started at 12:00 noon .....

So for those of you that don't know what a REAL President sounds like .....

Take a listen ....

Quite an eye opening experience ......


JMHO ..... YMMV .....

back to regular program .....

 

[jamil]

I am going to interrupt,


WIBC, is broadcasting a Ronald Reagan speech .....

It started at 12:00 noon .....

So for those of you that don't know what a REAL President sounds like .....

Take a listen ....

Quite an eye opening experience ......


JMHO ..... YMMV .....

back to regular program .....

Which speech are they broadcasting?

 

[Alpo]

Probably the one where he said he din no nuffin about Iran/Contra............