What the Trump/Khan Debate Really Says About America

DavidTC in reply to Dark Matter says:

Because those are the biggest, most blatant examples, and Dems often squeak about how there’s no evidence of fraud, just like they’re trying to claim right now that there are no problems with the IRS.

Oh, Democrats point to plenty of examples of election fraud.

The problem is you seem to think there is a lot of *voter* fraud, which is something that is incredibly rare, and when voters do commit fraud, it’s not in a way that could be detected by ID checks. Elections are not altered by *voters* deciding to do things, they are altered by election workers or elected officials deciding to do things.

My stated problem was dead people voting.

First of all, neither of those examples seemed to involve dead people voting at all.

Secondly, you don’t get to just *state* what problem you’re trying to fix with voter ID…it has to be a problem that voter ID would actually fix.

And yes, in order to have dead people voting you need to have lists of the dead supplied by (presumably high level) election officials.

Erm, actually, I know people use that as a story, but there’s never any evidence that’s how that worked. This story is, from what I understand, that people would circle through the line multiple times, and be given name of a different dead person each time.

This not only requires the collusion all of all the poll workers, but, once you realize it’s all a sham, you realize the ‘names of dead people’ doesn’t make sense. There’s no point. If the rule is they get to cycle through the lines as many times as they want, because the poll workers are in on it…they don’t need any new names at all. They just say their name again, or a totally made up name, the poll worker nods, pretends to cross that name off, and lets them in. The ‘names of dead people’ is a cute story, but if ‘kept cycling through the line’ truly happened, there were probably no ‘names of dead people’ involved at all. (And why anyone would do this instead of ballot box stuffing is unknown.)

And, again…as the poll workers would be in on it, I sorta doubt voter ID would do a damn thing to stop it. ‘Oh, sorry, I *was* going to knowingly let you illegally vote under the name you clearly made up, but there’s a law I have to check IDs.’

That said, there actually *are* dead people voting, sometimes. Much rare than the nonsense states quoted, but it does happen. The problem is that dead people voting is actually two different things, one of which would be solved by voter ID, and one that would not.

Specifically, someone showing up in person and voting under a dead person’s name would be stopped (Or at least hindered) by voter ID laws.

And someone voting *absentee* would not.

The problem is…almost all ‘dead people voting’ fraud is that second thing. Dead people vote absentee.

And it usually isn’t even some sort of deliberately setup thing to start with. Some person died, they get sent an absentee ballot, the person who ends up with that mail decides to vote it.

Please note this type of fraud can actually happen *before* their death…there are a lot of old people with dementia and various other problems where someone else basically just steals their ballot, or if they want to give their actions a shine of legally, pretends to ‘help them fill it out’.

To the best of my knowledge, we have no evidence that IDs prevents, or even suppresses, legit voters from voting.

To the best of my knowledge, we have no evidence that you are not John Wayne Gacy and this isn’t an attempt to murder people as they get photo IDs.

To the best of my knowledge we have no evidence showing that’s not true.

—–

Here is the thing we apparently have to say over and over again…in person voter impersonation doesn’t make sense. First, it has crazy risks that other sorts of voter fraud don’t have:
1) You are on camera committing a crime directly to a government agent.
2) You are physically located in the building and could easily be arrested *right there*.

And there are two ways to be detected:
1) You can be detected by an alert poll worker saying ‘Didn’t you come through here before?’
2) You can also be detected if the person you are impersonating decides to vote also.
(And once the fraud is detected…most of the time you’re *still in the building*. Smooth.)

And the results of this:
You get…one extra vote for every time you do it. One vote.

This is not any sort of rational risk. It’s not even close to a rational risk.

And thus…it actually doesn’t happen. Yeah, in real life, it doesn’t happen.

If you really, truly, desperately want to cast an extra ballot…you forge an absentee ballot request from a voter you know is registered, but doesn’t generally vote, and then try to steal it from their mail. It’s much safer, even with the additional crime of mail theft. Even if the voter does show up in person to vote, resulting in the fraud being discovered…it probably can’t be traced back to you. It’s a hell of a lot safer than walking in and committing a felony in front of multiple witnesses.Report

DavidTC in reply to Dark Matter says:

@dark-matter
I get that I’m probably an extreme case, but the bulk of society is structured so it’s somewhere between challenging and impossible to function without an id.

Pro-voter ID people like to use that argument that ‘everyone already needs an ID’, which hilariously *completely disproves* their other statement that ‘everyone can get an ID’. Both of those statements cannot be true! Why?

Because approximately *11%* of the adult population does not have a government-issued photo IDs.

If it was truely ‘impossible’ to function *without* ID in society, the _11%_ of people without such an ID proves that IDs are *really* hard to get for some people!

