Voter fraud--an expose'
 

Seems like a comprehensive plan to steal elections is in place. Some of this may be over-reach, but the author documents his allegations. Still, I do not see an answer to the criticism often posted here concerning the number required to affect an election and the penalties for voter fraud. Perhaps the penalties do not matter because they are rarely enforced. I can't remember hearing prosecution of voter fraud cases.

The Left?s National Vote Fraud Strategy Exposed

Meet the real election fraud.
Diebold Memos Disclose Florida 2000 E-Voting Fraud | Scoop News
Florida's flawed "voter-cleansing" program - Florida’s flawed “voter-cleansing” program - Salon.com
Florida 2000 Redux: GOP Using "Voter Fraud" To Disenfranchise
Vote Fraud 2004: How Ohio was "Delivered" to Bush
The 2004 US Elections: The Mother of all Vote FraudsYou can't trust anyone these days, or has it always been this way?

I look at it like this, GOP is pushing for voter ID, DNC is screaming like spoiled little children over the issue. Who then seems to be showing their game plan here?

Well then if we all had to show ID, there wouldn't be a problem on either side would there?

GOP.

Promote voter fraud by requiring ID thus preventing cheating.
Gimmee a hit of that stuff.

I'm just high on facts here. I haven't read the article mentioned in the OP yet, but everything else I've read says that voter fraud is a GOP fantasy. GOP-backed laws making it tougher to vote are real. If you've got evidence to the contrary, let's see it.

Yeah, that's why the Secretary of States project was done.

There'll be a concerted effort this summer and fall in affected areas to get IDs for those voters (largely Dem) who find that after exercising their rights as U.S. citizens for years, can't vote due to the new ALEC written ID laws. Voter fraud is a red herring.

my only take on this is: one may vote if they are a citizen of legal age, thus not encumbered by a restriction such as a felony conviction. And, id is issued for many reasons and required for the most mundane matters of practicing commerce, which basically anyone may do. Thus, it does not seem onerous to provide an ID during the period of practicing the right to vote, which has a higher standard of restriction than that of commerce.

There has been only one case in Texas where voter fraud has been alleged. Several people have been arrested and indicted.

Details are here: Seven indicted for voter fraud in RUD election - Your Houston News: The Woodlands Villager: News

Many sources, including the Defendants themselves, have alluded to the possibility that all of the indicted are strong supporters of the Tea Party.

The gist of the matter is that very few voters were expected in this election which would elect members of a Rural Utilities District. The RUD decides on the amount of taxes to levy and if an RUD can join in with other RUD's or a city. In The Woodlands only businesses are taxes on property and not homeowners, and the RUD has the power to change this.

Just a few votes would be needed to throw the election, so these guys are supposed to have stepped up to the plate and committed voter fraud.

At least that is what the Attorney General of Texas is alleging. A trial is yet to be held.

The voting in question took place over a year ago, but the Republican Attorney General of Texas took a long time before bringing any charges. The rumor going 'round is that the Defendants bragged to a number of people about what they did and this sort of forced his hand on the matter, but that is just a rumor. It could be the Attorney General was too busy looking for other cases of voter fraud but finally gave up since there don't appear to be any.

I am sure all the facts about this will come out during the trials.

And......

All of those accused of voter fraud in this instance would have had no trouble producing an ID, and yet they are alleged by the State of Texas to have committed the Felony of Voter Fraud.

So this whole voter ID thing works to prevent voter fraud?

Nope.

I agree that it does not seem onerous, but apparently it is onerous for a number of people otherwise qualified to vote. I don't know why it is that way, but it is. I would not want to take away their right to vote unless there is some reason to do so, something more than an imaginary fear that people will show up with fake ID's and cast felonious votes. Come back to us with evidence that voter fraud happens, then maybe we can talk about depriving people of their right to vote.

It is a real issue, with arguments on both sides.

Count me as one who sees no reason for electronic methods to cast votes. The Constitution allows PLENTY of time to count the ballots. Its only our lack of patience that compels this desire for immediate results. I see too much opportunity for mischief with electronic voting machines, but a real "paper trail" is needed to have any assurance in the votes. Electronic machines can be hacked, and if they only recount what is in their memory, there is no way to independently audit the votes.

Texas must be one messed up state.

I could not find any report about the case in The Woodlands on Rush or Hannity or any other right wing talk show.

I guess they will wait until the sentences are handed down before reporting on the evils of committing Voter Fraud.

I'm not so worried about people with fake ID showing up to vote in someone else's name. What seems more plausible to me, and living in a Sanctuary State-controlled by a single party- makes it most plausible, is the issuing of voter cards to illegals, and instructing them to vote a straight party line ticket.

