Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan

It's a federal crime, why aren't there any follow up articles from the same reporters?

This isn't evidence, it's a story to get you fired up about a non-existent problem.

Just like the drought in California. I bet there's a few people in San Jose that wishes they had a drought right now.

moldyoldy

[quote=jack sequim wa]Here is more relevant, since it is 2016.

By the way, I sent a link with nearly 50 separate evidences of 2012 voter fraud. What about those you seem to ignore? Leftist. .....

Argue each of these if your so convinced 2016 was a clean election and I can document a hundred more.




Here is an affidavit, like liberal voter OFFICIALS

http://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dangerandplay.com/2016/11/04/florida-election-officials-caught-filling-out-absentee-ballots-affidavit-alleges-floridafraud/amp/

Right wing conspiracy want to be web site
Watch Alex Jones and Mike Cernovich Discuss Deep State, Trump, MILO, and More

More 2016 evidence from the mouth of babe's (democrat, reveals massive voter fraud )

http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/10/democrat-confirms-rampant-voter-fraud/
Conspiracies are us.
WND (WorldNetDaily) is a politically conservative American news and opinion website and online news aggregator. The website has garnered much controversy for promoting conspiracy theories, which have led some journalists to label it a far-right fringe website.[3][4][5][6][7] It was founded in May 1997 by Joseph Farah with the stated intent of "exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power".[8] The website publishes news, editorials, and opinion columns, while also aggregating content from other publications. The website periodically publishes falsehoods and conspiracy theories.[

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/no-voter-fraud-isnt-myth-10-cases-where-its-all-to/[/quote]

More right wing fantasies.

The political leanings of The Washington Times are often described as conservative.[67][68][69] The Washington Post reported: "the Times was established by Moon to combat communism and be a conservative alternative to the liberal leanings of The Washington Post. Since then, the paper has fought to prove its editorial independence, trying to demonstrate that it is neither a "Moonie paper" nor a booster of the political right but rather a fair and balanced reporter of the news

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Dummy isn't the light Brite when you pull your head out of the sand just long enough to make a jackass statement . As you were....

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

The only one your fooling is yourself.

Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan

...so you didn't find any arrests....go ahead and stick your head back up your butt?

grey gringo Loc: South Texas

Here in South Texas (The Nueces Strip) there is abundant voter fraud...Dead people , undocumented people,absentee ballot box stuffing, etc...plenty of documented cases of multiple voting crimes plead down to one guilty plea fines and light jail time....This happens every election!!!

Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan

Who are you hiring to work at voting locations that are allowing this to happen...illegals????? Can anyone in Texas handle doing the right thing???

Again, multiple crimes, where, when....what do you consider multiple???

I ask because every time I look into it in Wayne County, all of sudden the numbers aren't there.....there are claims that get shut down immediately. They don't hire idiots to analyze ballots, do you think voting illegally is a second career or something?

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

There are numerous arrest, however your faulty reasoning does not point to the lack of in-person voter fraud, but rather to lack of enforcement mechanisms to identify and prosecute in-person voter fraud.

The science of criminal justice tells us that many crimes go unreported, and the more “victimless” the crime, the more this happens. The fact is, a person attempting to commit voter fraud is very unlikely to be caught, which increases the incentive to commit the crime.
The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) is a sophisticated, comprehensive effort to catalog “the number and types of crimes not reported to law enforcement authorities.” However, it tends to deal mostly in violent crimes. As complex as the NCVS is, gathering accurate data for unreported victimless crimes such as voter fraud is even harder, since 1) outside of the criminal, no one may know a crime has taken place, and 2) there is no direct victim to report the crime in the first place. Yet we are expected to believe that, unlike violent crime, voter fraud is limited only to the cases that are actually reported and prosecuted? This is a senseless position.

Further, the Brennan Center report argues that because prosecutor Kris Kobach’s review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states found only 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution (which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate), voter fraud is so statistically small that it’s a non-issue. Let’s follow this logic. Does the fact that 109 people were cited for jaywalking in Seattle in 2009 mean that only 109 people jaywalked in Seattle that year? Does the fact that 103,733 people were cited for driving without a seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015 mean that only that many people were driving without seatbelt in Tennessee in 2015?

Absolutely not. This can be proven easily because in 2014, the previous year, only 29,470 people were cited. The disparity is largely due to increased enforcement efforts in 2015. In other words, increasing enforcement of the crime revealed a much larger number of people committing the crime.

The exact same is true for voter fraud. We have no reason to believe that the low number of prosecutions means only that exact amount of voter fraud is happening. Rather, it could mean a lack of enforcement is failing to reveal the bulk of the violations that are occurring. Thus, as with many types of crimes, especially victimless crimes, the real number of cases is likely significantly higher than the number reported.

