quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
The article wasn't about election results. The authors never said that in 2012, it produced the desired outcome. They simply reported what their analysis showed vis-a-vis provisional ballots, and their conversion (or lack of) to an actual vote. My extrapolation was simply based on the well-known fact that african americans and hispanics overwhelmingly vote democrat. (Hispanics shift a bit, but still mostly vote democrate, african americans are always solidly democrat). That is why I said it was reasonable

Correct, the article wasn't about election results. However, the research was done on the 2012 election, and the results are merely facts now. You are assuming it's Republicans throwing out ballots. Maybe we should check and see what party the SoS hailed from in 2012 in all those States? I know Ohio was GOP, but I honestly don't know about all the rest.

Your jaded "analysis" is faulty. Unless you have proof, blow it out your ass.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

How about the New Black Panthers standing in front of a polling place with clubs down talking and intimidating whites that our justice department under bush was prosecuting and then were let go under Obama's Justice department because they were Eric Holders people?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

How about the New Black Panthers standing in front of a polling place with clubs down talking and intimidating whites that our justice department under bush was prosecuting and then were let go under Obama's Justice department because they were Eric Holders people?

Show me proof that the PA Secretary of State sent them there. I will go out on a limb and guess that he didn't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

I love when Republicans admit their motives. This one is better than the Turzai clip:

https://youtu.be/XreSZvgdZwA

Then if course the Turzai clip we have all seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

How about the New Black Panthers standing in front of a polling place with clubs down talking and intimidating whites that our justice department under bush was prosecuting and then were let go under Obama's Justice department because they were Eric Holders people?

Show me proof that the PA Secretary of State sent them there. I will go out on a limb and guess that he didn't.

Nobody said he did. They still engaged in pro Dem voter intimidation, and because they were black Holder refused to prosecute. Skipped right over the sec of state to the US Dept of injustice run by that renown Rep Eric Holder taking orders from a very well known Rep President Obama.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

How about the New Black Panthers standing in front of a polling place with clubs down talking and intimidating whites that our justice department under bush was prosecuting and then were let go under Obama's Justice department because they were Eric Holders people?

Show me proof that the PA Secretary of State sent them there. I will go out on a limb and guess that he didn't.

Nobody said he did. They still engaged in pro Dem voter intimidation, and because they were black Holder refused to prosecute. Skipped right over the sec of state to the US Dept of injustice run by that renown Rep Eric Holder taking orders from a very well known Rep President Obama.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
First of all, I apologize for not being clear on the "extrapolation" of party-affiliation. All I was referring to was an assumed party affiliation of minorites mentioned in the article. Afrcian Americans and Hispanics (especially African Americans) overwhelmingly vote Democrat. i think we can all agree on that. That was the limit of my analysis/extrapolation. I realize I didn't adequately clarify that point, and it could be reasonable to assume a broader analysis on my part.
Secondly, my point about provisional ballots is only one sub-point of my overall point of voter suppression.

quote:

Thirdly, you make a very good suggestion:
Let's look at the SoS in 2012 of the states in question: Shall we?
Arizona - Ken Bennett - R
Kansas - Kris Kobach - R
Montana - Linda McCulloch - D
North Carolina - Elaine Marshall - D
Nebraska - John Gale - R
Oklahoma - Glenn Coffee - R
South Dakota - Jason Gant - R
Utah has no Sos - Elections are the Lt. Gov's responsibility. That would be Greg Bell - R
California - Debra Bowen - D
Colorado - Scott Gessler - R
Maryland - John P McDonough - D
New Jersey - Kim Guadagno - R
New Mexico - Diana Duran - R
New York - Cesar Perales - D
Ohio - John Husted - R
Pennsylvania - Carol Aichelle - R
5 D's - 11R's Maybe a pattern here?

quote:

Thirdly, you raise a very valid question. (e.g. Why is California in the list?)
1) California has had a Provisional Ballot system for many years prior to HAVA. To my knowledge, there is no voter ID. But you have to show up at the designated polling place, and have to be registered. They have a HUGE latino population. Many of whom do not speak and read English very well. California routinely hands out a lot of Provisional Ballots. They actually use the ballot itself as a way of updating information.
Here is a quote from the link below on California's Provisional Ballots
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/10/09/354534487/rules-for-provisional-ballots-all-over-the-map
"The main reason is that the voter is not in the correct polling place or in the correct jurisdiction," Lindberg says.
In Virginia that means the vote doesn't count, but that's not the case everywhere. The rules for provisional ballots vary widely. In some states, like California, they're routinely used to update a voter's information, such as a new address. "
NOTE: The reference to California in the sentence IMMEDIATELY following the phrase "that's not the case everywhere."
2) As much as Hunter and I have had good experiences, my research shows that the Democrat run Sos in California sucks at communication (in any language) (actually sucks period)
Provisional Ballots (with the exception of California) are a creation of HAVA. My point is that HAVA simply moved the voter suppression from turning people away, to giving them an often worthless piece of paper. Not having proper ID is not a reason to deny someone their constitutional right to vote.
The only people who should be denied are: 1) Non-U.S. citizens 2) People who have already voted.
My overall point was not about provisional ballots (apologies for dramatizing that point multiple times).
If you want to argue that Democrat SoS's are denying people the right to vote and therefore it is a wash of any possible Republican effort, show me some proof. (No ass blowing required if you don't, however).

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
First of all, I apologize for not being clear on the "extrapolation" of party-affiliation. All I was referring to was an assumed party affiliation of minorites mentioned in the article. Afrcian Americans and Hispanics (especially African Americans) overwhelmingly vote Democrat. i think we can all agree on that. That was the limit of my analysis/extrapolation. I realize I didn't adequately clarify that point, and it could be reasonable to assume a broader analysis on my part.
Secondly, my point about provisional ballots is only one sub-point of my overall point of voter suppression.

It seemed like a pretty big point, there, MJ. Regardless, you still haven't proven it at all.

quote:

Thirdly, you make a very good suggestion:
Let's look at the SoS in 2012 of the states in question: Shall we?
Arizona - Ken Bennett - R
Kansas - Kris Kobach - R
Montana - Linda McCulloch - D
North Carolina - Elaine Marshall - D
Nebraska - John Gale - R
Oklahoma - Glenn Coffee - R
South Dakota - Jason Gant - R
Utah has no Sos - Elections are the Lt. Gov's responsibility. That would be Greg Bell - R
California - Debra Bowen - D
Colorado - Scott Gessler - R
Maryland - John P McDonough - D
New Jersey - Kim Guadagno - R
New Mexico - Diana Duran - R
New York - Cesar Perales - D
Ohio - John Husted - R
Pennsylvania - Carol Aichelle - R
5 D's - 11R's Maybe a pattern here?

Perhaps there is a pattern there, but that still doesn't prove anything, does it?

quote:

Thirdly, you raise a very valid question. (e.g. Why is California in the list?)
1) California has had a Provisional Ballot system for many years prior to HAVA. To my knowledge, there is no voter ID. But you have to show up at the designated polling place, and have to be registered. They have a HUGE latino population. Many of whom do not speak and read English very well. California routinely hands out a lot of Provisional Ballots. They actually use the ballot itself as a way of updating information.
Here is a quote from the link below on California's Provisional Ballots
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/10/09/354534487/rules-for-provisional-ballots-all-over-the-map
"The main reason is that the voter is not in the correct polling place or in the correct jurisdiction," Lindberg says.
In Virginia that means the vote doesn't count, but that's not the case everywhere. The rules for provisional ballots vary widely. In some states, like California, they're routinely used to update a voter's information, such as a new address. "
NOTE: The reference to California in the sentence IMMEDIATELY following the phrase "that's not the case everywhere."
2) As much as Hunter and I have had good experiences, my research shows that the Democrat run Sos in California sucks at communication (in any language) (actually sucks period)
Provisional Ballots (with the exception of California) are a creation of HAVA. My point is that HAVA simply moved the voter suppression from turning people away, to giving them an often worthless piece of paper. Not having proper ID is not a reason to deny someone their constitutional right to vote.
The only people who should be denied are: 1) Non-U.S. citizens 2) People who have already voted.
My overall point was not about provisional ballots (apologies for dramatizing that point multiple times).
If you want to argue that Democrat SoS's are denying people the right to vote and therefore it is a wash of any possible Republican effort, show me some proof. (No ass blowing required if you don't, however).

