Dum de Dum deeee Dum...
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
5 responses
@jerzgirl (9384)
• United States
7 Oct 08
So, why just Democrats? Anyone can cheat. I say allow everyone to vote, but run the signature lists against the questionable lists (known residences, known vacancies, known empty lots, etc) so that the VOTES can be purged instead of the voters. Too often, the voters are purged when they are actually eligible to vote. Allow them to vote and then question their eligibility afterwards because if you purge them before, they can't vote once they've proven they're eligible and that's infinitely unfair. But, don't target any one party. Do it to EVERYONE!
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
7 Oct 08
I'm asking Democrats, not because only Democrats cheat, but because Democrats block every attempt to come up with ways to verify the validity of voters.
Here in Wisconsin the Democrats consider it "voter intimidation" to even expect verification at all. Even when there were more votes in Milwaukee than voters, Wisconsin Democrats deny there is a problem.
So, while I don't deny people from any party can cheat, Democrats ensure the voter fraud will continue.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
7 Oct 08
That doesn't even make sense. With no way to match the votes with the voters, how can the fraudulent votes be purged after the fact?
1 person likes this
@jerzgirl (9384)
• United States
7 Oct 08
EIGHT!!
SEVEN AND COUNTING!!!!
Sixth attempt!!!
Four times I posted a response, and four times it refused to post it, giving me a blank text box again. So, I reopened the discussion and am going to paste the thing again. I'm going to be more than a little angry if it doesn't work this time!! 
OK - I'm pissed - my response got wiped out and I have to start over!! (second effort)
Here in NJ, all ballots are numbered. There is a tear-off stub that they pull before you go into the booth. They also record the ballot number next to your name. That's how my landlady was able to find out who I voted for in the primaries this year - she then announced it to her family. She was at the signature table when I went in and she helped with the vote counting. So, assuming the numbering system is nationwide (and there aren't many like my landlady who has forced me to do absentee ballots because of her refusal to allow my vote to be private), then all states can backtrack on all names if they discover ineligibility and revoke that vote.
As to why Democrats might fight a lot of the efforts, maybe being burned a few times makes one cautious. For instance:
Well, the Milwaukee Police Department just released its report on the voter fraud allegations in the city, and dropped this bombshell: “The reports of more ballots cast than voters recorded were found to be true.“
http://rightwingliberal.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/voter-fraud-in-wisconsin-over-4500-more-votes-than-voters-in-2004/
OK - I'm pissed - my response got wiped out and I have to start over!! (second effort)
Here in NJ, all ballots are numbered. There is a tear-off stub that they pull before you go into the booth. They also record the ballot number next to your name. That's how my landlady was able to find out who I voted for in the primaries this year - she then announced it to her family. She was at the signature table when I went in and she helped with the vote counting. So, assuming the numbering system is nationwide (and there aren't many like my landlady who has forced me to do absentee ballots because of her refusal to allow my vote to be private), then all states can backtrack on all names if they discover ineligibility and revoke that vote.
As to why Democrats might fight a lot of the efforts, maybe being burned a few times makes one cautious. For instance:
Well, the Milwaukee Police Department just released its report on the voter fraud allegations in the city, and dropped this bombshell: “The reports of more ballots cast than voters recorded were found to be true.“
http://rightwingliberal.wordpress.com/2008/02/26/voter-fraud-in-wisconsin-over-4500-more-votes-than-voters-in-2004/
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
7 Oct 08
Yes, it was, but you can also answer it here if you want.
2 people like this
@betsyraeduke (2669)
• United States
7 Oct 08
I don't consider myself to be a Democrat nor a Republican either one, but I'll respond here anyway.
I seen your other thread about this and noticed that someone brought up that voter eligibility verification methods make it so that a homeless person can't vote, so I'll try to solve that with my proposed solution
How about this: Before a person registers to vote, they must go get their thumbprints taken and put into a nationwide data base along with their social security number. Then when a person registers to vote, they do not need to register for any certain city or state, but just register. When they do register, they must provide their social security number and give their thumbprint which can be checked in the database to make sure both match. Then they are given a card with an electronic strip on it. When they actually go to vote, they must swipe this card which brings up their social security number and an electronic ballad thingy, they then cast their vote and must verify it with their thumbprint. This is all done electronically, of course if the thumbprint and social security number do not match, the vote is automatically discarded by the electronic device. This device has a nationwide database and will also keep stored in its memory who has voted this way. So a person would only be able to vote once, even if they go all the way across the country and try to vote again, they would not be able to because it would come up in the database that they already voted and the second vote would automatically be discarded by the device.
I don't know if that made sense...was just giving it a try.. :P
1 person likes this
@betsyraeduke (2669)
• United States
7 Oct 08
Of course I'm only talking about presidential or other national elections there, not local ones where of course a person would need to reside in a certain area or whatever....I have no clue for local elections.
@betsyraeduke (2669)
• United States
8 Oct 08
Drat, I just realized that I forgot all about absentee votes or whatever when I posted this. Perhaps for those votes a hand held electronic device, that works the same way as the big one for the people voting in person, can be mailed to them and they can make their vote on that and send it back. It would still be connected to same database and still have to verified with the thumb print and all that stuff I said. If the person was homeless they could have their device sent to a P.O. box or a friend's house or whatever, since it doesn't matter because no one can cheat, (vote more then once), due to the thumbprint thing.
.....Okiedokies, I think my entire response sounds like a bunch of jibberish, even to myself, and I typed it!...Hence the reason I seldom respond to political discussions, it serves me no purpose other then to make a complete fool of myself! 
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
8 Oct 08
The idea is ok, I mean most of us have our fingerprints on file with one federal organization or another... but it would cause a problem "requiring" it.
You also have to remember, we don't have national elections in the US, we have 50 state elections. There is the Federal Elections Commission, which does have limited authority for making regulations and voting policies, but election law itself is the sole authority of the state.
But I do thank you for at least giving it a shot.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
7 Oct 08
Sorry, I've been doing what they pay me for down here.
Did I already answer/dodge the question and if not would you direct me to it so I an answer/dodge it now? 
