Voter Supression, Attemps to Win Elections By Interfering With the Voting Process

SeaBreeze

SeaBreeze

Endlessly Groovin'
Location
USA
Today we received our mail-in ballots for the upcoming election. While I was coming home from the gym, I was listening to a conservative talk radio show. They were going on and on about how the mail-in ballots cause voter fraud. I like the convenience of my mail-in ballots, and will be very angry if that convenience is taken away from me for no good reason.

They were alleging that liberals were knocking on people's doors, asking voters if they needed help filling out their ballots. Then they would go into their homes and influence the vote. They also suggested that some people were just mailing off their ballots to these evil folks, for them to fill out in their absence.

I've noticed that Republicans just don't want everyone to vote. They are so afraid that they will lose elections by votes from all of the American citizens, that they appear to be trying to interfere with the voting process in any areas where they fear people might vote Democratic.

I can't believe some of the voter suppression techniques that they have been using or trying to use with the American voters. I am not Republican or Democrat, but I think that making it harder for the average citizen to vote in this country is a very underhanded way to try to win elections.

How about politicians trying to make constructive suggestions, and be proactive in doing positive things for this country and its citizens...instead of just trying to manipulate the vote. What do you think? http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Voter_suppression
 

This why I support the Australian system of compulsory voting. It makes it much harder to deny anyone a vote. We are all on the roll and there is a fine for not enrolling.

It is quite common for elderly people to use postal voting and no-one comes to the house to get anyone to the polls or to 'assist' postal voters. Occasionally a party member will door knock around election time but mostly we just get 'how to vote' material in the letter box.

If away from our electorates on polling day we can present at any voting place, usually a school, and vote as an absentee or we can vote earlier than polling day if we have to work through voting hours on the Saturday of the poll.

I once voted in a huge marquee at a country race meeting. Because so many people used to attend this annual event which happened to coincide with a very important full senate and house of reps election, for our convenience, the authorities set up a special polling station for absentee voting.

We don't vote for judges at all. They are all appointed by the governments of that particular jurisdiction and once that is done they have tenure and are completely independent of the people who appointed them.
 
Our government tried some shenanigans too earlier in the year to support a change they wanted to make in voter access. One of the Conservative Member of Parliament said that he'd seen people going through the trash outside of apartments and stealing voter registration cards that had been discarded by people who didn't want to bother voting. He said it on two separate occasions and then had to stand up in the Parliament and retract his assertion. At the time, the ruling party was in the throes of changing electoral ID requirements and it was widely speculated that it was an attempt to restrict voting of the poor and students and so on (because those groups aren't necessarily Conservative voters).

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...omplaint-to-elections-canada/article17079771/

Scoundrels abound eh?
 

Don't get me started on that one...:mad:

On PBS last week David Brooks (the conservative, though not crazy conservative) even said there is no evidence of voter fraud justifying the voting restrictions, and agreed it was to suppress turnout.

I don't think I'd like compulsory voting. Most people don't know anything about what's going on, and to be fair, it's time consuming, and most people are too busy working and trying to make a living and raise kids. That's why I support the party system. The general principles of the party are what I support. Outlier candidates will eventually fall to the wayside.

Flame retardent suit is on. :)
 
We don't fuss about compulsory voting because it has ever been thus. It isn't really a burden and in reality you don't actually have to vote for anyone. You just have to turn up and get your name crossed off. Then no-one else can use your vote. Multiple voting is not a significant problem and when it does happen it is usually some old lady who already voted by post, then forgot all about it and voted again at the polling booth when her helpful neighbours offered her a lift. Statistically this is a non problem.

However, it is probably the reason why most Australians follow politics so closely. When I vote it is not just because I've listened to the campaign slogans. I've been watching all of them for the whole time they have been in office and I pass judgement with my vote.

We do vote directly for candidates as local representatives and state senators. There is no electoral college for the Prime Minister. As in the UK, the leader of the house majority party (the government) becomes Prime Minister and remains so until either his/her party is defeated or he/she is challenged by another party member and loses the support of the party.

It can be a very exciting roller coaster ride at times. I'm wondering how long it will be before our current PM becomes so embarrassing that his party decides that he is too much of a liability and he suffers the fate of Julius Caesar, metaphorically, of course.
 
I don't think actual poll voting fraud is as bad as many want people you to believe but I think there are problems with registration like dual voting or voting in two jurisdictions along with fraudulent registration. I think they caught some college students in Minnesota voting in the home and campus locations several years ago. It might not a fraudulent voter going to the polls to vote but I definitely think there is a problem with fraudulent registrations including non citizens voting. And there was the lady in Ohio who voted 6 times with mail in ballots

http://patdollard.com/2013/05/ohio-...es-for-obama-convicted-of-felony-voter-fraud/

http://punditfromanotherplanet.com/...pping-voter-registrations-tip-of-the-iceberg/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaUsT9MLMlA

I think there is more fraud early in the process ie registration and mail in or even on line. In the 2012 election in Florida 3 ip addresses produced over 2000 absentee ballots. I think if was a library or something they would've id'd the ip addresses right away.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/18/4...g-phantom-online-ballot-requests-IP-addresses

I'm sure there is voter fraud but a large chunk of it starts or occurs early in the process and not at the polls.
 
We only have one electoral roll nationally and the same roll is used for state and council elections. If boundaries are changed you may discover that you are now in a different electorate but you don't have to do anything unless you actually change your address. Every so often they do an audit by doorknocking to see if the persons enrolled at that address still live there. When someone dies, they are automatically removed from the roll when the death certificate is issued. The system works pretty well.


