U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-22-2012, 07:01 AM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
10,512 posts, read 4,381,703 times
Reputation: 4636

Advertisements

RWNJ scared that someone will steal the election? Maybe an effort to keep people from their right to vote?

Been voting since High School have signed up to vote and my voting record has moved with me to each state. It seems that our Board of Elections in all states know what they are doing. I have never been asked to show my papers to prove who I am.

It takes a RWNJ to come up with the idea that voter fraud is a problem and to show people how easy it is. Just like Mr Steal your Pension and load you with debt Romney telling people how to do the most damage with a attack of a major city. He is a sad choice picked by the Repub.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-22-2012, 08:47 AM
 
2,603 posts, read 4,271,219 times
Reputation: 1954
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
This republic is made up of 50 states. I live in one of them. I have nothing to do with what another state enacts as far as legislation.

Why would you think any of us has anything to do with what goes on in another state?

You keep coming up with all these stats about probability of fraud.

This is simply risk management.

You audit your process. It is not complicated.

I don't care what some study shows. I don't care about probability. I care about ensuring that each ballot that is cast is cast by a citizen of this state who is properly registered as a voter.
You contradict yourself. Risk management requires probability of occurrence assessment. The probability of fraud in this instance is extremely low, which means that the risk is low and adding more burdensome requirements is not necessary. The studies I mention were essentially audits of the process outcomes of voter elections. They found fraud to be of little concern.

Of course we would care what has happened in other states as we can learn about some of the issues with this system as enacted in other states. Rather myopic attitude there once again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
I thought that is what we all would want. I thought that is what a valid election process meant.

You are not going to change my mind that properly overseeing registration of voters, and building in a system that assures each citizen has the right to vote, and that every vote cast is valid - is anything other than risk management and quality control.

It is called proper procedure.

Strange how we can all accept that a manufacturing plant has to follow a quality control procedure but somehow, that is being framed as a disenfranchisement tool when it applies to a vote.
You imply here that the system is not being properly overseen, and that the only way to "properly oversee" elections is through Voter ID. Risk management would tell you that the risks of damage to the democratic form of government are far greater from voter suppression than in-person voter fraud. So, suppression needs to be guarded against.

Regarding your factory analogy... doesn't excessive regulation stifle many plants from operating to their full potential? Don't qualifying requirements restrict the number of people who work at these plants? Again, additional requirements for voting that will solve no existing fraud problem but WILL stifle the number of people who are able to vote (decisively affecting one political party) are not risk management. They are voter suppression.

When someone says "I don't care about" a long list of factual studies and risk management tools, then says they are concerned with risk management, you really have to wonder what they do "care about."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 09:04 AM
 
2,603 posts, read 4,271,219 times
Reputation: 1954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neworleansisprettygood View Post
Would you have a problem with the idea if just a voter Id card was required? They're issued to everybody registered to vote. And they're free. They could even start putting pictures on them.

I get the libertarian argument here, but democracy isn't perfect. It too requires some regulation.
Phased in over many years, perhaps. I just don't know if the costs of setting up a system would be worth whatever small benefit we would get from it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:30 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,029,152 times
Reputation: 22370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neworleansisprettygood View Post
Would you have a problem with the idea if just a voter Id card was required? They're issued to everybody registered to vote. And they're free. They could even start putting pictures on them.

I get the libertarian argument here, but democracy isn't perfect. It too requires some regulation.
Absolutely do not have a problem with that. That is why they are issued.

This thread was actually part of another discussion we were having in Charlotte and it got separated with my name as the person who originally posted - and I did not originally post this thread.

I personally think the system is fine as long as SOME FORM OF VERIFICATION, other than a verbal statement of one's address and name, is required.

We get voter ID Cards issued. WHy do we get them issued if we aren't supposed to take them to the polls as ID?

That is what I feel is appropriate ID.

The rest of this discussion has been taken into photo IDs and I personally don't have a problem with that, either, but to me, A REGISTRATION CARD IS APPROPRIATE.

I find the protests about having to bring ANY form of ID is just plain silly! Why would anyone have a problem with showing up with their VOTER REGISTRATION CARD?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:32 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,029,152 times
Reputation: 22370
Quote:
Originally Posted by coped View Post
Phased in over many years, perhaps. I just don't know if the costs of setting up a system would be worth whatever small benefit we would get from it.
What are you talking about? We all get registration cards now. Just bring it to the polls.

They dont' have to have a photo ID on them. This is a non-issue. WE ALREADY GET THESE CARDS!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:36 AM
 
2,603 posts, read 4,271,219 times
Reputation: 1954
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
What are you talking about? We all get registration cards now. Just bring it to the polls.

They dont' have to have a photo ID on them. This is a non-issue. WE ALREADY GET THESE CARDS!!!!
The voter suppression is coming from those states that require state-issued photo IDs to vote. Not voter cards, not social security cards, not veteran's IDs, not student IDs (but somehow Tennessee has exempted gun-owner licenses). Its deliberate suppression. That's what this is about; the spread of PHOTO ID laws throughout other states in an attempt to suppress the vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:38 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,029,152 times
Reputation: 22370
MY STATE OF NC DOES NOT REQUIRE PHOTO IDs.

Okay?

