Elections Government Voter Registration Website Has Sketchy Results - If You Like Democracy It's Time for Voter ID

[jk7707]

There is nothing bullshit about them, unless you are Left Cult.

So the whole premise of your thread is that the number of "registrants" in swing states is suspicious. Except that the numbers you're using do not represent individual registrants, and the vast majority are verified through means other than this system. Quit lying, you hack.

From the article I posted, that your dumbass clearly didn't look at:

"Heckel told the AP that the HAVV data being cited on social media only represents the raw number of verification requests Pennsylvania counties make to the SSA, adding that “the data does not represent the numbers of newly registered voters, and any representation that they do is false.”

Heckel said that for Pennsylvania “in many cases, the same voter’s partial SSN is being checked more than once in a single year” and that the state makes HAVV requests for absentee and mail ballot applications in addition to voter registrations. This means that verification requests do not necessarily correspond one-to-one with people registering to vote.

A 2010 audit report published by the SSA’s Office of the Inspector General found that 32% of verification requests in 2008 — 2.4 million out of 7.7 million total — were for voters whose information had already been verified that year. In 2009, re-submissions constituted 20% of verification requests — 1.4 million out of 7.2 million.

Ohio, for example, in 2008 “submitted the same voter information 1,778 times during the year for a 77-year-old man who died in December 2005.” The submissions were made over an 11-day period, ranging from 1 to 278 verification requests per day. The same voter’s information was submitted by Ohio 13,824 times in 2009"

 

[Whippy McGee]

So the whole premise of your thread is that the number of "registrants" in swing states is suspicious. Except that the numbers you're using do not represent individual registrants, and the vast majority are verified through means other than this system. Quit lying, you hack.

From the article I posted, that your dumbass clearly didn't look at:

"Heckel told the AP that the HAVV data being cited on social media only represents the raw number of verification requests Pennsylvania counties make to the SSA, adding that “the data does not represent the numbers of newly registered voters, and any representation that they do is false.”

Heckel said that for Pennsylvania “in many cases, the same voter’s partial SSN is being checked more than once in a single year” and that the state makes HAVV requests for absentee and mail ballot applications in addition to voter registrations. This means that verification requests do not necessarily correspond one-to-one with people registering to vote.

A 2010 audit report published by the SSA’s Office of the Inspector General found that 32% of verification requests in 2008 — 2.4 million out of 7.7 million total — were for voters whose information had already been verified that year. In 2009, re-submissions constituted 20% of verification requests — 1.4 million out of 7.2 million.

Ohio, for example, in 2008 “submitted the same voter information 1,778 times during the year for a 77-year-old man who died in December 2005.” The submissions were made over an 11-day period, ranging from 1 to 278 verification requests per day. The same voter’s information was submitted by Ohio 13,824 times in 2009"

Your 2010 Reports is dated son.

 

[jk7707]

Your 2010 Reports is dated son.

Way to ignore all the rest of it moron. Are the people in charge of the elections in those states that were quoted in the article literally saying the way you're using the numbers here is WRONG, dated too?

How about you just admit you "found" these numbers, with this narrative attached to them from some right wing CT site, instead of acting like you were doing "research". We all know you're not intellectually honest enough to actually research anything.

 

[ShadowRun]

Streams * were not talking about DMV’s. Same way people register for selective service , same way people get SSN cards and numbers , same way people get passports. All federal

@avenue94

 

[Whippy McGee]

Way to ignore all the rest of it moron. Are the people in charge of the elections in those states that were quoted in the article literally saying the way you're using the numbers here is WRONG, dated too?

How about you just admit you "found" these numbers, with this narrative attached to them from some right wing CT site, instead of acting like you were doing "research". We all know you're not intellectually honest enough to actually research anything.

Those are numbers from .gov, What story do they tell?

Cry harder.

 

[spamking]

That's because you don't listen. I have explained this many times in excruciating detail why the courts have determined time and time again that it's suppression.

Are you playing games or are you simple?

Good grief . . . . you can't even keep voter registration, voter IDs, or presenting ID when voting separate.

Thirty-six states have some identification requirements at the polls. Not all voter ID requirements are discriminatory or burdensome to voters, but seven have strict photo ID laws, under which voters must present one of a limited set of forms of government-issued photo ID to cast a regular ballot–no exceptions.

Verifying our identity when registering to vote is a standard practice to ensure the integrity of the electoral process by preventing fraud and maintaining accurate voter rolls. It's not inherently considered voter suppression.

There hasn't been a blanket ruling by courts stating that verifying identity when registering to vote constitutes voter suppression.

Of course, courts have ruled differently on various voter ID laws depending on the specific details of each case. Some courts have upheld voter ID laws as constitutional. In contrast, others have struck them down or issued injunctions against their enforcement, citing concerns about voter suppression or disproportionate impacts on certain groups.

