Viciouss said: »
Keep in mind that at least one of those cases only involved local elections, possibly all of them. KN's blogger didn't bother to specify.
Random Politics & Religion #26
Random Politics & Religion #26
Garuda.Chanti said: »
Viciouss said: »
Keep in mind that at least one of those cases only involved local elections, possibly all of them. KN's blogger didn't bother to specify.
The author's core argument is also faulty
Quote:
Further, the Brennan Center report argues that because prosecutor Kris Kobach’s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate), voter fraud is so statistically small that it’s a non-issue. Let’s follow this logic. Does the fact that 109 people were cited for jaywalking in Seattle in 2009 mean that only 109 people jaywalked in Seattle that year? Does the fact that 103,733 people were cited for driving without a seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015 mean that only that many people were driving without seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015?
Absolutely not. This can be proven easily because in 2014, the previous year, only 29,470 people were cited. The disparity is largely due to increased enforcement efforts in 2015. In other words, increasing enforcement of the crime revealed a much larger number of people committing the crime.
Absolutely not. This can be proven easily because in 2014, the previous year, only 29,470 people were cited. The disparity is largely due to increased enforcement efforts in 2015. In other words, increasing enforcement of the crime revealed a much larger number of people committing the crime.
What about the jaywalking numbers for 2010 and 2008 in Seattle; why bring it up and then completely ignore it? The article is an excellent example of how to make a weak argument.
What's interesting is, is that the people caught committing voter fraud in 2016 presidential election also happened to be Trump voters in Texas, Iowa and North Carolina.
Viciouss said: »
Quote:
In Colorado, multiple instances were found of dead people attempting to vote. ...“a woman named Sara Sosa who died in 2009 cast ballots in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013.” In Virginia, it was found that nearly 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.
...Kris Kobach’s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate)
...Kris Kobach’s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate)
This was the fruit of KN's hard labor, the only cases of voter fraud he could provide. The rest was hopes, dreams, conspiracy theories.
I actually need to make a change, we can go ahead and scratch that Virginia case off, as the article the blogger linked was a case of registration fraud, not voter fraud.
Caitsith.Shiroi said: »
There's certainly voter fraud here and there, people are stupid, but on a scale of millions? You need some solid evidence.
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Caitsith.Shiroi said: »
There's certainly voter fraud here and there, people are stupid, but on a scale of millions? You need some solid evidence.
Just watch, before page 12 I predict that somebody here is going to deny this evidence
Heratige's own database tops 1000 cases of conviction.
1099 felons illegally voted for Frankin in the 08 election he won by 312 votes.
1099 felons illegally voted for Frankin in the 08 election he won by 312 votes.
The cited statistic:
No connection to ballot fraud. The Pew study was about modernizing current registration methods.
Quote:
Indeed according to a Pew Charitable Trust report from February 2012, one in eight voter registrations are “significantly inaccurate or no longer valid.”
"Heritage foundation" kicks off with the already dismissed case in Virginia in which no illegal votes were cast. No need to continue down their rabbit hole.
Yep, let's do it again, but let team Trump run the investigation.
Nausi said: »
Yep, let's do it again, but let team Trump run the investigation.
Y'all should take another stab at Benghazi and Obama's birth certificate while you're at it.
Nausi said: »
Heratige's own database tops 1000 cases of conviction.
1099 felons illegally voted for Frankin in the 08 election he won by 312 votes.
1099 felons illegally voted for Frankin in the 08 election he won by 312 votes.
Quote:
...
During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons -- all ineligible to vote -- who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race....
During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons -- all ineligible to vote -- who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race....
Quote:
Minnesota. Individuals convicted of a felony are ineligible to vote while incarcerated, on parole, or on probation. Voting rights are automatically restored upon completion of all supervised release.
Lol, is this a thing now? Is the Russian collusion thing so beyond the pale that we're now extending it to every conservative because it can't get any more ridiculous than it already is?
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Lol, is this a thing now? Is the Russian collusion thing so beyond the pale that we're now extending it to every conservative because it can't get any more ridiculous than it already is?
It takes 3 liberals, and one unidentified thing, on this website to deflect away voter fraud, and even attack sourced proof with idiotic analysis of their own. Without, of course, showing any shred of evidence of their own.
All any of them has ever said on this thread is "nuh uh!"
[+]
Yeah, it was easy to debunk that blog of yours KN. Try to actually get credibly sourced proof next time. And learn the difference between voter registration fraud and actual voter fraud. Otherwise it will keep being that easy for us to not deflect, but debunk.
Viciouss said: »
Yeah, it was easy to debunk that blog of yours KN. Try to actually get credibly sourced proof next time. And learn the difference between voter registration fraud and actual voter fraud. Otherwise it will keep being that easy for us to not deflect, but debunk.
Using words you obviously don't understand isn't going to help your argument....ever.
[+]
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
sourced proof
[+]
You offer no sources, and yet, you still say you are right because you say so?
Come on man. If you have convictions, at least own up to them. Otherwise, you are talking out of your ***.
...wait, that's all you ever do....
Come on man. If you have convictions, at least own up to them. Otherwise, you are talking out of your ***.
...wait, that's all you ever do....
[+]
I told you why your link was crap. You proclaim something as evidence by virtue of it being the first result in your google search but never actually bother to read or critically evaluate it. There was nothing in that blog post supporting widespread ballot fraud, which is the voter fraud of any actual consequence. It cited a few isolated cases, stated a recent study on registration inaccuracies (fraud is only mentioned once in the Pew study and only in a warning against the appearance of it), then incorrectly extrapolated that statistic to come up with an extremely questionable figure. If it can't hold up to even casual scrutiny then it isn't a worthwhile source.
[+]
You honestly think everything occurs in a vacuum?
Like I said before, you offer no reason to your arguments. You don't even back your arguments up at all. We are "supposed" to take your word for it, because you said it?
For somebody who attacks a source with nothing, you certainly spout what you have....
Keep telling yourself that Clinton really was the winner, and it was that pesky EC that kept your Queen from ascending to the throne and you being the bell of her coordination ball.
Like I said before, you offer no reason to your arguments. You don't even back your arguments up at all. We are "supposed" to take your word for it, because you said it?
For somebody who attacks a source with nothing, you certainly spout what you have....
Keep telling yourself that Clinton really was the winner, and it was that pesky EC that kept your Queen from ascending to the throne and you being the bell of her coordination ball.
We've proven it happens to a point where it affects elections. What steps are there that prohibit it from happening on a massive scale?
Since when do liberals get to demand proof of something before action. The only proof of this Trump / Russian collusion is, oh wait there is none.
Since when do liberals get to demand proof of something before action. The only proof of this Trump / Russian collusion is, oh wait there is none.
Caitsith.Shiroi said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
You honestly think everything occurs in a vacuum?
Like I said before, you offer no reason to your arguments. You don't even back your arguments up at all. We are "supposed" to take your word for it, because you said it?
For somebody who attacks a source with nothing, you certainly spout what you have....
Like I said before, you offer no reason to your arguments. You don't even back your arguments up at all. We are "supposed" to take your word for it, because you said it?
For somebody who attacks a source with nothing, you certainly spout what you have....
Your "source" sample size is so small (20 cases of fraud) it should be dismissed right away, even polls with sample sizes in the thousands can be quite inaccurate.
And you wonder why we are all saying you, along with Pleebo, Vic, Candlejack, and that unidentified goo, are all suffering from sever cases of TDS. You 5 really should go seek some help.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.