Voter Fraud - Voter ID - REAL ID

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by rooster

Your confidence in the filibuster and the courts is...perhaps too optimistic. It is true that Thune is making noise about respecting the filibuster. But there are many arguing that they need to work around it. And the courts? It will end up with the Supremes, and their track record for voting rights is not good recently...and trending worse. Much worse.
.

It would be very interesting to hear Blackman's views on this, given he's an attorney and spent years working in politics for the wrong side. (jk Blackman).

Say what you will about Mitch McConnell, he was a strong supporter of the filibuster as applied to legislation. Yes, Thune's saying the right things. Hopefully the Senate will continue to stand up to presidents like Trump, Obama and Biden who want to end or greatly restrict it.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Is this a trick question? Because 58% of Americans worried about voter fraud before the 2024 election? Or because 43% of Americans aren't confident votes for president will be accurately cast and counted? And because it's important most Americans believe they live in a democracy?

Let’s say we enact laws to enable all the changes they want to ensure our elections are legitimate in their minds and they still lose? What’s next?

Something like this perhaps.

President Donald Trump has suggested that the federal government should take control of elections in states that he believes cannot administer them "legally and honestly." He stated that if states fail in this regard, "somebody else should take over." This statement was made during a recent Oval Office appearance.

Trump specifically called out cities like Atlanta, Detroit, and Philadelphia, claiming they have "horrible corruption" in their election processes. He has repeatedly made unsubstantiated claims about widespread voter fraud in these areas, particularly following his loss in the 2020 presidential election.


The problem is not that our elections aren’t fair and accurate the problem is that politicians want people to believe it’s “rigged” because they are either delusional or just plain crooked.

This push to change our election laws is born of the proverbial forbidden fruit. I.E. Lies

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Is this a trick question? Because 58% of Americans worried about voter fraud before the 2024 election? Or because 43% of Americans aren't confident votes for president will be accurately cast and counted? And because it's important most Americans believe they live in a democracy?

Why are we even arguing about this, as it relates to the Trump administration? Short of an act of Congress, the Feds can't require photo ID or ban mail in voting. And no such act is going to pass because of the filibuster. If the executive branch tries to achieve either through regulation, the courts will shut it down pretty damn quick.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/po...fraud-concerns
https://news.gallup.com/poll/651185/...ven-wider.aspx

More of the usual illogic by you and your side. One group of people that never rely on facts (you for instance) lies and lies about the prevalence of voter fraud (even though it is so minuscule that it’s essentially nonexistent. Then you say “people are worried about voter fraud” which is the result of continuously telling them the lie that it is prevalent (which it is not - it’s not even negligible).

Then you say, let’s shore up the system to prevent fraud (which is only a concern because of the continued lies about its existence and actual fraud is essentially nonexistent). When in actuality, the system as is is pretty flawless without the fix. This is evidenced by the very low incidences of actual fraud.

Simply put, it’s a fix in search of a problem.

[Turner2099]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Is this a trick question? Because 58% of Americans worried about voter fraud before the 2024 election? Or because 43% of Americans aren't confident votes for president will be accurately cast and counted? And because it's important most Americans believe they live in a democracy?

Why are we even arguing about this, as it relates to the Trump administration? Short of an act of Congress, the Feds can't require photo ID or ban mail in voting. And no such act is going to pass because of the filibuster. If the executive branch tries to achieve either through regulation, the courts will shut it down pretty damn quick.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/po...fraud-concerns
https://news.gallup.com/poll/651185/...ven-wider.aspx

Trust, but verify. Put the results of each election under a microscope to prove validity. There may have been concerns approaching the 2024 election, but no one's really calling out fraud now. I truly believe that remaining concerns are driven by propaganda and actions such as seizing ballots from Georgia.

Fraudulent voting can theoretically always happen, regardless of what laws are in place.

I really hope the filibuster remains in place. The act of Congress that requires a photo ID and bans mail-in-voting referenced above has already passed the House and is sitting with the Senate. The SAVE Act also mandates frequent voter purges and threatens election workers with prison, even if they erroneously register someone. Those same election workers will also be vulnerable to civil lawsuits.

The filibuster for cabinet nominees and other executive branch appointees was eliminated in 2013. Mitch McConnell warned the Democrats they would regret their decision. That's darkly funny.

