The Republican Voting Fraud

[Loren Pechtel]

Wow

"There are currently 180 users online. 33 members and 147 guests

Niggermania Forum Statistics
Threads 71,039 Posts 533,536 Members 11,075"

Those numbers must be wrong because we are constantly reassured that racism is an isolated and rare phenomena.

1) Racism is a lot more rare than racists. Most know they can't act on their feelings and most aren't in a position to do so anyway. I've run into a few on the web--typical losers who blame blacks for their own failings.

2) Forums cover an awfully big area. 11k people (some are no doubt just watching things, not themselves racists) out of something over 400 million whites that have enough English to participate in such a place is a tiny drop in the bucket.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Law enforcement officials have charged 12 people with using absentee ballots to skew an election in Georgia.

“As a result of their grand jury findings, 12 individuals were indicted in that particular matter and we will be trying that case in a court of judicial law instead of a court of public opinion,” District Attorney Joe Mulholland told the local TV station, WALB.

The charges followed a bitter November 2010 school board election in Brooks County in which the final tally was changed by an unusually large wave of absentee ballots.

During the election, 1,060 absentee votes were cast out of the 1,403 ballots mailed out to people who requested them, according to a July 2010 report by WCTV.

http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/24/12-charged-with-voter-fraud-in-georgia-election/

Perhaps Artur Davis ought to discuss voter ID with his fellow democrats, given that they represent the determined opposition against checking a voter ID, and other obvious measures.

Foot, meet bullet.

This is exactly what we have been saying: The only substantial voter fraud is with the absentee ballots. Absentee ballots have never been subject to voter ID rules because they're not in person to check an ID in the first place.

You're obsessing about putting a bank vault lock on your front door while you have a sliding glass door next to it.

 

[Axulus]

Those numbers must be wrong because we are constantly reassured that racism is an isolated and rare phenomena.

1) Racism is a lot more rare than racists. Most know they can't act on their feelings and most aren't in a position to do so anyway. I've run into a few on the web--typical losers who blame blacks for their own failings.

2) Forums cover an awfully big area. 11k people (some are no doubt just watching things, not themselves racists) out of something over 400 million whites that have enough English to participate in such a place is a tiny drop in the bucket.

These aren't your ordinary run of the mill racists, however. The level of psychosis and obsession on that forum is disturbing. Nearly every thread I looked at (about a half dozen out of morbid curiousity) was openly wishing for genocide and constantly obsessing about crime and disease.

 

[NobleSavage]

Those numbers must be wrong because we are constantly reassured that racism is an isolated and rare phenomena.

1) Racism is a lot more rare than racists. Most know they can't act on their feelings and most aren't in a position to do so anyway. I've run into a few on the web--typical losers who blame blacks for their own failings.

2) Forums cover an awfully big area. 11k people (some are no doubt just watching things, not themselves racists) out of something over 400 million whites that have enough English to participate in such a place is a tiny drop in the bucket.

3) A lot of forums fake stats. The "180 users on line" can be simply manipulated and a I've seen it a lot. The 11K members could be one blast with with XRumer http://botmasterlabs.net/

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

...

Technically this not voter fraud...

Did I say "voter fraud", I said "The Republican Voter Fraud". As in the Republicans have invented this fraud in order to actually help burden the ability of Democrats to vote. They are the fraud.

...it is a seemingly attempt to dampen voting by closing (one) polling station.

One polling location where 1/3 of the county is around. A logical polling station. The only reason to close it was to burden Democrat voters. Your counter argument is that it is only a short distance to go to another location, which sidesteps why it was closed in the first place.

It is another case of the Republicans actively attempting to burden voters that align to the left.

But what was the Chicago level perfidy of this act in Boone? Students would have to go to a station a daunting 1/2 mile, located in the centre of Boone, the town in which this university sits. And besides, it is sooooo difficult for a young person to walk (or drive) a 1/2 mile. Students are "busy with lectures" don't you know?

If it were about money, fine. About being able to staff it, fine. But it wasn't. It was a clearly partisan effort to reduce liberal votes at the polls. The judge agreed.