You have yet to prove that the GOP is denying the people the right to vote. Changing the goal posts won't do you any good, either. How do you determine if a person is a citizen, or that they already voted? In Ohio, if you don't go to your polling station, you can cast a provisional ballot. Let's say, hypothetically, that Lucas County, Ohio (my County) has 100 polling stations. I could visit all 100 and I could "vote" in all 100. I would fill out 99 provisional ballots, which would end up not being counted because I did vote in my proper polling place, too. Had I not done that, 1 of my provisional ballots would have counted. Now, that's almost 100 provisional ballots that would be thrown out, and that would include ones from all the polling stations in minority areas, too.

That millions of provisional ballots were thrown out means little, until you find out how many were valid ballots. If every single one (highly unlikely, though it may be) were invalid ballots, then I have absolutely zero issues with 2.7M provisional ballots being thrown out.

You claimed that Republicans were throwing out provisional ballots of voters they deemed weren't likely to vote conservative. You attempted to back it up with the link that doesn't actually back up your claim with any solid evidence. It's possible the information presented backs your claim, but, it's also possible it completely refutes your claim, too.

I would have liked to have seen a breakdown of the # of provisional ballots used, and the number not counted broken down by State. It's entirely possible (though I would consider it nearly impossible), that 95% of all those ballots used and not counted came from California.

quote:

Voter ID opponents are fond of arguing that there are few cases in which mass voter fraud has been proven. That’s true, but that talking point is undermined by the realization that, in states and cities where parties control law enforcement and election commissions, even the most suspicious voting patterns are ever investigated.

quote:

the effort to hype this into a fight for racial equality is about Clinton’s fear that the African-Americans that turned out in record numbers to elect and then re-elect Barack Obama won’t show up for her next year. And if takes a cynical waving of the bloody shirt of the Civil Rights era to convince them that Republicans are out to get them, Clinton is demonstrating that she will stoop as low as it takes to get blacks sufficiently alarmed about a possible GOP victory in 2016.

quote:

The same year a Washington Post poll found that nearly two-thirds of African-Americans questioned supported voter ID laws while three-quarters of all Americans agreed. There is no proof that anyone who really wants to vote is being turned away or stopped from doing so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/06/05/hillary-clinton-needs-faux-war-on-voting-rights/

Some of the points made:

quote:

Voter ID opponents are fond of arguing that there are few cases in which mass voter fraud has been proven. That’s true, but that talking point is undermined by the realization that, in states and cities where parties control law enforcement and election commissions, even the most suspicious voting patterns are ever investigated.

Oh my, that doesn't sound like the SoS controls all voting in fifty states like MJ believes.

quote:

the effort to hype this into a fight for racial equality is about Clinton’s fear that the African-Americans that turned out in record numbers to elect and then re-elect Barack Obama won’t show up for her next year. And if takes a cynical waving of the bloody shirt of the Civil Rights era to convince them that Republicans are out to get them, Clinton is demonstrating that she will stoop as low as it takes to get blacks sufficiently alarmed about a possible GOP victory in 2016.

quote:

The same year a Washington Post poll found that nearly two-thirds of African-Americans questioned supported voter ID laws while three-quarters of all Americans agreed. There is no proof that anyone who really wants to vote is being turned away or stopped from doing so.

So apparently ol MJ is trying to foist something on African-Americans they don't want.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

If it were the KKK and Bush were prez at the time, leftists wouldnt pretend it wasnt a thing

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
First of all, I apologize for not being clear on the "extrapolation" of party-affiliation. All I was referring to was an assumed party affiliation of minorites mentioned in the article. Afrcian Americans and Hispanics (especially African Americans) overwhelmingly vote Democrat. i think we can all agree on that. That was the limit of my analysis/extrapolation. I realize I didn't adequately clarify that point, and it could be reasonable to assume a broader analysis on my part.
Secondly, my point about provisional ballots is only one sub-point of my overall point of voter suppression.

