No voter fraud here. Nope. Not a bit.

[Benvolio]

There is if the effort does more harm than good. If your efforts to prevent fraud prevent more legal voters from voting than it prevents illegal votes that is counterproductive.

Not a problem.

 

[gsdx]

We have a right to provide for honest elections and prevent dishonest ones, irrespective of your personal opinion of the substantiality of existing fraud. There is no legitimate argument against the prevention of fraud.

It should be equal for both sides. Like so many of your arguments, it's despicable for one side and acceptable for the other. It's like the Emails. Shouts of "Lock her up!" Cries of "Crooked Hillary!" Why no shouts for "Lock him up!" or of "Crooked Donald!"?

As I've said before, you can't have it both ways.

 

[Benvolio]

It should be equal for both sides. Like so many of your arguments, it's despicable for one side and acceptable for the other. It's like the Emails. Shouts of "Lock her up!" Cries of "Crooked Hillary!" Why no shouts for "Lock him up!" or of "Crooked Donald!"?

As I've said before, you can't have it both ways.

Nonsense. Elections should be honest for both sides.

 

[Kulindahr]

Not a problem.

Yes, a problem: if some of the laws about voter ID had passed here, a whole slew of people in their 80s and 90s would have been disenfranchised.

It's something worth spending money on to get right: have an agency to run for the next three elections with the assigned task of tracking down all eligible voters and making sure they get the proper ID, at no cost to them.

 

[Kulindahr]

Nonsense. Elections should be honest for both sides.

Not according to the GOP in practice; they make sure that voting places in white areas are easy to get to and abundant, while those in minority areas are hard to get to and limited in number. To be "honest for both sides", federal law should mandate that every voter have equal ease of access to voting.

Senator Ron Wyden champions mail ballots to achieve that, and it may be the best way to go though there are still problems with it.

 

[gsdx]

Nonsense. Elections should be honest for both sides.

That is what I said! [Text: Removed]

 

[Benvolio]

Not according to the GOP in practice; they make sure that voting places in white areas are easy to get to and abundant, while those in minority areas are hard to get to and limited in number. To be "honest for both sides", federal law should mandate that every voter have equal ease of access to voting.

Senator Ron Wyden champions mail ballots to achieve that, and it may be the best way to go though there are still problems with it.

Mail ballots will make it impossible to prevent fraud. No way know who is actually doing the voting.

 

[Benvolio]

Not according to the GOP in practice; they make sure that voting places in white areas are easy to get to and abundant, while those in minority areas are hard to get to and limited in number. To be "honest for both sides", federal law should mandate that every voter have equal ease of access to voting.

Senator Ron Wyden champions mail ballots to achieve that, and it may be the best way to go though there are still problems with it.

Mail ballots would reduce the benefit the Republicans have in representing the responsible, tax paying, patriotic voters who turn out better. It would encourage more democrat lazy and apathetic voters, who often don't vote.

 

[opinterph]

Mail ballots will make it impossible to prevent fraud. No way know who is actually doing the voting.

I have the same problem with sending checks through the mail. How do we know the person sending the check is actually the person whose name appears on the account?

 

[Benvolio]

I have the same problem with sending checks through the mail. How do we know the person sending the check is actually the person whose name appears on the account?

If not, you will find out when the account holder discovers his account is depleted. Election fraud is unlikely ever to be proven as democrats are so fond of reminding us.

 

[Kulindahr]

Mail ballots will make it impossible to prevent fraud. No way know who is actually doing the voting.

Mail ballots would reduce the benefit the Republicans have in representing the responsible, tax paying, patriotic voters who turn out better. It would encourage more democrat lazy and apathetic voters, who often don't vote.

According to Oregon's elections people, the switch to mail-in ballots hasn't changed the rate of fraud (I'm not sure how they check, other than verifying the signatures) or the participation by party (except possibly more smaller parties are getting votes).

 

[opinterph]

If not, you will find out when the account holder discovers his account is depleted.

Then why did he sign the friggin’ check?

 

[Benvolio]

According to Oregon's elections people, the switch to mail-in ballots hasn't changed the rate of fraud (I'm not sure how they check, other than verifying the signatures) or the participation by party (except possibly more smaller parties are getting votes).

Oregon being a democrat state, we can assume your assurances came from democrats, huh? Election fraud is difficult to detect, even when someone tries.

 

[gsdx]

Election fraud is difficult to detect, even when someone tries.

Then why in hell did Trump spend so much time and Taxpayers' Money looking for it?

 

[Benvolio]

Then why in hell did Trump spend so much time and Taxpayers' Money looking for it?

Not because it is easy to detect fraud but because it is important to Republicans and independents.

 

[Stardreamer]

The fact is most of the fraud that does occur, occurs by mail-in ballot. This is why the Republican efforts are so misguided, they aren't even looking at where the fraud is. In fact, they will only make it worse as the more hassle you make it to go the polls and vote the more voters will want and push to go to mail-in ballots. The states are not going to fight that either as it is much cheaper.

 

[Kulindahr]

Oregon being a democrat state, we can assume your assurances came from democrats, huh? Election fraud is difficult to detect, even when someone tries.

The elections people are required by law to be evenly divided between the parties.

But yes, mail-in fraud is somewhat harder to detect, though mostly the kind where one person is pretty much told how to vote by another. One newspaper reporter claimed that the most common kind of fraud is where people in a household agree on how to vote and all mark their ballots the same -- or agree to cancel each other's votes!