Mind you, us oldsters go to a polling station about 1/2 mile from where I live.

This "example" smacks of an annoyance turned into a ginned crisis.

Agreed. The idea that voter fraud is everywhere, yet it is the Republicans that are passing laws aimed at burdening the ability of certain people to vote, it is a ginned up crisis, that has real consequences. The Republicans already gerrymandered the House of Representatives. The Republicans even tossed out the idea of Gerrymandering the Electoral College. What more do they have to do for you to start thinking their interests aren't in the best interests of democracy?

 

[maxparrish]

http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/24/12-charged-with-voter-fraud-in-georgia-election/

Perhaps Artur Davis ought to discuss voter ID with his fellow democrats, given that they represent the determined opposition against checking a voter ID, and other obvious measures.

Foot, meet bullet.

This is exactly what we have been saying: The only substantial voter fraud is with the absentee ballots. Absentee ballots have never been subject to voter ID rules because they're not in person to check an ID in the first place.

You're obsessing about putting a bank vault lock on your front door while you have a sliding glass door next to it.

The vote fraud scam in Georgia might have been avoided had Voter ID "and other measures" been implemented. Artur Davis is under the impression that the problem is much greater than just absentee ballots, so my suggestion is that he ought to be talking to his fellow Democrats who road-block ALL these measures.

That you believe there is "substantial voter fraud...with absentee ballots" is not something that I disagree with. Now with Colorado, we have another entire state that relies on absentee ballots.

"Excuse me sir, your ballot for a cell phone?"

 

[ksen]

voter fraud = the only thing keeping republicans from winning elections

 

[Nice Squirrel]

"Excuse me sir, your ballot for a cell phone?"

Now you are wondering into crazyland.

 

[maxparrish]

Oh Lord.

First, it's not a case of voter fraud, if anything its a case of vote suppression. I agree that voter suppression, depending on circumstances, could be as morally corrupt as casting fraudulent votes BUT you should cease confusing the discussion by ignoring the difference. There is no element of deceit by the election board, but rather an element of "home cooking" by their closing an early voting station in the student union that, in at least one previous election, was provided.

Second, I am all for a fair and equal access to early voting stations (although I am largely against most implementations of early voting). If the left would cease blocking anti-fraud measures and the right employ a value free formula to locate polling stations I'd be as pleased as punch. I doubt most of the left would agree, if only because they intuitively know they have more to lose with a truly secure and fair voting system.

Third, while I am more than happy to agree with you that this local board was likely 'stacking the deck', and should not have done so, I also insist it is not a big deal from a fairness perspective.

Watauga County has six early voting poll stations. One each for the two county towns, three for the rural areas, and now another one in Boone for ASU (which is actually located in Boone, the campus edge being ONE BLOCK from the downtown early voting station and the BEER pubs). When it comes to "fairness" the ASU students are whiners. Most of the County residents have to travel a lot further to an early voting station, including a big part of town residents.

As is self-evident, most folks in Boone and in other places have ONE HELL of alot further to travel than several blocks to an early voting station

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

A single early voting station for each town, and large rural areas was completely fair. If its "equal access" that matters, clearly the inequality is for the other two-thirds of the County, who don't have carpers whining that it is not within a block of their place of occupation.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oh Lord.

First, it's not a case of voter fraud...

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

There is no element of deceit by the election board, but rather an element of "home cooking" by their closing an early voting station in the student union that, in at least one previous election, was provided.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

 

[maxparrish]

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

There is no element of deceit by the election board, but rather an element of "home cooking" by their closing an early voting station in the student union that, in at least one previous election, was provided.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

Representative of special treatment, you mean? The town has a population of around 14,000, and the campus about 18,000 undergrads (whose living arrangements on campus or off are unclear). However, all town residents, including students, had access to the town's single county office, a mere BLOCK from the campus. To whine about a few blocks and demand special treatment is merely the era's pandering to the narcissism youth; the infantilization and worship of college students as "poor, struggling, yada yada".