You're complaining about something that impacts 13% of the black and 5% of the white population in the US. And those seven states I mentioned before.

Texas allows handgun licenses for voting but does not accept student ID cards (this could make sense due to residency issues with students). Until its voter ID law was struck down, North Carolina prohibited public assistance IDs and state employee ID cards (this makes no sense, but it's no longer a problem), which are disproportionately held by Black voters. Wisconsin’s law originally prohibited Veterans Affairs ID cards for voting but permitted active duty military ID cards.

 

[jk7707]

Those are numbers from .gov, What story do they tell?

Cry harder.

Are you seriously that fuckin stupid? The election officials in the article I linked to literally explain it. I copied and pasted the relevant text here about it to make it easier for you.

All of what I posted refutes your entire premise for this thread. The numbers exist. The numbers are from .gov. YOUR ANALYSIS is what is 100% WRONG. And I shouldn't even say your analysis, considering it's pretty much a guarantee you copied and pasted this shit from some CT nutter site.

Time to fuck off and run to a new thread like usual.

 

[Loiosh]

Good grief . . . . you can't even keep voter registration, voter IDs, or presenting ID when voting separate.

Thirty-six states have some identification requirements at the polls. Not all voter ID requirements are discriminatory or burdensome to voters, but seven have strict photo ID laws, under which voters must present one of a limited set of forms of government-issued photo ID to cast a regular ballot–no exceptions.

Verifying our identity when registering to vote is a standard practice to ensure the integrity of the electoral process by preventing fraud and maintaining accurate voter rolls. It's not inherently considered voter suppression.

There hasn't been a blanket ruling by courts stating that verifying identity when registering to vote constitutes voter suppression.

Of course, courts have ruled differently on various voter ID laws depending on the specific details of each case. Some courts have upheld voter ID laws as constitutional. In contrast, others have struck them down or issued injunctions against their enforcement, citing concerns about voter suppression or disproportionate impacts on certain groups.

You're complaining about something that impacts 13% of the black and 5% of the white population in the US. And those seven states I mentioned before.

Texas allows handgun licenses for voting but does not accept student ID cards (this could make sense due to residency issues with students). Until its voter ID law was struck down, North Carolina prohibited public assistance IDs and state employee ID cards (this makes no sense, but it's no longer a problem), which are disproportionately held by Black voters. Wisconsin’s law originally prohibited Veterans Affairs ID cards for voting but permitted active duty military ID cards.

I made my underlying point perfectly clear, and you said you don't care. Everything else you're saying is just white noise.

Parsing the white noise I can see that you don't understand that either, but it's irrelevant.

 

[Cajun]

That's because you don't listen. I have explained this many times in excruciating detail why the courts have determined time and time again that it's suppression.

Free national ID cards may be the answer. It cant be a free for all but needs to be accessible to all citizens.

 

[Loiosh]

Free national ID cards may be the answer. It cant be a free for all but needs to be accessible to all citizens.

Maybe someone can explain to me why this is so important to some people.

In Canada have to periodically complete a census form, not doing so is against the law. When you do that, you're registered to vote. It's my understanding this is similar to getting on American voter rolls, but I don't really know.

I've voted by simply providing a proof of address (like a bill). This is because trying to rig an election by falsifying identity is an enormous risk with a microscopic reward.

In 2020, Republican election officials under a Republican administration said the election was the most secure in American history, and yet at the end of the day huge numbers of conservatives keep saying the vote was rigged.

It all seems completely insane to me.

I worked in fraud prevention for a decade, I ran a department protecting twenty million dollars a week in transactions. When I wanted to implement a new measure I had to prove I was actually targeting fraud and illustrate how the measure would address that fraud.

Following the 2020 elections, they spent hundreds of millions of dollars picking the elections apart and found absolutely nothing.

Politicians at all levels of government have repeatedly, and falsely, claimed the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections were marred by large numbers of people voting illegally. However, extensive research reveals that fraud is very rare, voter impersonation is virtually nonexistent, and many instances of alleged fraud are, in fact, mistakes by voters or administrators. The same is true for mail ballots, which are secure and essential to holding a safe election amid the coronavirus pandemic.

 

[avenue94]

Free national ID cards may be the answer. It cant be a free for all but needs to be accessible to all citizens.

It could be, but my gut tells me that the venn diagram of those who want stricter requirements for voting and those who oppose a national ID has a lot of overlap.

 

[Cajun]

Maybe someone can explain to me why this is so important to some people.

In Canada have to periodically complete a census form, not doing so is against the law. When you do that, you're registered to vote. It's my understanding this is similar to getting on American voter rolls, but I don't really know.

I've voted by simply providing a proof of address (like a bill). This is because trying to rig an election by falsifying identity is an enormous risk with a microscopic reward.

