It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Voter I.D. Law in North Carolina Stands !

page: 10
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 11 2014 @ 11:55 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66
Just google "hacking voting machines" and you'll get hours and hours of evidence in print and video format. If a criminal can take your money they can certainly take your vote as well if the machines are electronic.
Even in our Commonwealth the numbers of persons arrested for voter fraud has fallen since the electronic machines came into widespread use.

posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 03:20 AM
a reply to: diggindirt

Yep, I'm fully aware of what can be done with the voting machines. But as we've noted above several times, that is not voter fraud, that is election fraud. If a machine gets hacked (or, if it was actually programmed to miscount votes, gasp) that is not prevented by a new Voter ID.

Your comments seem to be self contradictory ... you're concerned about how easy it is to hack an electronic machine, and yet you maintain that the number of people arrested for "voter fraud" has fallen somehow? How does that work exactly? Can you provide a link that clarifies what you're saying?

posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 03:42 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66
I'm not sure where you see a contradiction in my post. You asked how elections are rigged. I directed you to sources of how elections can be rigged.
My statement about the actual numbers of people arrested for voter fraud being down since the machines came into widespread use is simple common sense. If you can rig a machine to produce the desired results there is no reason to go about handing out money or booze to individuals for voting. If fewer individuals are involved the chances of being caught in act are diminished dramatically. The corrupt politicians and their toadies find it much safer and more economical to hire one person to rig the machine than to go about finding dozens of people to vote multiple times.
I'm concerned about any misdeed that contravenes the will of the people, aren't you?
Look, I realize you probably don't want to believe that this sort of thing happens without consequences to the wrong-doers, I was in the same situation many years ago---right up until the time that I saw my aunt's name on that voting roll after she had died. I simply couldn't believe that the people I had trusted would have done such a thing. But there it was, in black and white and I had no choice but to believe it.

posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 06:04 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

I had to show my ID to get a ballot at our primary in Michigan just a few days ago. In our modern society, who doesn't have an ID? It's not a big deal, just a requirement.

Don't want to show your ID, then don't vote.

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 02:12 AM
a reply to: diggindirt

1. I asked a specific member how "the system" is rigged, as they had asserted, not how elections could be rigged in general.

2. Again, election fraud is not voter fraud. What is so hard about this concept? Requiring a Voter ID (the subject of the thread) would not affect in any way the outcome of a "rigged election" that had been effected by hacking the voting machines.

3. "Simple common sense." So, no actual data then, just a series of reasonable assumptions about a theoretical situation? As opposed to the mounds of clear information demonstrating over and over again in the discussion that in-person voter fraud even when heavily investigated is virtually non-existent? You're talking about dirty politicians, and I understand where you are coming from, especially in local politics. Wouldn't debate that with you even for a second ... but I would debate with you, is whether new Voter IDs are needed to ensure the sanctity of the vote from in-person fraud (as in your imagined situation where people are tempted with "money or booze.")

IF your situation were true, the Republicans should be fighting to have their machines installed nationwide, which is not the case. They're concentrating on ways to keep people from voting. like requiring new IDs, changing early voting, absentee voting, etc. to address a problem that VIRTUALLY DOESN'T EXIST (in-person voter fraud).
edit on 2Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:15:24 -050014p022014866 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 06:32 AM
a reply to: Gryphon66

1. Sorry, I misread your question.
2. I understand voter fraud---it includes selling your vote or buying a vote.
3. There are mounds of newspaper articles about the voter fraud in each election in our state.

I'm depressed at the list I get when I google "voter fraud in Kentucky"---my state.
I didn't imagine that votes are bought with money and booze. Here are some links:

These are some of the more recent cases, there were dozens in the '90s.

This is from the last presidential election and is still under investigation as far as I know.

We have 120 counties in the Commonwealth, each a potential nest of vipers unless the citizens are vigilant about keeping the corruption weeded out.

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 06:57 AM
a reply to: diggindirt


We're talking about in-person voter fraud. This means that a given voter votes more than one time, using someone elses identity, etc. This is the logic behind the Republican push for new photo IDs to allow voting.

What you're talking about here ... corrupt politicians and Boards of Election "buying votes" ... even though Fox and friends refer glom it all together as "voter fraud" is not. Even so, the percentages of these bad votes remain miniscule or misreported. From your link regarding the Presidential election:

"Many of them are procedural in nature and we have only received just a few allegations of vote buying," said Martin.
"Of course we take those allegations very seriously and those will be investigated thoroughly."

Selling or buying a vote is a federal crime, but a photo Voter ID would not prevent either one.

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 04:35 PM
a reply to: Gryphon66
No, it's not just "Fox and friends" that call this sort of thing "voter fraud", did you not see the release from the FBI after the convictions of half a dozen or more people in Clay County, KY.

FRANKFORT, KY—A former democratic election commissioner in Clay County was sentenced today to 20 years for his role in helping a criminal enterprise make millions of dollars and obtain power and authority in the county. Charles Wayne Jones, 71, was sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Danny C. Reeves for conspiring with a former circuit court judge, a school superintendent, and other county officials in schemes that involved racketeering, money laundering, and voter fraud. Last March, a jury convicted Jones and seven others for their roles in the above mentioned schemes. The jury also found that the eight men were jointly liable for $3.4 million that represented the salaries and contracts they were able to get as a result of the conspiracies. Jones is the second defendant sentenced today. William Stivers was sentenced to 292 months this morning.