You’ve literally argued the wrong direction.

The only actually justification for voter ID laws with that ‘11%’ number hanging out there is maybe IDs are *not* needed for those people currently, and they could easily go and get them if they were required. Maybe they don’t have ID because they don’t really want it.

The problem there is even if, of that 11%, if only _1%_ of those people, aka, 0.11% percent of the population, have a problem getting an ID…that is literally *tens of thousand* more people than instances of voter impersonation.

Preventing a legit person from voting causes constitutional issues, but so does letting someone who shouldn’t.

Are you willing to accept that, I dunno, *1%* of the people who currently do not have IDs do not have IDs because they cannot prove who they are?

Because that’s approximately 230,000 people. Which is higher than all *alleged* voter impersonation added together, and then multiplied by a thousand. (And most of the allegations are nonsense.)

Maybe we should ERR ON THAT SIDE WHEN TALKING ABOUT CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.Report

DavidTC in reply to Dark Matter says:

@dark-matter
Source?

If anything, 11% is an underestimation.

‘86.1% of those who voted in 2006 reported proper credentials compared to 78.1% of those who are registered but did not vote, and only 75.4% of those who are not registered voters’
http://depts.washington.edu/uwiser/documents/Indiana_voter.pdf

Here’s the nationwide survey:
http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/download_file_39242.pdf

‘Eleven percent of the American citizens surveyed responded that they do not have current, unexpired government-issued identification with a photograph, such as a driver’s license or military ID.’

And in that same survey, 7% said they didn’t have ready access to citizen documentation. I.e., 11% don’t have an IDs, and 7% aren’t sure they could *get* an ID.

Additionally, the survey shows that an additional 10% of the voting age population has photo ID that they know is *incorrect*, with either the wrong address or the wrong name. (Often not updated after marriage.) This means when they put their *actual* address or *actual* name on their voting registration, their ID will be denied at the polls.

And that’s just the people who *know* they can’t get access to documentations and people who *know* their ID is wrong. There are plenty of people that are not aware of these things.

So they do not and can not drive, they don’t have birth certificates, bank accounts, enough contact with the gov to ask for a free id, and so forth?

Wow, it’s literally a ‘Non-poor person does not understand how poor people live’ parade.

There are plenty of poor people who do not drive, because, duh, they do not own a car.

And, yes, plenty of poor people do not have bank accounts. They are called the ‘unbanked’. They’re the people getting ripped off by check cashing places and car title loans. (Although the people getting car title loans presumably have driver’s licenses, but still don’t have access to a bank.) It’s sort of a big thing WRT poverty, often talked about.

Birth certificates were not commonly issued to people born at home until fairly recently. You know, like *tons* of black people were during Jim Crow, up until the 60s. Additionally, even if they were born in a hospital, a birth certificate existing does not mean they have a copy of it, gaining a certified copy is generally something that must be done in person *and* costs money…assuming their hospital still exists.

And it’s not always the *birth certificates* that are the problem. To get photo ID, you additionally have to provide proof of residency, often *two* documents proving that. Poor people often do not have any utilities bills or documentation about where they live, because they are living with other people.

Hell, I’ve had years where *I* couldn’t have proven where I lived to the level required by the state currently, because I was living with a roommate whose name was on all the bills and I just paid her my half, and I’ve *always* gotten most of my mail at a PO box. (I even had that on my driver’s license for a while.) Luckily, by the time I had to get an upgraded ID, I had moved again, and various utility companies wanted to send bills here and I said sure, so I could use them…it was basically purely by luck I didn’t have a bunch of bills all saying my PO box.

And if you lost your social security card, and *don’t* have a photo ID…have fun with all that.

It’s trivial to think of cases where that’s going to be true (extreme mental illness/disfunction, extreme age to the point of disfunction, people on the run from the law, illegal aliens, etc). It’s harder to see how that wouldn’t also prevent them from voting.

Good Lord. It’s not like looking at *any* lawsuit about voter ID laws wouldn’t, you know, turned up some *plaintiffs* and an explanation of why they are suing.

The current ACLU lawsuit against voter ID in Wisconion has two plaintiffs, and both of them have been voting for *decades*. Also, neither of them are alleging it is too hard to meet the requirements, or is the equivalent of a poll tax, as far as I can tell. They are alleging that, as far as they can tell, it is LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE for them fulfill the requirements to get an ID, because their name is misprinted on their birth certificate, and the state will not accept it. (It is *theoretically possible* to alter a birth certificate, sometimes, but it’s a long and expensive process that requires hiring lawyers and going to court….and sometimes it isn’t allowed.)Report