SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
01-27-17, 05:22 PM | #781 | |
Fleet Admiral
|
Quote:
It would not make sense to pre-ink your own fingers if you intended to vote.
__________________
abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right. |
|
01-27-17, 05:43 PM | #782 | ||||
Fleet Admiral
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[quote}- person uses those means of ID at the elections. [/quote] We are still a confederation of independent states and unfortunately that means that there are few laws the govern how states run elections other than the laws enacted in that state. We have states that have photo ID laws, other states that have non-photo ID laws and states that have no ID laws. As a precinct chief, I am in favour of photo ID laws as long as the state makes it easy and affordable for citizens to get the necessary ID in time for the election. In Virginia, it is possible to get a photo ID issued after the election if the citizen does not have a photo ID on election day. That's making it as easy as they can. Quote:
A lot of these problems can be solved by having a National ID card, but that is a touchy topic with many citizens. We came up with a compromise in the REAL ID ACT where the federal government mandated what consists a good ID card but left the implementation up to the states. That way it is not a National ID card but a State ID card that adheres to national standards. A good compromise but it also mandated that the states (meaning the citizens) pay for this. Several states balk at this and want the maintain control over the ID but want the federal government (meaning citizens from other states) to fund it and we are at an impass There are always claims that photo ID laws discriminate against certain types of citizens and can lead to disenfranchisement. I have honestly not seen a logical supported argument that supports that. We are in the 21st century. It is getting more and more difficult to operate in our society without Photo ID. You can't open up a bank account without it, you can't cash a check without it, you can't get on a commercial airliner without it. In many states you can't see your doctor without it. For those low percentage of citizens that truly don't have a photo ID, then the citizen should be allowed to obtain one easily and inexpensively (or free).
__________________
abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right. |
||||
01-27-17, 05:48 PM | #783 | |||
Ocean Warrior
|
Thanks for a detailed and constructive repply!
Quote:
Quote:
While this may not end in a land slide victory, this may well tip the scales. Quote:
The other way to maximise the effects is to move the group of people between as many voting areas as possible (within the physical constraint ofc) p.s. the reason why I discuss this is because from what I know, the accusations of voting fraud in Russia tend to come from the multiple voting or people not eligible to vote voting. As as pro-democracy person (strange as that may appear) I think that the voters should be concerned about how they vote and try to minimise the effects of the fraud. While I have great respect for your experience as an organiser of the vote, I am concerned about you possibly not seeing the greater picture due to that same experience.
__________________
Grumpy as always. |
|||
01-27-17, 07:35 PM | #784 | ||
Fleet Admiral
|
Quote:
But let's take my precinct. Lets assume that my precinct does not require ID to vote. Using the numbers I already posted, I would need to fraudulently cast about 1,700 votes out of a voting population of 5,000. How am I gonna do that? If I want to fraudulently vote in place of Mary Smith, then I need to have my fraudulent voter at the polls before Mary Smith votes. It does me no good to have my fraudulent voter arrive at the polls after the legitimate Mary Smith votes as my fraudulent voter won't be allowed to vote and will only call attention to my scheme. I would need to generate a list of the registered voters in my precinct that would not normally vote for the Purple Party. It would be silly to fraudulently take a vote away from a citizen who intends on voting Purple after all. I would need their names and addresses. I would then need to distribute and assign each of my fraudulent voters one or perhaps two names and addresses of legitimate voters. I don't want two of my fraudulent voters to use the same name. Awkward! The assignments would have to match sex and aproximate age. I would not be a good choice to impersonate 22 year old Sally Smith when I am an old guy. So I have my crew of fraudulent voters and their assigned identities. They have to be in line early in the morning because voters in my precinct tend to vote early in the morning on their way to work. Precincts are simply a collection of neighbourhoods. The election officers in most cases live in those neighbourhoods. So if I am in line trying to impersonate Mike Jones, there is a not insignificant chance that one of the election officers or someone standing in line knows Mike Jones and will challenge me. Even the attempt to fraudulently vote is a felony. Each fraudlent voter can be used only once perhaps twice but the chances of being caught increase greatly the more times one tries to vote, especially when you are trying to vote as early as possible. And I want to successfully do this 1,700 times. That is not easy. Let's assume that I am successful and I do arrange fraudulent votes 1,700 times in my precinct and my precinct's results are a win for the Purple Party. That's one precinct out of about 100 just in my county and there are about 100 counties in Virginia. In my example, I estimated that I need to sway 40 precincts to sway my county to the Purple party. That means that I need 39 other masterminds, each with their own crew of 800-1,700 fraudulent voters. That is about 40,000 people in on the conspiracy just in one state. What is the likelihood of keeping this a secret? And that's for one state. Their are 49 other states in which a federal candidate needs a minimum of 11 states to win and those are very specific states. So theoretically it may be possible to fraudulently significantly affect a federal election but practically, it is pretty hard. It would be a whole lot easier if the voting were to take place directly at the state level. But our decentralize precinct based balloting has an intrinsic safety level in that each precinct individually has little effect but must be infiltrated separately. Quote:
The size of the voting population in federal elections and the decentralized balloting systems we have makes successfully altering the outcome fraudulently a lot harder than state and local elections where a few hundred votes can make a difference. As was demonstrated in our last election it is not just the number of votes but the location of those votes that can sway an election. Like most conspiracy theories, they initially sound feasible but when you start working the details and the numbers, they usually start to fall apart. Of course even if they don't alter the outcome of an election, fraudulent votes are still wrong and we need to come up with systems that reduce (but probably never eliminate) fraudulent votes. If you want to affect the election, it is much easier and cost effective to simply have a mud slinging advertisement campaign to discredit the opposing candidate..... which is what happens.... and the press eats it up like ice cream. I have no idea how elections are run in Russia so I can't opine on how easy or difficult it would be to affect those elections.