The filibuster for Supreme Court justices was eliminated by Republicans in 2017. That was after Mitch McConnell refused to allow the Senate to vote on Merrick Garland because it was an election year, leaving the seat open for nearly a year. Now there is a Republican super majority that tends to support Trump more often than not.

I think it's been shown that there's a strong argument that the SAVE Act equates to voter suppression that supports Republicans. Trump did tell his followers they wouldn't have to worry about voting after the 2024 election.

[Precious_b]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

The Myth of Voter Fraud is itself a fraud. Studies show that voter fraud is less than 10 thousandth of a percent.

Here is a good editorial about the issue if you’re interested. Although I’m sure plenty of people here will call the conclusions lies or the author a RINO.

https://archive.ph/eRCVO

Trump’s Claims About Noncitizens Voting Are False. We Can Prove It.
By Stephen Richer
Mr. Richer is a Republican former elected recorder of Maricopa County, Ariz., where he was responsible for voter registration, early voting and mail-in voting.

This week, President Trump called on his party to nationalize American elections, an unconstitutional move that he said would be justified because of the danger of noncitizens casting ballots. “These people were brought to our country to vote, and they vote illegally,” he said.

No president has so baldly proposed to intervene in state elections, but the charge that noncitizens are illegally casting ballots is sadly commonplace. Elon Musk claims on X, without evidence, that significant numbers of illegal immigrants vote. Rudy Giuliani erroneously alleged that my home state, Arizona, had allowed “probably about 250,000” votes from noncitizens in 2020, despite the fact that Arizona has long required proof of citizenship to vote in state elections.

Election officials usually respond to these allegations by pointing out that there are almost no prosecutions of fraudulent noncitizen voters. Reuters has noted that even the pro-Trump Heritage Foundation’s database of election crimes listed only 24 instances of noncitizens voting in U.S. elections from 2003 to 2023.

While these rebuttals are correct, they are incomplete: Just because something isn’t prosecuted doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Happily, there is new compelling evidence debunking the false claims. Recently, a number of states have undertaken investigations into noncitizen voting, cross-checking voter rolls with citizenship status, and found it virtually nonexistent.

When confronted with allegations on noncitizens voting in Utah, Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top election official, initiated a monthslong review of Utah’s approximately 2.1 million registered voters. She and her team found one “confirmed noncitizen.” Just one. And that one noncitizen, while registered, had never voted.

Idaho, a state of one million voters, ran similar tests in 2024, and they found 36 “very likely” registered noncitizens. That may seem like a lot until you view it in light of claims that statewide elections are altered by such anomalies. Some, but not all, of those 36 people have previously voted, the secretary of state, Phil McGrane, said, but “out of the million-plus registered voters we started with, we’re down to 10 thousandths of a percent” of the overall count — not even close to affecting the outcome.

Louisiana’s investigation in 2025 netted some 390 noncitizen registrants, 79 of whom had voted in at least one election over the last several decades (out of 2.9 million registrants). Just a few weeks ago, Montana found 23 possible noncitizen registrants (out of approximately 785,000 people registered). And Georgia, in some ways the model for these investigations, found in its 2024 audit 20 registered noncitizens (out of 8.2 million registrations). In my four years in office in Maricopa County overseeing voter registration, I came across a total of two possible instances of noncitizens voting out of some 2.5 million registered voters.

….

These investigations affirm what is simply common sense. People largely aren’t willing to risk their status in the United States — the land of economic opportunity — for the ability to cast one more vote out of hundreds of thousands or millions in a state and hundreds of millions in the country.

The investigations also suggest that many politicians and public interest groups, all of which have access to these reports, may not actually care that much about election security. The constant talk of noncitizen voting is more likely about scoring political points and bolstering fund-raising.

Playing politics with the idea of fraudulent voters and stolen elections comes at a real cost to American confidence in our elections. It’s an affront to our democracy and to all those who work to deliver free and fair elections. It’s also an ominous sign for where things may be heading this year.

Click the link above for the full article.

Psst. Don't tell that to the salty one. Don't want to distrub is pov of reality.

[RX792P]

Originally Posted by Turner2099

Trust, but verify. Put the results of each election under a microscope to prove validity. There may have been concerns approaching the 2024 election, but no one's really calling out fraud now. I truly believe that remaining concerns are driven by propaganda and actions such as seizing ballots from Georgia.