I want nothing to deter any citizen from voting. I also want only citizens voting.

I am guessing you posted those in a knee-jerk reaction with out bothering to read the linked article.

Neither party is as pure as the driven snow when it comes to election fraud - which is as old as elections themselves - whether it be thru "legal" means such as redrawing districts to create "safe" seats for one party or the other - or outright cheating such as "misplacing" absentee ballots or delaying their initial mailing such that they won't return in time to be valid.

In Texas, you had Tom Delay try to strongarm events to redraw districts to create a permanent R majority in the state legislature.

In NC, the D's have long had the districts so gerrymandered that nearly half the state house districts were a one-horse race, with only a D on the ballot, for several decades. This past election was the first time in OVER A CENTURY that anything close to an R majority was elected to the state house - mainly out of disgust, not so much with BO, but what could arguably be the most incompetent Governor elected by any state in modern times - that had her own party literally beg her not to run for reelection.

I don't know about proving voter fraud - but do I believe that people in BOTH parties have at least attempted voter fraud now or in the past? Damn right.

And Tom DeLay is now a convicted Felon.

Tom DeLay is also famous for lashing out at Republicans for compromising with anyone. His famous line is that only real leaders never compromise. Rush Limbaugh said that DeLay was right and that anyone who compromised was weak and unfit for office.

Republicans seemed to forget about this line when Obama refused to Compromise on an issue.

DeLay is now on the comeback trail and is a regular at Tea Party events in Texas. I wonder if he is pushing for Texas' Gov. Rick Perry to grant him a full pardon so he can run for office again?

You're amazingly well-informed of conspiracy theories for a foreigner. I'm impressed.

We need to keep those who may not be wealthy or educated enough to be considered desirable American citizens from voting in our elections and skewing the results. The constitution unfortunately requires that we allow such folks to vote, so our only practical strategy to keep such folks away from the polls is to make the prerequisite for voting just a wee-bit arduous. Not arduous enough to be successfully contested in court of course.

Naturally, I'm all for this, as I can't stand going to my polling place and seeing those unseemly great-unwashed ethnic types putting their grubby hands all over the levers in the voting booth. Makes me want to bring Purell to the polls.

In Texas, evidence of voter fraud abounds

I'm with you Paul. Who cares if unqualified people get to vote? They have to live here and pay taxes here, too so they should have an equal voice. Let them all through!

I noticed last week at the poll, they have hand sanitizer for people like you.:P

That's where Margaret Sanger was coming from about low educated indigents ruining our society, probably why DNC supports Planned Parenthood.

As long as they're American citizens, and reside within the jurisdiction of the polling place, dammit we just have to let them in. Even the Democrats...

Who can forget that those who came over in the Mayflower all had advanced degrees from Oxford?

And were basically the 1600's equivalent of the Far Righteous?:D

Sorry you feel that way. You are obviously way too good for us. You are free to find a better country.

Having read the opinion piece in the link the OP provides, the conspiracy themes run so deep as to blur the fact that there's no direct evidence of such, but plenty of what might best be called "seven degrees" type writing. A writer can link any theory to any event with enough creativity . . . coupled with a reader's lack of skepticism.

I love the part that you quoted:Tip of the iceberg, my butt. He claims 50 convictions, but only cites 3 cases where more stringent identification requirements would have made any difference. This is typical of voter fraud arguments. They raise the specter of people voting multiple times and voting for dead people, but then the overwhelming majority of the cases they cite have nothing to do with voter impersonation fraud. He says that voter fraud is hard to detect. Really? I would think that multiple votes by the same voter or votes by dead people would show up every time. Maybe now and then an imposter will get lucky and pick someone who is alive, registered to vote, and not likely to show up at the polls, but I find it hard to believe that people would concoct schemes based on such shaky assumptions. Abbott is full of baloney.

I still haven't read the article in the OP. Maybe it will cite evidence we haven't already seen.

I have no such evidence, other than anecdotal. However, I do not suppose that it does not exist. Nor do I understand why obtaining and using ID would be so difficult or fear inducing for a legal citizen, who on every other day before and after election day, circulates in society as a free citizen.

Oh I want to stay here; I just want to push the availability of voting privileges back to about the year 1800. Absent that, I just want to become a Republican...

If you are homeless you don't have an address. To get a PO box you need ID which they don't have because they are trying to get that so they can vote. It also cost money to get a copy of your BC which they may not have. These are just a few of the things I can think of that might make it difficult for a person to get a valid for of ID to vote.