Dummy Boy Loc: Michigan

...so again, you don't have any evidence to support your concern or claims.

Let me give you a lesson in reasoning, you're talking in circles. If Trump or anyone else claims that millions have voted illegally and there isn't any evidence to support the numbers except anecdotal statistical inference. It's like if I test any part out of a box of fasteners, if the first five are not case hardened then none of them are. And for safety reasons that should be your approach.

Let's consider another plausible example: I could state that it's plausible that a hailstorm will kill someone today in the state of Colorado, but it is equally plausible that no one will get killed from a hail storm (Colorado is one of 3 states that receive the most hail in a given year) It is far more statistically plausible that someone will drop dead from old age in the state of Colorado. We can't even get a 20 year old to vote in this country, what's the endgame for a non-citizen? What is more plausible? That is the point that is argued over and over again. There is no logical "walk" to assume that because you catch 5 illegal voters that everyone is an illegal voter. Or in example, who cares how many jaywalkers there are, start running over people: the jaywalking will stop a lot faster than deploying police to ticket them. First you have to know who is eligible to vote, who has registered to vote and who has the opportunity to vote illegally. Human beings behavior and motivation is far different, thus, what is the endgame for an illegal to vote in an election. How much would either party spend to pay 5 million illegal voters. How long did it take you to fill out a ballot, 5 minutes, 10 minutes?

Criminal science also talks about motivation, intent, opportunity: right? Answer that question-what benefit is there for illegal voting?

Hopefully, you're prepared to spend money on a passport, a microchip and a federal or international driver's license to prove that you are an American citizen. Because that is the only way that this will be eliminated. It will have the added benefit of getting illegals off the welfare rolls and SS disability benefits.

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Your rationale makes sense of which I have no argument. My intent has not to support or discredit millions of illegals voted. We do know illegals voted, but was it a thousand or a million? There is no "empirical " evidence leaving any reasonable argument "speculation " only.
My point to those denying voter fraud goes beyond isolated cases rest on evidence, but (but) exactly how extreme is still left to speculation. As an example, we know printing plates exist and have printed fraudulent ballots, we don't know how many were distributed accross America. We know that 120% of voters, voting in dozens of district's accross America verses the number of registered voters. What we don't know was there 10% voter turn out or 80% turnout in order to determine the actual number of fraudulent votes. We know that liberal groups and officials have been caught in relatively high numbers verses conservatives, but how many are involved since majority are never prosecuted is again unknown. Then the big but.... how accurate are the many university statically studies representing millions of fraudulent votes by liberals in 2016.
Based on dozens of studies, plus journalist investigations combined with voters caught or voter officials caught, I lean towards the speculation accross America and including illegal aliens it is not unreasonable to conclude 2-4 million fraudulent votes had been cast for hillary.

One last point, the individual that committes voter fraud likely is restricted from much beyond 1-20 fraudulent votes (my guess). Higher numbers are committed by small organized grass root groups, likely limited to geographic area's, but also it is likely that there are a far greater number of these group's than liberals independently would ever aggree with. Again speculation, but look how many tens of thousands organized in a matter of just hours, once it was realized Trump won the election.

Your comments of "federal " drivers license makes a great deal of sense and is actually in the works. Washington State offers an enhanced drivers license requiring the same identity standards as a passport. With said license, one can enter Canada or Mexico (no other countries ). It is my understanding that all states have been given a drop dead date to have their systems upgraded to an enhanced (federal) drivers license.

Your heads not in the sand after all, thanks for your reply

Take care

moldyoldy

That 120 % voting makes no sense, when less than half of the voters actually vote.

zelda

I agree with this part of your post
I lean towards the speculation accross America and including illegal aliens it is not unreasonable to conclude 2-4 million fraudulent votes had been cast for hillary.
It has not been proven yet but I believe it will be!

jack sequim wa Loc: Blanchard, Idaho

Exactly, as an example if 100 people were registered, and Obama received 120 votes it is empirical evidence that fraudulent ballots were added to the collection pre-counting.

Also there were dozens of counties that Obama received 100% of the votes, which is mathematically impossible. As I previously stated, those who claim how many votes were fraudulent , are making false claims.
The only way anyone could come close to putting an actual number, is if the registrations were 100% purged of dead, people that have moved, required voter ID, and 100% actual voter traffic managed, with paper ballots that were managed from the voters hand, too the count table by both democrat and republican monitoring.

Nicholas

Every American must be concerned that every vote is valid. To tolerate any voter fraud is to give up your freedom that many people died for. Voter fraud should be exposed by printing the faces of those that commit it and apply a hefty fine. All people should know who are the cheaters in American that do not honor the right to vote.

moldyoldy

Those false claims have been debunked many times