This is not voter fraud. Voter fraud is when someone ACTUALLY CASTS A VOTE that they are not legally empowered to do.
As long as the names remain on the rolls, someone can vote the name, even if they aren't that person. That is, of course, unless valid ID is required to cast a vote, and it is not a hardship for anyone to acquire a valid ID. Even if they can't afford it -- and I don't buy that someone can't afford to pay for a state ID -- the state will pay for it. The state shouldn't have to, though. I'd be willing to guess that some of those people whining "I can't afford it" don't have any trouble buying cigarettes, lottery tickets and fast food. Not to mention alcohol and illegal drugs. So yeah, they can afford it. They just don't want to, and then try to make it a point of contention that it's "discrimination." Hogwash.
Invalid registrations are not necessarily indicative of bad intent, probably more like government inefficiency.
Quite true. But as mentioned, if the names are on the rolls for whatever reason, someone can vote the name, even if they aren't the person.
This is not voter fraud. Voter fraud is when someone ACTUALLY CASTS A VOTE that they are not legally empowered to do.
Quite true. But as mentioned, if the names are on the rolls for whatever reason, someone can vote the name, even if they aren't the person.
"Ninety-nine case of potentially interstate voter fraud." Well, did they commit voter fraud or not. And, whew, 99 cases out of over 120 million ballots cast, yep that there is a CRISIS! Never let a crisis go to waste.
What do you suppose 24 million illegal votes would do to an election? Let me give you a hint: There were only 126 million votes cast in the Great Pretender's corona ... uh, reelection event last year. Before you make the claim that "No one could manage to illegally vote all 24 million names" let me point out to you, they don't have to try to vote 24 million. They only need to get a few people to vote a few names illegally in each precinct. Kennedy "beat" Nixon by the equivalent of slightly more than one vote per precinct nationwide. It isn't hard. And I'm certain it's been done -- and I don't mean by Kennedy supporters in the Chicago machine back in 1960, either.
No. Voter fraud.
And yet, names on the voter registration rolls were used by someone, even though the person was dead. Don't tell me that's not voter fraud, because that is exactly what it is, your denial aside.
So popularity is the new benchmark?
Yes, it's called "majority rule." Ever hear of it?
One has nothing to do with the other -- but nonetheless, it's not. A Gallup poll in May 2012 showed that only 41% favored abortion. This year, it's down to 26%. So you got snookered by your own illogical and unrelated question.
I do not understand why conservatives, who claim to be for less government, less government intrusion, less regulations, less spending, would endorse a new unfunded government mandate that voters must have photo IDs to vote.
So you think that 74% of Americans overall and 71% of Hispanics in the U.S. are conservative?