All the philosophical BS about this issue is OF NO INTEREST TO ME.

THe only thing I am concerned about is VOTER FRAUD.

I object to people being able to vote WITHOUT ANY FORM OF ID TO PROVE THEY ARE INDEED THE PERSON ON THAT PRECINCT LIST.

A voter registration card - the one we all get via mail here in North Carolina - IS FINE WITH ME.

If people are voting who are not citizens, then the election is FRAUDULENT.

This is simple

If people are registered properly, they should be allowed to vote.

Registration in NC is as simple as it gets: I copied the requirements on an earlier post.

I have to ask - if a person is too stupid to bring a registration card to the polls to prove they are indeed the person on the precinct list - THIS COUNTRY IS INDEED GOING DOWN THE TUBES.

A state that requires more ID should make provision to help folks get that ID, but that is NOT MY ISSUE. I DO NOT LIVE IN A STATE THAT REQUIRES FURTHER ID.

If you want to argue about PENNSYLVANIA, go talk to the PENNSYLVANIA folks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:43 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,029,152 times
Reputation: 22370
Quote:
Originally Posted by coped View Post
The voter suppression is coming from those states that require state-issued photo IDs to vote. Not voter cards, not social security cards, not veteran's IDs, not student IDs (but somehow Tennessee has exempted gun-owner licenses). Its deliberate suppression. That's what this is about; the spread of PHOTO ID laws throughout other states in an attempt to suppress the vote.
THen you are talking to the wrong folks, COPED.

Our state does not require a PHOTO ID.

I have been asked for ID in the past. Others say they haven't. It evidently differs from county to county within NC.

I have shown my driver's license in years past. I have also shown my registration card.

Since moving to MECK, I have not been asked to show SQUAT, which frankly concerned me.

If you want the law to change, go talk to the states who you feel are suppressing the vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:47 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,029,152 times
Reputation: 22370
Quote:
Originally Posted by coped View Post
You contradict yourself. Risk management requires probability of occurrence assessment. The probability of fraud in this instance is extremely low, which means that the risk is low and adding more burdensome requirements is not necessary. The studies I mention were essentially audits of the process outcomes of voter elections. They found fraud to be of little concern.

Of course we would care what has happened in other states as we can learn about some of the issues with this system as enacted in other states. Rather myopic attitude there once again.



You imply here that the system is not being properly overseen, and that the only way to "properly oversee" elections is through Voter ID. Risk management would tell you that the risks of damage to the democratic form of government are far greater from voter suppression than in-person voter fraud. So, suppression needs to be guarded against.

Regarding your factory analogy... doesn't excessive regulation stifle many plants from operating to their full potential? Don't qualifying requirements restrict the number of people who work at these plants? Again, additional requirements for voting that will solve no existing fraud problem but WILL stifle the number of people who are able to vote (decisively affecting one political party) are not risk management. They are voter suppression.

When someone says "I don't care about" a long list of factual studies and risk management tools, then says they are concerned with risk management, you really have to wonder what they do "care about."
That is frankly insulting, my friend.

THe voting process needs to be VALID.

That is all I am asking.

My rights are infringed on as a citizen if folks are voting who are NOT CITIZENS, or whose voting privileges were removed b/c of a FELONY, or who are impersonating someone else in order to vote multiple times.

I dont care if those things happen ONCE. They are FRAUD.

I do care about voter suppression. My contention is - how the hell can someone say their vote was suppressed b/c they were required to prove they are the person whose name is on the precinct list?

I agree that a vote is FRAUDULENT if properly registered people are not allowed to vote.

STOP THE MADNESS.

I can't help what other legislatures have done. It is up to them to come up with a viable solution if people have problems meeting the requirements for voter ID.

I DO NOT VOTE IN THOSE STATES. I VOTE IN NC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2012, 10:56 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,029,152 times
Reputation: 22370
Quote:
Originally Posted by frewroad View Post
OK, what's to stop the government from requiring everyone to have a chip installed on your spine at birth in order to "protect the integrity" of the system. It's another step of putting the state in control of the people rather than the people being in control of the state.

It's up to the local election boards and precient workers workers to maintain the system and they have done so for centuries without requiring the use of state mandated IDs. If people are going to cheat the system then there simply are better ways to do it than to get a massive number of people to go and vote illegally. That would be like tying to herd a group of cats. It a'int happening. If people are really worried about the system, they should bring in independent auditors to go and check these electronic machines to make sure they are not being modified.

What you suggest is a solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist.
I AM NOT ASKING FOR SQUAT!!!!!

FIrst of all, I did not start this thread. SO I am not asking anything.

In reply to others, I have stated that it is important to ensure the integrity of an election.

Integrity of an election includes MAKING SURE PEOPLE ARE REGISTERED. I want to see every eligible voter in the USA REGISTERED AND VOTING. Only half the people eligible even bother to vote!!!

I WANT EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO VOTE TO BE ABLE TO VOTE.

If they can't show up at the polls, I want them to have access to an absentee ballot.

This is SIMPLE.

I am not looking for any kind of problem. However, I do find it strange that anyone would object to a person having to prove they are, indeed, the same person whose name is on a precinct voter registration list.

Showing a registration card is fine with me!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top