Your goal does not seem to be equal access, but identity group voter privileging. When the average distance a student has to travel is the same as town and county residents, there is equality. When the location is located to inflate an interest groups representation, it is a form of corruption.

So thank you for finding this example of "Republican Voter Fraud" - which turned out to be an effort at Democratic Voter Privileging.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

Representative of special treatment, you mean? The town has a population of around 14,000, and the campus about 18,000 undergrads (whose living arrangements on campus or off are unclear). However, all town residents, including students, had access to the town's single county office, a mere BLOCK from the campus. To whine about a few blocks and demand special treatment is merely the era's pandering to the narcissism youth; the infantilization and worship of college students as "poor, struggling, yada yada".

Your goal does not seem to be equal access, but identity group voter privileging. When the average distance a student has to travel is the same as town and county residents, there is equality. When the location is located to inflate an interest groups representation, it is a form of corruption.

So thank you for finding this example of "Republican Voter Fraud" - which turned out to be an effort at Democratic Voter Privileging.

18,000 voting at one location???

 

[maxparrish]

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

Representative of special treatment, you mean? The town has a population of around 14,000, and the campus about 18,000 undergrads (whose living arrangements on campus or off are unclear). However, all town residents, including students, had access to the town's single county office, a mere BLOCK from the campus. To whine about a few blocks and demand special treatment is merely the era's pandering to the narcissism youth; the infantilization and worship of college students as "poor, struggling, yada yada".

Your goal does not seem to be equal access, but identity group voter privileging. When the average distance a student has to travel is the same as town and county residents, there is equality. When the location is located to inflate an interest groups representation, it is a form of corruption.

So thank you for finding this example of "Republican Voter Fraud" - which turned out to be an effort at Democratic Voter Privileging.

18,000 voting at one location???

No, we are only speaking of one of the county early voting (not election day) stations, of which five or six have been found sufficient. On election day there will be precinct voting stations - most likely many score (at least) through the town and either on or adjacent to campus. The downtown voting station was able to handle a similar number for the towns 15K. Apparently folks just trickle in over a couple of week period, and most vote on election day.

The 'capacity' of early voting stations have not been in question.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

Representative of special treatment, you mean? The town has a population of around 14,000, and the campus about 18,000 undergrads (whose living arrangements on campus or off are unclear).

So, more students than people living in the town, and for some reason you think it is "special treatment" to have a voting location there?

What is also interesting is that the Mayor of the Town and the Chancellor of the school asked for the location to be reopened. So either the Mayor and Chancellor are both students and holders of those positions or maybe, just maybe, this is more than students wanting special treatment.

 

[Axulus]

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

Representative of special treatment, you mean? The town has a population of around 14,000, and the campus about 18,000 undergrads (whose living arrangements on campus or off are unclear). However, all town residents, including students, had access to the town's single county office, a mere BLOCK from the campus. To whine about a few blocks and demand special treatment is merely the era's pandering to the narcissism youth; the infantilization and worship of college students as "poor, struggling, yada yada".

Your goal does not seem to be equal access, but identity group voter privileging. When the average distance a student has to travel is the same as town and county residents, there is equality. When the location is located to inflate an interest groups representation, it is a form of corruption.

So thank you for finding this example of "Republican Voter Fraud" - which turned out to be an effort at Democratic Voter Privileging.

This doesn't make any sense. Given a fixed number of polling locations, the goal should be to make it as convenient as possible for as many as possible based on where the people are located. The students should get a "special privilege" based on the fact that they have a dense population all in one area.

Those who live in dense cities are going to be _far_ closer to polling stations than those living in rural areas. Are you outraged by the "special privilege" of the city dwellers? If their polling stations were closed up in the most dense urban areas and relocated to the city outskirts, quite possibly for partisan reasons (having nothing to do with a non-political purpose), making it much more inconvenient for them to vote, would you scream about them demanding their special privilege given that rural voters have to travel much father than these whiny city dwellers?

 

[maxparrish]

I suppose you just didn't bother to read what I wrote.

Why did a Judge open it back up?

Yes, students want to be treated as "special", and given enhanced access not available to most county residents.