Fraudulent voting can theoretically always happen, regardless of what laws are in place.

There has never been an election placed under such a high power microscope as the 2020 election. Heck, it's been put under a 50000000x Transmission Electron Microscope.

Despite that, no evidence has emerged of any 'rigging', voter fraud etc. that would have had any effect on the outcome of the election.
What 'rigging' and voter fraud that has been found falls into the 0.000xx% range.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

More of the usual illogic by you and your side. One group of people that never rely on facts (you for instance) lies and lies about the prevalence of voter fraud (even though it is so minuscule that it’s essentially nonexistent. Then you say “people are worried about voter fraud” which is the result of continuously telling them the lie that it is prevalent (which it is not - it’s not even negligible).

Then you say, let’s shore up the system to prevent fraud (which is only a concern because of the continued lies about its existence and actual fraud is essentially nonexistent). When in actuality, the system as is is pretty flawless without the fix. This is evidenced by the very low incidences of actual fraud.

Simply put, it’s a fix in search of a problem.

That's utter nonsense, the red text. I've said more than once that election fraud in recent times probably has only overturned results in local podunk elections. I have said many times that Trump lost fair and square in 2020.

Rhetoric like yours is a sure fire way to make people think Democrats are hiding something.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Turner2099

Trust, but verify. Put the results of each election under a microscope to prove validity. There may have been concerns approaching the 2024 election, but no one's really calling out fraud now. I truly believe that remaining concerns are driven by propaganda and actions such as seizing ballots from Georgia.

Fraudulent voting can theoretically always happen, regardless of what laws are in place....

Yes, and it goes both ways. I agree with Raffensperger, the Feds shouldn't have seized the Fulton County ballots. However, most people in the FBI are professionals. That exercise should theoretically shore up faith in the system.

Originally Posted by Turner2099

I think it's been shown that there's a strong argument that the SAVE Act equates to voter suppression that supports Republicans. Trump did tell his followers they wouldn't have to worry about voting after the 2024 election.

That's academic. The Save Act won't be passed. And the courts will insure that American elections are fair. Hypothetically, if enacted, at this point in time it would support Democrats, not Republicans. Because of Trump, Democrats are more motivated to register to vote and go to the polls.

As to Supreme Court judges, what choice did McConnell and Republicans have? As you implied, that's Harry Reid's fault. He started down that path when he allowed federal judges (except supremes) to be appointed with a majority vote. McConnell to his credit didn't further restrict the application of the filibuster to legislation.

You might want to look up the definition of supermajority.

OK, Now I go cold turkey!

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by Tiny

That's utter nonsense, the red text. I've said more than once that election fraud in recent times probably has only overturned results in local podunk elections. I have said many times that Trump lost fair and square in 2020.

Rhetoric like yours is a sure fire way to make people think Democrats are hiding something.

So if you understand that there is no voter fraud, you also understand that the system works as is. You can’t have it both ways. If there’s no fraud of note in the elections, which you seem to partly acknowledge, then there’s no need to add any further requirements to voting to protect against a nonexistent issue with voting.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by Tiny

That's utter nonsense, the red text. I've said more than once that election fraud in recent times probably has only overturned results in local podunk elections. I have said many times that Trump lost fair and square in 2020.

Rhetoric like yours is a sure fire way to make people think Democrats are hiding something.

Your argument can be exposed by the use of reductio ad absurdum. Latin for "reduction to absurdity". It’s absurd to believe democrats are hiding something when they simply point out the facts and the lies that are being spread.

You may not believe the rhetoric that’s being spread by Trump, his administration and the right wing media but plenty of other people do. Your argument that pointing that out is proof that their false belief is true is just wrong.

[Turner2099]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Yes, and it goes both ways. I agree with Raffensperger, the Feds shouldn't have seized the Fulton County ballots. However, most people in the FBI are professionals. That exercise should theoretically shore up faith in the system.



That's academic. The Act won't be passed. And the courts will insure that American elections are fair. Hypothetically, if enacted, at this point in time it would support Democrats, not Republicans. Because of Trump, Democrats are more motivated to register to vote and go to the polls.

As to Supreme Court judges, what choice did McConnell have? That's Harry Reid's fault. He started down that path when he allowed federal judges (except supremes) to be appointed with a majority vote. McConnell to his credit didn't further restrict the application of the filibuster to legislation.

