Friday, November 29, 2013

No Voter Fraud in NC?...

Between 2008 and 2012, 475 cases of voter fraud in North Carolina were referred for prosecution, according to a new NC Board of Elections report obtained by the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina (after repeated requests), which undermines claims that voter fraud in North Carolina is insignificant.

See full article here

48 comments:

Sarkazein said...

This doesn't count the times Democrats got away with the fraud. Those are just the times we know about. At least two liberals have posted comments showing they are ignorant of any voter fraud, much less these 475 cases. I would bet it matters not.

Anonymous said...

NCSBE Report lists: "Voter - Impersonation" 1 case.

So an ID requirement would address 1 case in how many years, 10?

Abraham said...

"undermines claims that voter fraud in North Carolina is insignificant."

How is 475 cases out of approximately 12 million votes a "significant" problem? There is some level of voter fraud everywhere in the US, but the mere presence of fraudulent behavior does not automatically create a "significant" problem.

I'm not sure a 0.00004% prevalence rate is anything to throw millions of tax-payer dollars at. Nor does the linked article say anything of substance. Just partisan pandering.

Abraham said...

Should read 0.004%, not 0.0004.

Sarkazein said...

Abe- Just look at the many close elections, some won or lost by recount.
Once faith in the electoral process is lost, freedom is lost.

NewGuy said...

Apparently some readers here are of the opinion that voter fraud is acceptable as long as it doesn't exceed certain levels?

Abraham said...

"Apparently some readers here are of the opinion that voter fraud is acceptable as long as it doesn't exceed certain levels?" --NewGuy

The issue is exceedingly rare and does not warrant throwing millions of tax payer dollars at. Do you believe that 475 fraudulent votes out of 12+ million warrant extra government intervention and the provision of tax-payer funds?

Anonymous said...

These cases are just the tip of the iceburg! These are the cases where people were CAUGHT and then REFERRED FOR PROSECUTION.

There is no valid estimate as to the number of voter fraud cases which go undiscovered.

Democratus Rex said...

All voter fraud in N.C. was committed by republicans.

guy faulkes said...

Some races, particularly local races, have been decide by a miniscule amount of votes. I seem to remember one race was won by nine votes. How many does it take to be significant?

Abraham said...

Why'd you censor my comment/question, made this afternoon?

NewGuy said...

Rare? How do we know if it's rare or not? What we do know is that almost 500 cases were found and referred for prosecution. We don't know if there were a million cases or a dozen cases that were not caught.

Integrity of the voting process is critical to our system of government. If we can't be confidant that our votes are honestly accounted for, and that our elector process reflects the true voice of the voters, then we can't have faith in the results.



NewGuy said...

Abraham, as far as I know, no one has "censored" your comments. If you posted something that hasn't appeared here and you think it's worthwhile - I suggest that you repost it.

Sarkazein said...

It doesn't matter which Party voter fraud comes from. Either voter should be prosecuted. It would be better to stop it in the first place.
It must be just a coincidence Democrats don't want to try and stop it or worse ignore it while Republicans want to stop it. I think you should have to pass a general knowledge test written in English before you are registered to vote. If you can't read, an oral test should be given. In national elections, only people required to or are register for the draft should have a vote.

Sarkazein said...

All male illegal aliens must register for the draft at age 18. I am guessing they don't. This is also a criminal offense.

Democratus Rex said...

"In national elections, only people required to or are register for the draft should have a vote. "

So, only the military or people eligible for the military should be allowed to vote?

"Some races, particularly local races, have been decide by a miniscule amount of votes. I seem to remember one race was won by nine votes."

Which/where races? Please be specific. Don't rely on your memory or your feelings.

There is such a thing as statistical significance. It's used in every part of your life.

NewGuy said...

Rex, you remind me of some previous posters here who never had anything to say about the topic, only posted for the purpose of attacking other posters.

If you have nothing to contribute.....you know? Just sayin.

Close elections...1974 US Senate, New Hampshire...2 votes difference out of 1/4 million votes cast...

