Free Markets, Free People

Voter fraud? Aw, come on, no way.

Or at least that’s what those who oppose using a picture ID to ensure the integrity of the voting system would have you believe.  All a nonissue they tell us.

One day after being sued over a controversial ballot box citizenship question, Secretary of State Ruth Johnson said Tuesday there are an estimated 4,000 noncitizens on Michigan’s voter rolls.

The estimate is based on the state’s access to citizenship information for one-fifth of the population, Johnson said, adding the federal government won’t give her access to more citizenship data.

Johnson said the results of a “very tedious” analysis of 58,000 driver’s licenses and state-issued identification cards found 963 noncitizens registered to vote.

Department of State employees cross-referenced those noncitizens with voting records and found 54 have a voting history and have voted a total of 95 times, Johnson said.

So you have 963 noncitizens in the sample who have managed to get state issued driver’s licenses.  Nice.  There’s something else that needs to be tightend up a tad in Michigan, huh?

But obviously the point is that you have people who are not entitled to vote voting fraudulently (oh, and they didn’t have any problem obtaining ID so why do our “minorities” have such a tough time?).  And in contests decided by a few votes as we’ve seen numerous times over the years (convicted felons for go big for Al Franken!), the integrity of the system is in question.

However, it’s just too much to a) have people prove their citizens prior to getting a state issued ID and b) produce that at the polling place to ensure they are who they say they are.  You know, like they do when you board a plane?

~McQ

Twitter: McQandO

Facebook: QandO

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

22 Responses to Voter fraud? Aw, come on, no way.

  • …adding the federal government won’t give her access to more citizenship data.

    OK, then sue the bastards.  WTF…?!?!?
    This in the same week as we learn that Media Mutters(to itself in a dark, dank basement) is being used as the DOJ its proxy to crush bad press, and employees and former employees who blow the whistle on Holder corruption.
    Holder is simply a (not very bright) outlaw.

  • Or go to an Obama campaign event.

  • Besides, while not asking for ID we haven’t caught anyone voting as someone other than themselves, so it can’t be happening, see?
     
    It’s very simple.

    • Exactly … without an ID check how do you know Joe Smith is really Joe Smith?

      • To certain parties that really IS evidence it’s just not happening in numbers big enough to worry about.   However, they ARE convinced that millions (millions I tell you!  Millions!!!!!!) will be disenfranchised, and their evidence of this is……because they FEEL it will.
         
        Now, let’s do one of them thar gedankenexperiment thingies on the reality of their feelings….
        Since we don’t require voter ID on a national level, and it’s by State, how many states is it possible to disenfranchise MILLIONS of voters in?
         
        Well, can’t do that in Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, or Wyoming….there ain’t enough people in those places.   So, in 7 of the 57 states of Obama it’s impossible to disenfranchise millions of voters in the first place.
         
        Likewise, it’s unlikely in states where the population is under 2 million – since they can’t ALL be eligible to vote, with or without ID – that would be Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and West Virginia.   So, another 7 of the 57 states.   We’re up to 14 States where it’s numerically impossible to disenfranchise millions of voters.
         
        Now we get into the troublesome states that have a few million, I’ll set that number to be between 2.5 and 6 million (completely arbitrary on my part) – so Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin.
        18 of those, now we’re up to 32 states out of 57.  I guess it’s possible there are a million ‘poor’, ‘old’ and uh, undocumented, in each of these states, who don’t presently HAVE any means of identifying themselves.  Possible, unlikely, but possible.  Remember, they have to be old, or poor, AND not presently have any valid ID, not just old and poor.
         
        Finally what I’ll lump in as the ‘big’ states. Which is the rest of course – populations in excess of 6 million, all the way up to 37 million (California) and there are 18 of those.  Now you have to ask yourself, how many old, poor, voters who are in fact, eligible in the first place, in these states DO NOT have any sort of id already.   Again, it’s sorta possible, I guess.
         
        The 7 additional Obama States are probably where the danger lies, since I’m assuming, without facts to back me up as they are completely unavailable, that these are the mega large states with populations in excess of 37 million.  Clearly in the Obama States it’s possible, in fact, if his states are anything like his management of the country, it’s LIKELY there are millions upon millions of poor and probably some old, people who don’t have ID to vote with or a pot to piss in.
         
        Millions.
         
         
         
         

      • And I’m using the code word – ‘poor’ to mean minorities (after all, some dark skinned gentlemen claimed when we say “dead voters” we mean African-Americans) of course.  There ARE no poor white-folks you know, even in the 7 states that compose the 7 unknown states Obama spoke of.

  • It obviously is because – and I’m just using the democrats own arguments here – minority voters are so incapable of interacting with society that they can’t get photo IDs.

  • I can see the advantages of voters photo-ID, but people should have enough time to get them—like a year, instead of a few months—so we don’t disenfranchise millions of citizen voters for the sake of a few thousand hypothetically fraudulent ones.

    • Still waiting on our post wherein you include the pdf of the bill for the van you rented to gather up all those puuuurrrr people who cannot get their photo IDs…
      Tick, tock, moron.

    • Millions?  Why not pick a bigger numbers since you’re winging it in the first place.

    • But….since your statement is not totally unreasonable on the surface.    Will they pick a year as a bench mark year and after that there will be no whining allowed about how new poor people didn’t have time to get photo-id?
       
      It’s not that it’s a bad idea Tad, and I’m being sincere here, it’s just that the panderers will make sure that that goal post is set in sand so they can move it at as needed.  Every year, there will be the sad story of how millions of new voters and immigrants and old people didn’t have time to get id.

    • They’ve had since they were 16 for heaven sake.

    • They’ve already had an effing lifetime dude.

    • I may miss the deadline for an absentee ballot due to travel. I demand internet voting NOW to make sure I don’t lose my rights.
      Same logic as what you are saying, but no one would say I am being reasonable.

  • You know, like they do when you board a plane?
    What a stupid thing to say Bruce. Poor people can’t afford to get on planes. You are as bad as Romney with his ” poor people are a drain on society and should all be shot and thrown in one huge mass grave” comment.

    • You forgot a “sarc” tag.

    • I know Jamie. Btw, I was talking about “minorities”, not poor people. Remember, validated picture IDs “disenfranchise” the nebulous “minorities”. Poor people seem to have figured out how to get such IDs so they can get to work and frequent the services they use (banking, etc).

      • They are all the same people Bruce. You libertarian-conservotards can’t seem to get it through your heads that all people are poor and minorities except the evil 1%.

  • Yes i did. And it didn’t block quote for me.

  • “So you have 963 noncitizens in the sample who have managed to get state issued driver’s licenses.”
    This is completely normal. If you are a non-citizen, you still need to drive and its perfectly fine to issue them to foreigners.
    My wife is a non-citizen and has a driver’s license. What she does not have is the right to vote.
    So, they could check the voter rolls and see if she was on it or not, or they could stamp her license “NOT ELIGIBLE TO VOTE” like they do for underage licenses in regard to alcohol.

    • But you could not deny foreigner non-citizens driver’s licenses. That would place a huge burden on people legally here.
      p.s. I have a Taiwan’s driver’s license, but they use national ID cards for everything not DL. I don’t get to vote.