And please note there is no Republican super majority, in the House or the Senate. Republicans barely control both.

OK, Now I go cold turkey!

I am not responding just because you're going cold turkey. : )

The fact that the ballots were seized at all is the problem. Kash Patel doesn't inspire confidence, though, for many reasons. If it wasn't for the filibuster being eliminated, I really don't think he'd be in his position. Also, having the Director of National Intelligence involved is sketchy.

I really hope you're right about the act not being passed. I think we both agree disenfranchising anyone is bad and the act seems to do that. I think that alone should disqualify it.

I should have been more specific about McConnell, sorry. I meant to point out that while he refused to bring Merrick Garland's nomination to a vote in the Senate because it was an election year, preventing Obama from appointing a Supreme Court justice, he was just fine allowing a vote to proceed for Amy Coney Barrett during an election year under Trump. She was sworn in just over a week before the election, while the seat Garland would have filled was vacant for nearly a year.

By McConnell delaying Garland's vote, it allowed Trump to end up appointing three Supreme Court Justices, which created the Republican super majority I referenced. I wasn't referring to the House or the Senate.

[Turner2099]

Originally Posted by RX792P

There has never been an election placed under such a high power microscope as the 2020 election. Heck, it's been put under a 50000000x Transmission Electron Microscope.

Despite that, no evidence has emerged of any 'rigging', voter fraud etc. that would have had any effect on the outcome of the election.
What 'rigging' and voter fraud that has been found falls into the 0.000xx% range.

Yeah, I almost spelled this out. That's the propaganda I was referring to. I was going to point out that the same people that are trying to rewrite the narrative of the January 6, 2021, capitol riot to suit political needs (unfortunately causing people to absolutely believe the lies) are the same people who lie about the 2020 election being rigged. I feel the comparison is important, but I didn't and don't want to send the thread in another direction.

[lustylad]

The last time I looked, California had a population of roughly 39 million. This included an estimated 4.8 million non-citizens. We all agree, I think, that non-citizens are not eligible to vote, and should not even be registered to vote. What concerns me is this - if a non-citizen walks into a DMV in California to apply for a driver's license, that person is automatically added to the state's voter registration rolls unless he/she specifically opts out. It's called motor/voter registration. Other states have similar set-ups.

The whole process works on the honor system. No need to present proof of citizenship such as a birth certificate or social security number. Just check a box verifying you are a legal US citizen and presto - you're added to the rolls! Once you're registered, the chances are slim to none that you will be exposed or expunged from the rolls. Democrats control California. It's a one-party state. They have no interest in cross-checking their voter rolls against databases at the DHS or other federal agencies that might help to weed out non-citizens.

So we really have no idea how many, or how few, of California's 4.8 million non-citizens are 1) registered to vote and 2) recorded as having voted in recent elections. If only 1% voted, that's 48,000 fraudulent ballots. If 10% voted, it's tantamount to almost half a million fraudulent ballots!

I have no idea what the truth is here. But my gut tells me 1% is probably on the low side. And I don't mean to fault every illegal immigrant who may have voted in California. Many of them may not have understood what they signed up for at the DMV. They go home and one day a voter registration card pops up in the mail, so they think "Cool! They want me to vote!" It's easy to overlook the fine print about it being a felony if you're a non-citizen and don't opt out.

Now here's something for all of you fraud deniers to ponder. Voter registration rolls are used in CA (and other states) for juror selection purposes. You're required to be a US citizen in order to serve on a jury. If you turn out to be a non-citizen, you're automatically dismissed from jury service. I asked my AI research assistant the following question - "What percent of California residents are disqualified from jury duty for being a non-citizen"?

Here's what she told me:

"Based on data from the Judicial Council of California, approximately 40% to 45% of the individuals disqualified from jury duty annually in California are excused because they are not U.S. citizens.

Here is a breakdown of the data:

Total Disqualifications: Roughly 1 million people are disqualified from jury duty in California annually.

Non-Citizen Disqualifications: In the 2016-17 fiscal year, 449,404 people were disqualified for not being U.S. citizens.

Recent Figures: During the 2017-18 fiscal year, 425,814 residents were disqualified for lacking citizenship."