2004 Governorship Washington State..133 vote difference out of nearly 3 million votes cast

2000 Presidential election Florida...a little over 500 votes difference between Gore and Bush in the recount which decided the election. This one was in all the papers, maybe you read about it?

There are literally dozens of cases where 500 or fewer votes made a difference in national or state representation. And, it's pretty common in local races to win or lose by a very small number of votes.

Sarkazein said...

DRex wrote- "So, only the military or people eligible for the military should be allowed to vote?"

If you are unfamiliar with the rules of the American Selective Service, Google it and read about it. "Who has to register?".

Sarkazein said...

NewGuy- One old liberal used to comment on how low the odds were you will be killed by a terrorist act that if we should ignore the terrorists. Same with voter fraud I guess.

NewGuy said...

Yes, Sark. That's their "logic"...Since bank robberies in Boone are so infrequent that they have become 'statistically insignificant', we shouldn't pay a bank employee to lock the doors at night nor should we spend money on security systems.



Abraham said...

"as far as I know, no one has "censored" your comments" --NewGuy

First, I posted a comment/question yesterday at approximately 4:30pm. As of 10:30pm, it had not been published, yet other comments had been published. Only after submitting a "censorship" comment was my comment retroactively published by the moderators. The moderators seem to be acting a bit shady in regards to open discussion. But we digress.

Second, you never answered my question, so I will restate and rephrase. You claim that 475 fraudulent votes out of 12+ million warrants vast amounts of tax-payer money to right-the-wrong. At what level would you consider no provision of tax-payer money? 200 fraudulent votes? 50? 1?

Third, claiming that the 475 number is a highly conservative number because, "those are just the cases we know about" is a ludicrous statement. An analogous claim would be for me to state that the population of North Carolina is 100 million because the census claims 10 million, but those are just the people we know about. Sounds pretty silly, doesn't it.

Democratus Rex said...

"...odds were you will be killed by a terrorist act that if we should ignore the terrorists. Same with voter fraud I guess."

Comparing terrorism to voter fraud is pathetic

"Rex, you remind me of some previous posters here who never had anything to say about the topic, only posted for the purpose of attacking other posters."

I sometimes need to have your logic explained.

Still, you would honest to admit that NC voter laws are designed to discourage Democratic voter participation, plain and simple. Your other republican brethren have.
have.

Sarkazein said...

Drex wrote- "Comparing terrorism to voter fraud is pathetic"

They are both illegal acts to achieve a political goal.
One violent... the other non-violent. Historically the Democrats had a violent terrorist wing called the KKK.
Now they have voter fraud.

Sarkazein said...

Democrats are really sensitive about their voter fraud.

guy faulkes said...

Drex

1. Voter fraud is political terrorism as is voter intimidation such as your Black Panther friends with their nightsticks outside a polling place.

2. You cannot be blamed for using the personal attack tactics of liberals because you are a liberal. You are only doing that which you have been taught by your peers.

3. N.X. voter laws are designed to stop voter fraud by either party. This includes removing the polling place advantages Democrats have given themselves over the years. Democrats do not want a level playing field.

These reforms do not matter much in the long run as there is little difference in Democrats and establishment Republicans. They both support the big government status quote.

Abraham

I have had the same thing happen on numerous occasions. Sometimes a post is automatically sent to the spam folder. Unless you tell NewGuy o Bloger about it, it will stay there. If you do tell them, they will take the time and trouble to look for it and put it on the blog. Put your big boy britches on and get over it. These guys go above and beyond what other people that have blogs do.

So, is it your contention that if only 475 blacks were to be murdered out of 12 million, it would be acceptable? What about 475 gay people out of 12 million? Does the nature of the rule of law that is being broken effect your opinion?

Why is questioning that 475 cases of voter fraud are all that occurred ludicrois? What is ludicrous is the comparison to the census. The census has nothing to do with criminal activity. Can you prove definitively that the 475 cases mentioned included every case of voter fraud that occurred? If not, the argument you make is meaningless.