They represent 1/3 of the entire county and are the largest employer in the county. "Special"? Sounds more like representative.

Representative of special treatment, you mean? The town has a population of around 14,000, and the campus about 18,000 undergrads (whose living arrangements on campus or off are unclear). However, all town residents, including students, had access to the town's single county office, a mere BLOCK from the campus. To whine about a few blocks and demand special treatment is merely the era's pandering to the narcissism youth; the infantilization and worship of college students as "poor, struggling, yada yada".

Your goal does not seem to be equal access, but identity group voter privileging. When the average distance a student has to travel is the same as town and county residents, there is equality. When the location is located to inflate an interest groups representation, it is a form of corruption.

So thank you for finding this example of "Republican Voter Fraud" - which turned out to be an effort at Democratic Voter Privileging.

This doesn't make any sense. Given a fixed number of polling locations, the goal should be to make it as convenient as possible for as many as possible based on where the people are located. The students should get a "special privilege" based on the fact that they have a dense population all in one area.

Those who live in dense cities are going to be _far_ closer to polling stations than those living in rural areas. Are you outraged by the "special privilege" of the city dwellers? If their polling stations were closed up in the most dense urban areas and relocated to the city outskirts, quite possibly for partisan reasons (having nothing to do with a non-political purpose), making it much more inconvenient for them to vote, would you scream about them demanding their special privilege given that rural voters have to travel much father than these whiny city dwellers?

It does not make sense to you because you are operating with a premise that I reject. You seem to believe it is the job of the elections board to provide a high as possible turnout. Apparently you think that it is either a legal, constitutional or moral imperative to get as many voting as possible. WHY you may think that is unclear to me, but I suspect it is derived from a belief that maximized voting is a somehow "social good". Perhaps you even believe people should be required to vote, and fined if they do not.

I don't. I don't care how many vote. I see no law or inherent duty of the State to maximize turnout OR influence voting patterns. I believe people should vote, or not vote, as they choose and that they have a right to change their mind up to the day of the election. I believe that 'equal opportunity' in voting (as much as practical) trumps pursuit of extra voting from large or concentrated groups.

I have no problem with more than one early voting station in Boone IF it is necessary due to capacity concerns. However, I am against early voting ballot box gerrymandering; the provision of easy and almost thoughtless balloting access for some while expecting everyone else in Boone to drive or hike many miles to get to the downtown station. The one station downtown Boone served the City and surrounding areas, and still "privileged" students because it was convenient to students due to its proximity to campus - there was no need for a "special" site for kids drinking coffee and eating fish sticks in the student union. (Hence, those who sued invented all sorts of special needs - students have to go to lectures, don't you know?).

Otherwise the government should have provided many more early voting stations in and around Boone, including strip centers and other large employers.

PS - Actually you make one valid point. Perhaps the City should have moved the early voting stations to the outskirts of town to provide more equal access to rural and town residents.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I have no problem with more than one early voting station in Boone IF it is necessary due to capacity concerns. However, I am against early voting ballot box gerrymandering; the provision of easy and almost thoughtless balloting access for some while expecting everyone else in Boone to drive or hike many miles to get to the downtown station. The one station downtown Boone served the City and surrounding areas, and still "privileged" students because it was convenient to students due to its proximity to campus - there was no need for a "special" site for kids drinking coffee and eating fish sticks in the student union. (Hence, those who sued invented all sorts of special needs - students have to go to lectures, don't you know?).

Otherwise the government should have provided many more early voting stations in and around Boone, including strip centers and other large employers.

PS - Actually you make one valid point. Perhaps the City should have moved the early voting stations to the outskirts of town to provide more equal access to rural and town residents.

Early voting stations are based on where the people are. Around here they aren't anything like randomly placed, nor are they even placed based on population. Rather, they are placed in the areas people frequent. The biggest early voting locations are the big indoor malls even though few people live near one of them. The ideal placement of the stations is what minimizes the total travel time to vote--your notion of putting them around the edge of town flunks that as it means a lot of travel for the students that constitute the majority of the people voting.