While you may have your own narrow definition of "voter fraud", it seems that the Federal authorities have a somewhat different definition.
Another reason you may not find a lot of convictions for voter fraud is that many, many times, especially in state cases, the charges are amended downward for the "good ole boys" club members so that it appears as "rackateering" or some other charge. These people may also be prosecuted for crimes other than voter fraud simply because their other crimes (most of the time financial in nature) are much easier to prove to a jury.
Bless your heart for believing in the overall security of the system. You are in the place I was about 20 years ago, before my eyes were opened with black and white printed evidence. Perhaps your local elected officials are pure as the driven snow, I truly hope for your sake that you are correct in those beliefs.
The scales fell from my eyes when Operation Boptrot exposed the widespread nature of government corruption in Commonwealth. Seeing more than a dozen legislators from both parties go to jail and hearing the special agent in charge of the FBI sting say that they had "made a dent" in the corruption was enough for me to realize that I had been naive. Several years later I had the opportunity to sit down with one of the agents investigating that mess and was told that if all the leads given to the FBI had been followed, a majority of the members of the legislature could have been brought up on charges. But the Justice Dept. decided to narrow the scope of the investigation down to the corruption associated with horse racing in order not to "disrupt the flow of government" by arresting the majority of that body.
I don't personally know if the corruption in North Carolina is as widespread as it is in Kentucky but I think anything that can be done to curtail it is a good idea.
Now, I've provided links to show you the problems we've had with what the US Attorney called "voter fraud" in our Commonwealth yet you've dismissed it as some "Fox and friends" fantasy simply because one of my links happened to be a Fox source. sigh....
As for your final comment, "Selling or buying a vote is a federal crime, but a photo Voter ID would not prevent either one." Yes, if you have to show an ID you can't sell your vote multiple times with multiple names unless you go to the trouble of getting multiple IDs. I can't believe that you are so thick that you can't see this so I'm beginning to believe that you are being willfully ignorant on the issue.
Now I'm done derailing this thread. I wish you completely honest elections wherever you may be.

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 02:53 AM

originally posted by: diggindirt

As for your final comment, "Selling or buying a vote is a federal crime, but a photo Voter ID would not prevent either one." Yes, if you have to show an ID you can't sell your vote multiple times with multiple names unless you go to the trouble of getting multiple IDs. I can't believe that you are so thick that you can't see this so I'm beginning to believe that you are being willfully ignorant on the issue.

You know, even though you started posting information that is so obviously off the topic of this thread, I never once indicated that there was a problem with you personally. I've made it clear what we're talking about in the thread. We are not talking about hackable machines or dirty officials or even folks who are willing to sell their vote, all of which you are intent on labelling "voter fraud" and implying that I'm dull-witted, ignorant or something because I won't kow-tow to your misplaced definition that you have certainly lifted from right-wing media sources. You, my fellow member, are the one who is apparently too thick-headed, either organically or intentionally, to see that the issue we're discussing here is in-person voter fraud, i.e. the kind that would be stopped with a Voter ID.

If the machine is rigged or the election official is dirty, the Voter ID makes NO DIFFERENCE ... and yet, you keep implying, as does the right-wing media you obviously have assimilated, that somehow this magical Voter ID is going to make these instances of election fraud go away.

Let's take a look at your citation from the FBI site, in the actual detail rather than just stating in our own words, shall we?

As an election commissioner, Jones helped the Clay County board of elections control the outcome of the primary and general elections for the years 2002, 2004, and 2006.

Evidence at the trial proved that during elections, Jones picked election officers who assisted in corrupting the voting process at Jones’ direction. Jones also gave specific instructions to the officers on how to manipulate the voting machines to steal votes. This was done so that the enterprise could ensure victory for the slate of candidates they wanted in county offices.

If the Board of Elections is manipulating the election outcomes, how does a Voter ID required from any individual make a difference? Answer: it doesn't.

Jones also intentionally prepared false election reports to be sent to Frankfort that inaccurately reported voting totals to help conceal the conspiracy.

If the fraud is taking place at the level of reporting election outcomes by election officials, how does a Voter ID required from any individual make a difference: Answer it doesn't.

Now, why so much confusion? Because we've taken care in this thread to narrowly maintain the definition of "voter fraud" that could possibly be countered by a photo Voter ID. Of course, different people, different agencies, different counties, States and Federal departments use the term generically:

Electoral fraud refers to is illegal interference with the process of an election. The definition of the term varies from country to country. Generally it includes illegal voter registration, intimidation at polls and improper vote counting. Even though technically the term 'electoral fraud' covers only illegal acts, the term is also used to describe acts morally unacceptable, outside the spirit of electoral laws or in violation of the principles of democracy.

Electoral fraud is also termed voter fraud.

from US Legal - Definitions

Do you see it now? I am not and have not indicated there is no election or electoral fraud. You are attempting to fallaciously imply that somehow I'm blinded by innocence or willful ignorance, when all you're doing is parroting the standard right-wing media spiel which I labelled above somewhat whimsically "Fox and Friends" ... boy that got under your metaphorical skin more than a little, right?

Could it be because instead of having the scales lifted from your eyes and seeing 'the truth' you've merely adopted the package designed for you by corporatist media outlets (Fox, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, etc.).

Unless you're still laboring under the illusion that all that garbage is actually "fair and balanced" and if so, we are really communicating, or rather, not communicating, at two totally different levels of understanding.

new topics

<< 7  8  9   >>

log in