__________________
abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right. |
||
01-27-17, 07:47 PM | #785 | |
Wayfaring Stranger
|
Quote:
Now assuming that its possible to surmount such a mountainous organizational hurdle they have an even larger logistical hurdle to overcome. They would still need to bus those thousands to the polls where ever they might be needed, even if it is thousands of miles and several time zones away. They must do this relying only on often inaccurate exit polls since official tallies aren't going to be available until it's too late to vote. Finally like Santa Claus they must do all of this in one night and even then Santa has all night to get his job done whereas the election polls close by 8pm.
__________________
Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see. |
|
01-27-17, 10:22 PM | #786 |
Shark above Space Chicken
|
I agree. You will likely always be able to prove cases of voter fraud, but never in numbers that would effect any of the elections. This is more smoke to hide u-boat dives.
__________________
"However vast the darkness, we must provide our own light." Stanley Kubrick "Tomorrow belongs to those who can hear it coming." David Bowie |
01-28-17, 05:02 AM | #787 | |
Navy Seal
|
Quote:
The fellow being cited by Trump as his source of authority for his claims of not only voter fraud, but of also costing him the election's popular vote is named Gregg Phillips. On the local newsradio station here in Los Angeles (KNX 1070 AM) yesterday, Phillips was interviewed, live and at long length, by one of the reporters who is well known in this area for being very hard and tenacious on interview subjects of all stripes, politically. The reporter just basically blew holes in Phillips' claims and it was amusing to hear Phillips squirm; there has not been a better exhibition of tap dancing since those old MGM musicals. I just wish the reporter had had a database expert along with him since a lot of what Phillips was spouting about his databases and methodology was sheer nonsense... Gregg Phillips ("with two g's") was similarly upended by Chris Cuomo live on CNN (please excuse the poor quality of the clip, but some of better quality were not complete by a few seconds either at the beginning or the end, and I did not want to give the impression something was being hidden): When watching the above clip, it brought to mind the sort of 'proof' Sen. Joe McCarthy and his minions would try to foist off in the 1950s: The more things change, the more they remain the same; same swamp - not much different 'gators... <O>
__________________
__________________________________________________ __ Last edited by vienna; 01-28-17 at 08:23 AM. |
|
01-28-17, 06:32 AM | #788 |
Lucky Jack
|
|
01-28-17, 06:51 AM | #789 |
Stowaway
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
|
|
01-28-17, 08:16 AM | #790 |
Born to Run Silent
|
It's cute & appropriately simplistic.
__________________
SUBSIM - 26 Years on the Web |
01-28-17, 08:35 AM | #791 |
Admiral
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: in a neighborhood near you
Posts: 2,478
Downloads: 293
Uploads: 2
|
I don't recall us constitutional moderates/Republicans,, burning cars,, smashing windows,, and beating on people,, it seems that it is mostly done by democrats and the new world order types,, that don't get their way,, we changed the direction by voting out the fascist that didn't have the peoples well being at heart,, that's right I called them fascist because they are a little less evil than communist.. even with all the voter fraud they still couldn't win.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bombshel...s-in-2016.html |
01-28-17, 09:07 AM | #792 | |
Lucky Jack
|
Quote:
|
|
01-28-17, 10:12 AM | #793 |
Admiral
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: in a neighborhood near you
Posts: 2,478
Downloads: 293
Uploads: 2
|
|
01-28-17, 11:20 AM | #794 |
Lucky Jack
|
The Iraqi translator for the 101st airborne is currently sitting in detention in JFK airport.
GG |
01-28-17, 11:34 AM | #795 |
Stowaway
Posts: n/a
Downloads:
Uploads:
|
|
Tags |
biden, clinton, election, harris, obama, politics, trump, twitter |
|
|