Why do you support breaking the rule of law by not attempting to stop such actions? Do you somehow benefit from doing so?

Sarkazein said...

I wonder if Abe is as upset with the Obamacare Redistribution website glitches as he is with this blog.

NewGuy said...

Abraham...at about 10 or 1030 last night,I posted the comments which had ALL been pending since my previous update at around 4:15 PM or so. There were no comments submitted later than yours which were approved before yours were They were all posted at the same time. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT A COMMENT WAS MOVED FROM THE SPAM FOLDER TO THE MAIN PAGE during this same period. I don't recall the time frame specifically but I did find a comment in the spam folder yesterday that I "rescued" and moved to the main page.
It happens.

There are only two active administrators.....Blogger and myself. Blogger did not post any "moderated" comments during that time period yesterday -all of the moderated comments between 4Pm and midnight last night weremoderated and posted by me.

If we had any desire to not post your comments, we would simply just not post them....and would probably not bother to post your complaints about "censorship" either.

As to your questions - I really haven't put a numerical value on the amount of voter fraud I would tolerate before I took steps to discourage it. In my mind, a single fraudulent vote is one too many.

Your comparision to the census numbers is ludicrous. The census is an attempt at counting all the people within the state whereas the number of cases of voter fraud referred to prosecution is not. It does not claim in any way to be an indication as to the number of actual fraudulent votes.

You are probably smart enough to realize that - if 500 cases were discovered and referred for prosecution, there were probably a number of cases which were either NOT discovered, or where there was insufficient evidence for prosecution. Or do you believe that our present system is so "tight" that every single case is found and prosecuted?

If that is your belief, do you also believe that every drunk driver is caught and prosecuted? Or would you agree that a "statistically significant" number of drunk drivers are not caught?

I guess I don't understand why Democrats are so afraid of honest elections.

Abraham said...

I am all for honest elections. What I am not for is throwing millions of tax-payer dollars at a problem that is rare to begin with. There is a reason why McCrory vetoed the bill which would have required drug testing for welfare recipients: it's a waste of public money. Yes, there are welfare recipients who use drugs. But it is far from common, and a similar program in Florida wasted vast amounts of tax-payer money to catch just a few drug users.

Similarly, yes, there is voter fraud occurring. But, again, it is far from common. I would love to have a perfectly air-tight electoral system, but that is an infeasible goal, no matter how much tax-payer money you throw at it. There is no such thing as a perfect process.

"Your comparision to the census numbers is ludicrous." --NewGuy

It's actually the closest comparison one could make. But I'm glad you agree that it sounds terribly inane. See, election officials attempt to count (i.e.: catch) all the instances of voter fraud...just like census officials attempt to count all the instances of citizenship in the state. But, again, I'm glad that you agree.

"there were probably a number of cases...where there was insufficient evidence for prosecution." --NewGuy

Yes, that is what is known as "innocent until proven guilty." Here in the United States, in order to be convicted of a crime, the prosecution must have compelling evidence of one's guilt. If you'd rather live under a legal system that convicts based upon simple accusation, then I believe there are a number of Asian countries that may fit your ideals.

"In my mind, a single fraudulent vote is one too many." --NewGuy

So, not only do you deem 475 out of 12 million (a 1 in 25,000 chance) significant, you deem 1 out of 12 million significant (a 1 in 12 million chance, obviously), and in need of extra public intervention. So let's visit some significant (in your eyes at least) dangers which need immediate infusion of millions of tax-payer dollars in order to avoid:

Death by asteroid impact (1 in 200,000 chance)
Assault by firearm (1 in 325 chance)
Having your identity stolen (1 in 200 chance)
Dying from parts falling off an airplane (1 in 10 million chance)

Quick, to the public coffers!!!

Moderate voice said...

I agree that it is important to ensure clean and fair elections, and I would be on board with ID requirements if NC was making a real effort to get all eligible voters the necessary IDs - and if they hadn't targeted certain populations like students (explain to me how it's fair to accept pretty much every state-issued ID except those issued by NC public universities). Until then, it's hard not to see the recent changes to voting laws as an attempt to disenfranchise certain populations, or at the very least make it harder for them to exercise one of our most essential rights as US citizens.