I have no idea why my trusty research assistant couldn't find more up-to-date numbers, but even these 8-year-old figures are eyebrow-raising. How does it happen that non-citizens account for only 12% of California's population, but up to 45% of all jury disqualifications? And insofar as potential jurors are called from the state's voter rolls and DMV records, isn't this evidence that a lot of non-citizens in CA are in fact registered to vote? Why don't they have a system to automatically cross-check and remove anyone who is disqualified from jury duty due to non-citizenship from the voter rolls?

[txdot-guy]

In California the process of registering people to vote at the DMV requires the person being registered to affirm their citizenship. The Motor Voter law doesn’t automatically register anyone automatically. It just offers registration during the process bu requires completing the registration process in full.

Otherwise they are not registered.

Now someone could lie and affirm their citizenship status falsely but the studies show non citizens don’t register to vote illegally. They just don’t even when offered the opportunity.

[RX792P]

Originally Posted by lustylad

The last time I looked, California had a population of roughly 39 million. This included an estimated 4.8 million non-citizens. We all agree, I think, that non-citizens are not eligible to vote, and should not even be registered to vote. What concerns me is this - if a non-citizen walks into a DMV in California to apply for a driver's license, that person is automatically added to the state's voter registration rolls unless he/she specifically opts out. It's called motor/voter registration. Other states have similar set-ups.

The whole process works on the honor system. No need to present proof of citizenship such as a birth certificate or social security number. Just check a box verifying you are a legal US citizen and presto - you're added to the rolls! Once you're registered, the chances are slim to none that you will be exposed or expunged from the rolls. Democrats control California. It's a one-party state. They have no interest in cross-checking their voter rolls against databases at the DHS or other federal agencies that might help to weed out non-citizens.

So we really have no idea how many, or how few, of California's 4.8 million non-citizens are 1) registered to vote and 2) recorded as having voted in recent elections. If only 1% voted, that's 48,000 fraudulent ballots. If 10% voted, it's tantamount to almost half a million fraudulent ballots!

I have no idea what the truth is here. But my gut tells me 1% is probably on the low side. And I don't mean to fault every illegal immigrant who may have voted in California. Many of them may not have understood what they signed up for at the DMV. They go home and one day a voter registration card pops up in the mail, so they think "Cool! They want me to vote!" It's easy to overlook the fine print about it being a felony if you're a non-citizen and don't opt out.

Now here's something for all of you fraud deniers to ponder. Voter registration rolls are used in CA (and other states) for juror selection purposes. You're required to be a US citizen in order to serve on a jury. If you turn out to be a non-citizen, you're automatically dismissed from jury service. I asked my AI research assistant the following question - "What percent of California residents are disqualified from jury duty for being a non-citizen"?

Here's what she told me:

"Based on data from the Judicial Council of California, approximately 40% to 45% of the individuals disqualified from jury duty annually in California are excused because they are not U.S. citizens.

Here is a breakdown of the data:

Total Disqualifications: Roughly 1 million people are disqualified from jury duty in California annually.

Non-Citizen Disqualifications: In the 2016-17 fiscal year, 449,404 people were disqualified for not being U.S. citizens.

Recent Figures: During the 2017-18 fiscal year, 425,814 residents were disqualified for lacking citizenship."

I have no idea why my trusty research assistant couldn't find more up-to-date numbers, but even these 8-year-old figures are eyebrow-raising. How does it happen that non-citizens account for only 12% of California's population, but up to 45% of all jury disqualifications? And insofar as potential jurors are called from the state's voter rolls and DMV records, isn't this evidence that a lot of non-citizens in CA are in fact registered to vote? Why don't they have a system to automatically cross-check and remove anyone who is disqualified from jury duty due to non-citizenship from the voter rolls?

A correction...
California courts draw potential jurors from multiple lists (not just voter rolls), and if someone called for jury duty isn’t a U.S. citizen, they are excused or disqualified when that is identified.
California courts use the following main lists to compile potential jurors (referred to as source lists):

- Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) lists – including holders of valid driver’s licenses and state identification cards issued to residents.

- Voter registration lists – lists of persons registered to vote within the jurisdiction.

- Franchise Tax Board (FTB) state tax filer lists – lists of resident taxpayers who filed state income tax returns

As of the most recent California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) data, there are approximately 34,777,752 driver’s licenses and identification (ID) cards currently issued by the state — this total includes both driver’s licenses and state ID cards combined (not just identification cards alone). Breakout of data was not available.