Showing posts with label alleged voter fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alleged voter fraud. Show all posts

April 11, 2012

SandBoxBlogs: Contentions " A Powerful Argument for Voter ID Laws "

Alana Goodman:




"New York Magazine says there’s nothing to see here:
The question is whether anyone should really care. Yes, if you wanted to, you could risk five years in prison and a $10,000 fine to vote for someone else, but we’re not sure why you would, since a single vote, or even a few votes, will never make a difference. (Okay, almost never.) Could a group of hundreds or thousands of fraudsters be mobilized to go around to different polling stations on election day and vote for one particular candidate or issue, possibly altering the outcome of an election? It would be difficult to organize surreptitiously, but sure, it’s probably doable. But it has never happened.
That’s like the government saying it’s pointless for bars to check IDs, because underage drinkers will face a hefty fine if they’re caught. The punishment becomes less of a deterrent if there’s a very high probability of getting away with the crime.


Voter fraud, by the way, is notoriously difficult to prosecute. Unless the fraudster sparks the suspicion of a polling official, the incident is unlikely to be reported or investigated. Often a fake name and/or address are used, which means there’s little chance of tracking this person down once he’s left the premises. And even if the suspect is reported and somehow located, it’s difficult to prove intentional fraud – can anyone demonstrate that this was the same individual at the polling location? Was the fraud intentional, or could it have been done in error?...."  (Read more?  Click title)

"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."

December 8, 2011

SandBox Comments: Breitbart TV "Obama Voter Fraud Case Heats Up In Indiana"

Another special thank you to Marilyn Marks and her crew up in Pitkin County for staying in the trenches fighting for election transparency laws. 

"The prospect that an estimated 150 signatures may have been forged on petitions has raised the question of whether President Obama actually reached the legitimate number of signatures needed to be placed on the ballot in Indiana. Under state law, presidential candidates need to file 500 signatures from each of the state's nine congressional districts. Indiana election officials say that in St. Joseph County, the Obama campaign qualified with 534 signatures; Clinton's camp had 704. The certified signatures were never challenged...."
(Breitbart TV)

(Watch the video?  Click title.  Comment to discuss)