It seemed like a pretty big point, there, MJ. Regardless, you still haven't proven it at all.

quote:

Thirdly, you make a very good suggestion:
Let's look at the SoS in 2012 of the states in question: Shall we?
Arizona - Ken Bennett - R
Kansas - Kris Kobach - R
Montana - Linda McCulloch - D
North Carolina - Elaine Marshall - D
Nebraska - John Gale - R
Oklahoma - Glenn Coffee - R
South Dakota - Jason Gant - R
Utah has no Sos - Elections are the Lt. Gov's responsibility. That would be Greg Bell - R
California - Debra Bowen - D
Colorado - Scott Gessler - R
Maryland - John P McDonough - D
New Jersey - Kim Guadagno - R
New Mexico - Diana Duran - R
New York - Cesar Perales - D
Ohio - John Husted - R
Pennsylvania - Carol Aichelle - R
5 D's - 11R's Maybe a pattern here?

Perhaps there is a pattern there, but that still doesn't prove anything, does it?

quote:

Thirdly, you raise a very valid question. (e.g. Why is California in the list?)
1) California has had a Provisional Ballot system for many years prior to HAVA. To my knowledge, there is no voter ID. But you have to show up at the designated polling place, and have to be registered. They have a HUGE latino population. Many of whom do not speak and read English very well. California routinely hands out a lot of Provisional Ballots. They actually use the ballot itself as a way of updating information.
Here is a quote from the link below on California's Provisional Ballots
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/10/09/354534487/rules-for-provisional-ballots-all-over-the-map
"The main reason is that the voter is not in the correct polling place or in the correct jurisdiction," Lindberg says.
In Virginia that means the vote doesn't count, but that's not the case everywhere. The rules for provisional ballots vary widely. In some states, like California, they're routinely used to update a voter's information, such as a new address. "
NOTE: The reference to California in the sentence IMMEDIATELY following the phrase "that's not the case everywhere."
2) As much as Hunter and I have had good experiences, my research shows that the Democrat run Sos in California sucks at communication (in any language) (actually sucks period)
Provisional Ballots (with the exception of California) are a creation of HAVA. My point is that HAVA simply moved the voter suppression from turning people away, to giving them an often worthless piece of paper. Not having proper ID is not a reason to deny someone their constitutional right to vote.
The only people who should be denied are: 1) Non-U.S. citizens 2) People who have already voted.
My overall point was not about provisional ballots (apologies for dramatizing that point multiple times).
If you want to argue that Democrat SoS's are denying people the right to vote and therefore it is a wash of any possible Republican effort, show me some proof. (No ass blowing required if you don't, however).

You have yet to prove that the GOP is denying the people the right to vote. Changing the goal posts won't do you any good, either. How do you determine if a person is a citizen, or that they already voted? In Ohio, if you don't go to your polling station, you can cast a provisional ballot. Let's say, hypothetically, that Lucas County, Ohio (my County) has 100 polling stations. I could visit all 100 and I could "vote" in all 100. I would fill out 99 provisional ballots, which would end up not being counted because I did vote in my proper polling place, too. Had I not done that, 1 of my provisional ballots would have counted. Now, that's almost 100 provisional ballots that would be thrown out, and that would include ones from all the polling stations in minority areas, too.

That millions of provisional ballots were thrown out means little, until you find out how many were valid ballots. If every single one (highly unlikely, though it may be) were invalid ballots, then I have absolutely zero issues with 2.7M provisional ballots being thrown out.

You claimed that Republicans were throwing out provisional ballots of voters they deemed weren't likely to vote conservative. You attempted to back it up with the link that doesn't actually back up your claim with any solid evidence. It's possible the information presented backs your claim, but, it's also possible it completely refutes your claim, too.

I would have liked to have seen a breakdown of the # of provisional ballots used, and the number not counted broken down by State. It's entirely possible (though I would consider it nearly impossible), that 95% of all those ballots used and not counted came from California.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

How about the New Black Panthers standing in front of a polling place with clubs down talking and intimidating whites that our justice department under bush was prosecuting and then were let go under Obama's Justice department because they were Eric Holders people?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

Could it be that Hillary could be stirring up racial tension to get votes? Dear sweet Hillary?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01

Clearly, at least IMHO, Obama and Holder were pandering to African Americans. (I mean, it kind of seems obvious?)

Not unlike the Executive amnesty to illegal immigrants.