But back to the issue of fraud. Have all those commenting read the study that was linked from the blog post? Because of the 475 cases of fraud reported, a whopping 377 (about 80%) were cases of felons trying to vote. Yes, even one case of fraud is troubling, but it sounds like if we really wanted to combat the main source of voter fraud in this state, it would be implementing a robust system that prevented felons from voting. An ID system won't do that. In any case, once you look at the numbers, they do not seem anywhere near as alarming as the headline would have you believe.

Moderate voice said...

Actually, I just realized I mistakenly counted all the years on the document, not just 2008-2012. So from just those years, 318 of the cases of fraud were for felons. That's 67% of all cases and my argument remains the same, but I wanted to make sure I got the numbers right.

Sarkazein said...

It is unanimous! All Democrats don't want you messing with their voter fraud.

Let 'em have their voter fraud, abortions, and government freebies and they are happy.

Democratus Rex said...

"...government freebies and they are happy."

What benefits do Democrats receive that Republicans don't receive?

Sarkazein said...

He he he he left out the voter fraud and abortion....

Democratus Rex said...

Republican's already take advantage of that. Now, answer the question.

guy faulkes said...

Nobody says that Democrats receive things that Republicans do not. It is not a question of who receives these benefits. It is a question of the porportions of the different Parties that receive these benefits.

Some people actually need and deserve the benefits. However the policy of buying votes that the Democrats use by giving benefits to those that are able to support themselves is the objectionable issue.

There is also the question of who provides and oversees distribution of any such benefits. Local control would be best as it might cut down on the abuse that is rampant under the purchase of votes with entitlements scheme of the left.

Sarkazein said...

(CNSNews.com) - The total number of people in the United States now receiving federal disability benefits hit a record 10,982,920 in November, up from the previous record of 10,978,040 set in May, according to newly released data from the Social Security Administration.

Sarkazein said...

The number of American households on food stamps reached a new record high in March, according to new data released by the Agriculture Department.

The March numbers the USDA released Friday reveal 23,116,441 households enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps, each receiving an average monthly benefit of $274.30./// The Daily Caller

Democratus Rex said...

Republicans receive the largest percentage of these benefits.

Democratus Rex said...

"Nobody says that Democrats receive things that Republicans do not."

That is Sark's insinuation.

guy faulkes said...

"Republicans receive the largest percentage of these benefits." - Drex

Proof, please.

Nobody says that Democrats receive things that Republicans do not." - me

"That is Sark's insinuation." - Drex

No, that is your interpretation of what Sark said. Mine is different.

Sarkazein said...

Drex- If there was a vote today on cutting welfare, cutting food stamps, eliminating Federal disability, tort reform, cutting medicaid, and making those recipients take a urinalysis test for drug and alcohol abuse, which way do you think Democrats would vote and which way do you think Republicans would vote?
That should answer your question. If you were allowed to vote, which way would you vote?

Sarkazein said...

Drex Click Here

Democratus Rex said...

"Proof, please."

I heard it on FOX News and Sean Hannity.

Sarkazein said...

An attempt at humor? Or typical liberal dishonesty?

guy faulkes said...

"I heard it on FOX News and Sean Hannity." - Drex

Proof, please. Where is the link?

Democratus Rex said...

Google it. Maybe it was Civitas or Drudge? Us liberals get so confused. All we do is talk on our free cell phones, get abortions and look around for all the government free stuff and try to figure out how to stuff ballot boxes with phony votes. It can be tiring living up to republican fantasy.

Sarkazein said...

Drex- Don't forget about Democrat GUN GRABBING.
I understand your comment 4:29 PM. It is getting harder and harder to defend liberalism in any serious manner. You sure cannot.

guy faulkes said...

Drex, you made a mathematical statement that you apparently cannot support with any data. If you saw or heard it, give us some proof. If you fabricated the statement, that would make it an opinion that is rather hard to substantiate, would it not?