Does it really matter whether you or I understand it? Isn't it enough that studies show that it happens?

You sound more like you fit the profile of a democrat voter. Margaret Sanger would have agreed perfectly with your expressed sentiments.

Thank God that today she probably would have had some difficulty becoming qualified to vote for political candidates supporting those sentiments...

Odd. Not one person here has commented on the Woodlands case.

I guess if you just ignore it then it goes away.

You can't register for either party without a home address.
I'd say thats voluntary removal from the system?

BOTOH they find cash for booze and dope so I don't think voting is a big issue.

And an even minor reading of Abbot's claims show he has inflated his figures by about 100%.

So far Abbot has 26 real convictions. Not bad for a six year period during which 24,000,000 votes were cast.

That means that .00000108333 of one percent were found guilty of voter fraud.

But in the Montgomery County, Texas, RUD election there were only 12 votes cast, and 7 of them are now thought to be the result of Voter Fraud. Based on this number the percentage of fake votes in this election is 58%, so yes, it appears there is a problem with voter fraud in some parts of Texas.

By the way, the trial of the 'RUD 7' begins on September 17th.

Regardless, its more than one case.

I read somewhere Obama was all for voter ID. I guess his internal polling has made him change his mind.

No dice on that one, unless you can provide a link.

Ah.....meant to say he couldn't win with it, sorry.

I agree entirely. The ATM style voting machine can be (and quite possibly has been) the vehicle for large scale voter fraud and anyone professing concern about voter fraud should be squarely opposed to them.

Who makes those things anyway.....and what PACs do they support... :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Diebold, Electronic Voting and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy

be better off with a slot machine...
Las Vegas Slots Versus Electronic Voting Machines | Prose Before Hos

How do they buy cigarettes and wine without an ID?

How do you know they're American citizens? How do you know where they live?

An editorial by Greg Abbott, the Attorney General for Texas?

Check his math:

PolitiFact | Abbott touts 50 election fraud convictions; we subtract 29

He claims 50 convictions since 2002. He's spent millions of dollars pursuing this. He formed a special unit just to combat voter fraud.

Reality: 26 convictions, miscellaneous other results.

Evidence of fraud abounds in Texas, all right.

Here are some non-anecdotal reasons why it's hard to get. Texas is a big state under budget constraints. Some counties are so sparsely populated that it's not cost effective to have a driver's license office in the county so they closed them, so you have to travel to another county. Since you don't have a current driver's license, that means someone has to drive you. That's a round trip for two, on a work day, of a few hundred miles in order to get an ID recognized by the new state law.

You could argue that another form of legal photo ID should suffice, as was done in the TX legislature, but they specifically EXCLUDED student ID's from Texas universities and tribal IDs from Native American tribes (recognized by DHS to board airplanes, though) when they ADDED the Texas Concealed Handgun License as a valid form of ID for voting.

The current law requires you to show your voter card - which is mailed to your home of record - or, if you don't have that, THEN you show a photo ID and the they match you against the rolls.

So people who were registered, had voted in the past, and who have current valid photo IDs valid for nearly every purpose except voting now need to get a new ID.

Or they can simply claim a religious belief in not having your picture taken and vote anyway without a photo ID.

I think it's a great law and a wonderful use of the millions of dollars spent on drafting, defending, advertising the new rules, and disrupting the electoral schedule just to possibly reduce the likelihood of one person voting in place of her dead mother - in which case she probably looked like her mom's photo anyway.

It's not like they could have looked at absentee ballot fraud, or something. Gotta spot impersonation at the polls!

Are you kidding me?

Documents his allegations?!? Did you look at them objectively? Did you seek out possible alternative explanations for what he cites as facts or evidence? Just because someone says "according to..." it's not documentation. This about as one-sided a hack job as can possibly exist.

It's comical. ACORN! ACORN! ACORN! I think there was bet to see how many times he could put that in the piece.

Here's the summary: There's a liberal/progressive/socialistic/KGB-like nationwide plot! In order to fight back you need to join our decent, freedom-loving, American nationwide plot, err, I mean, group!

Don't listen to the left-wing echo chamber - they lie! Sign up for fair, accurate and unbiased reporting (see, it says that in the title, so it must true) from our conservative, freedom-loving websites from the clarion of truth!

This is the lead paragraph from a site that touts (and I'm not kidding) "fairness, balance and accuracy" in its reporting. Man, I'd hate to see a biased report from these guys.

Why not just ask people if they're qualified instead of all of this rigamarole. I mean, nobody would lie and try to conceal anything, would they?