Past electoral rolls are preserved and are very useful for people wanting to research their family history. You can track their movements around the country over their lifetime.
 
Well that is a bargain for not having to participate... (I prefer a benign monarchy of an earlier day as my form of government.)
 
We knew it was a scam to stop Democrats from voting and to help Republicans win. Now a CONSERVATIVE Federal Judge agrees and writes a scathing opinion.






http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/13/1336362/-Highly-Respected-Conservative-Judge-Rips-Voter-ID-Laws-and-the-GOP-in-Blistering-Opinion



DartagnanFollowRSS
Daily Kos member


Mon Oct 13, 2014 at 04:42 PM PDT
Highly Respected Conservative Judge Rips "Voter ID" Laws--and the GOP--in Blistering Opinion

by DartagnanFollow


When 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard A. Posner speaks, for better or for worse, lawyers, Judges, and Supreme Court Justices listen. Possibly the most well-known jurist in the country, the Reagan-appointed, conservative Posner is not only an accomplished Circuit Court Judge, he is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School and the author of nearly 40 books. He is 75 years old and were it not for a penchant for raising hackles of the legal community with his acute opinions, he would likely be on the Supreme Court right now.
"There is only one motivation for imposing burdens on voting that are ostensibly designed to discourage voter-impersonation fraud," [Posner] writes, "and that is to discourage voting by persons likely to vote against the party responsible for imposing the burdens." More specifically, he observes, photo ID laws are "highly correlated with a state's having a Republican governor and Republican control of the legislature and appear to be aimed at limiting voting by minorities, particularly blacks."
"There is compelling evidence that voter-impersonation fraud is essentially nonexistent in Wisconsin." Assertions about voter fraud are "a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters." He adds that "some of the 'evidence' of voter-impersonation fraud is downright goofy, if not paranoid, such as the nonexistent buses that according to the 'True the Vote' movement [a voter suppression organization originating in the tea party movement] transport foreigners and reservation Indians to polling places." Indeed, Posner writes, lists of the states that impose the strictest requirements "imply that a number of conservative states try to make it difficult for people who are outside the mainstream, whether because of poverty or race or problems with the English language...to vote."

STATES WITH STRICT PHOTO ID LAWS—POLITICAL MAKEUP
WHEN THE LAWS WERE ADOPTED
Arkansas: Democratic governor, but both the House and Senate were under Republican control.
Georgia: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate.
Indiana: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate.
Kansas: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate.
Mississippi: Adopted by the voters through a ballot initiative. Republicans, who already controlled the governorship and the state Senate, won a majority of seats in the House in that same election.
Tennessee: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate.

Texas: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate.
Virginia: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate.
Wisconsin: Republican governor, Republican control of both the House and Senate
​
 
All that shows is there are some in the US that would like to keep unidentified folks from voting. Not a thing wrong with that and why should one party be offended that a different party was trying to make sure things are true and honest. Why should the Democrats be so concerned about fact finding if nothing is wrong? I would think they would appreciate any such identity proofs same as others.

One problem in the US is saying Republicans and Democrats are the government. They are not and are not even mentioned in the Constitution. Parties are just what happens for certain activities and have done so over the centuries. Our current Democrats and Republicans have been around for some time now, but nothing to stop them from existing but the public's reactions to their politics.

I am all for identity to prove the persons are not just one of the many thousands, or millions. that have crossed our borders and live unidentified, and actually untouched, by our border control folks. Darn shame as they likely do not pay taxes either, or have medical insurance, their children go to our schools, and no credible source of funds for the schools, libraries, doctors, police, firemen, streets, and all the other services the cities and towns provide them.

So proof of being a citizen would be good for the elections and the communities of the US for any election parities that may exist.
 
The pro voter id people are shooting themselves in the foot by not producing evidence of impersonation voter fraud other mail in ballots like the lady in Ohio. I'm sure there is fraud but again I think the bulk of it occurs early in the process at the registration. That should include record keeping/updating including when people move or die.

I do think the question of a voter identification law need not be spun immediately into voter suppression which is inflammatory.
 
WhatInThe said:
The pro voter id people are shooting themselves in the foot by not producing evidence of impersonation voter fraud other mail in ballots like the lady in Ohio. I'm sure there is fraud but again I think the bulk of it occurs early in the process at the registration. That should include record keeping/updating including when people move or die.

I do think the question of a voter identification law need not be spun immediately into voter suppression which is inflammatory.
Click to expand...

Perhaps because there isn't any? At least not on the scope that's been implied? If it really existed, wouldn't it have been presented as evidence over and over? They have had almost 4 years to do so. Is it fair to disenfranchise thousands of people to stop one case of identity fraud? This is just a case of a solution looking for a problem that's not there.
 
Not one person that deserves to vote legally will be disenfranchised by implementing a simple check of authority to vote. And it would definitely make it harder to change the vote counts that does happen at times. Certain cities have been caught doing that, but only after the votes had been taken and counted. Yes fraud and cheating has taken place in our elections in past years. Search with 'voter cheating' and there are some examples of voter fraud and some arguments against it. If voter fraud was a year round subject rather than just at election time, a lot of the objections about chasing off voters would not exist. There have been times when such was noted, but not much was done about it at all. Good voting means good preparations and good defenses from illegal happenings.

If done properly there would be no reason ever to not allow a person to vote. Some places that do check for eligibility will allow the person to vote but the ballot will not be counted till after the verification has taken place. If no good verification no count, if good verification then the vote gets counted.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top