In 2020, Republican election officials under a Republican administration said the election was the most secure in American history, and yet at the end of the day huge numbers of conservatives keep saying the vote was rigged.

It all seems completely insane to me.

I worked in fraud prevention for a decade, I ran a department protecting twenty million dollars a week in transactions. When I wanted to implement a new measure I had to prove I was actually targeting fraud and illustrate how the measure would address that fraud.

Following the 2020 elections, they spent hundreds of millions of dollars picking the elections apart and found absolutely nothing.

I'm not going to touch the 2020 election as it was covid and millions of votes hand counted etc that likely wont be repeated. I will say that if there was enough evidence then the republicans would have pushed it. The census we do here doesnt take into account citizenship. It is purely a count of the people living here. When I moved originally to texas (this is my second time), one in eight or something was illegal. I have no idea how Cali does it because they give licenses to non-citizens. Maybe there is a mark or something indicating non-citizen.

 

[Cajun]

It could be, but my gut tells me that the venn diagram of those who want stricter requirements for voting and those who oppose a national ID has a lot of overlap.

Even if you were to do it by state it seems like it wouldnt be that great of a cost for just an ID particularly for those that cannot afford the fee. Seems like it would make both sides ease up. If the left are worried about leaving citizens out of elections due to affordability and the right is worried about people voting who have no rights here.... it would be very easy. These types of things make me think that neither side (politicians) want anything to change.

 

[Goatenstein]

Aren't racists big fans of voter IDs?

 

[Cajun]

Aren't racists big fans of voter IDs?

I'm sure white bigots will be for them. What's your point?

 

[spamking]

I made my underlying point perfectly clear, and you said you don't care. Everything else you're saying is just white noise.

Parsing the white noise I can see that you don't understand that either, but it's irrelevant.

Oh stop acting like you're not being a complete douchebag too. You're so blinded by your own stance you're completely refusing to read anything because you disagree with it.

I'll repeat it just for good measure . . . verifying your ID at voter registration is in no way shape or form voter suppression. Your beef is with those states that have different photo ID requirements. My point is completely different than whatever bug you have up your butt.

 

[spamking]

Maybe someone can explain to me why this is so important to some people.

You're whining about what I've said but are acting stupid about that point? You seriously have no clue why verifying your ID at voter registration to make sure the voter logs are accurate is important?

In Canada have to periodically complete a census form, not doing so is against the law. When you do that, you're registered to vote. It's my understanding this is similar to getting on American voter rolls, but I don't really know.

But yet you're blasting me for telling you how to get on our voter rolls. Unbelievable.

I've voted by simply providing a proof of address (like a bill). This is because trying to rig an election by falsifying identity is an enormous risk with a microscopic reward.

Which along with verifying your identity is exactly like our requirements for registering to vote.

 

[Loiosh]

You're whining about what I've said but are acting stupid about that point? You seriously have no clue why verifying your ID at voter registration to make sure the voter logs are accurate is important?



But yet you're blasting me for telling you how to get on our voter rolls. Unbelievable.



Which along with verifying your identity is exactly like our requirements for registering to vote.

Fraud that can be stopped by verifying individuals is so small it doesn't and hasn't changed any modern election.

I keep saying I don't care about your great system because it doesn't matter. Conservatives simply cannot be trusted to change any part of any electoral process, as they court cases you don't care about indicate.

I don't have a problem with systems being improved but it has to be the way it was before they gutted the VRA, which you refused to agree with in another thread. I have no idea why you'd object to someone studying a measure before implementing it.

As far as I'm concerned, we're done on this topic. We were done a couple of attempts ago.

You're from Oklahoma, right? How do you feel about Senate Bill 518?

 

[avenue94]

Even if you were to do it by state it seems like it wouldnt be that great of a cost for just an ID particularly for those that cannot afford the fee. Seems like it would make both sides ease up. If the left are worried about leaving citizens out of elections due to affordability and the right is worried about people voting who have no rights here.... it would be very easy. These types of things make me think that neither side (politicians) want anything to change.

Sort of. It's not that IDs are expensive it's not obtaining them is the issue. It doesn't matter if the ID is free if say, the state closes the DMV near you. Ultimately, the issue with voting ID is it's solving a problem that doesn't really exist.

 

[spamking]

Fraud that can be stopped by verifying individuals is so small it doesn't and hasn't changed any modern election.

I keep saying I don't care about your great system because it doesn't matter. Conservatives simply cannot be trusted to change any part of any electoral process, as they court cases you don't care about indicate.

I don't have a problem with systems being improved but it has to be the way it was before they gutted the VRA, which you refused to agree with in another thread. I have no idea why you'd object to someone studying a measure before implementing it.

As far as I'm concerned, we're done on this topic. We were done a couple of attempts ago.

You're from Oklahoma, right? How do you feel about Senate Bill 518?

If we're done. We're done.

So it ultimately doesn't matter how I feel about SB 518.