Another example of Democrats rigging votes

And the Democrats have the balls to say the Republicans are the culprits.

OK, I already know what our liberals will respond with - "the machines weren't calibrated." Yeah right, they were calibrated .. just in such a way as to always vote Democrat.

http://theweek.com/article/index/270...emocratic-ones

Republican state representative candidate Jim Moynihan offered this gracious lesson to his followers on Twitter: “Be careful when you vote in Illinois. Make sure you take the time to check your votes before submitting.”

.

Yes, more non-existent vote fraud. And yes, we will say it appears the machine was not calibrated. Isn't that what the article that you posted up says? Without refutation by anyone?

Yes, more non-existent vote fraud... Originally Posted by timpage

Non-existent, huh?

Hey timmytard, did you know that when US federal court districts cross-check names of registered voters called for jury duty with immigration status, as many as 3% turn out to be non-citizens?

Did you know it's a federal crime for a non-citizen to register to vote in federal elections?

Do you think 3% is significant enough to swing most elections?

Did you know the DHS keeps fighting requests for immigration info from states seeking to clean up their voter registration lists?

If you don't want to fix this problem because doing so would hurt your candidates, just say so. But don't lie and say the problem is "non-existent".

.

I always get a kick out of the "voter fraud doesn't exist" argument.

First off, being a Kansan, and remembering my state's history, I know first hand that voter fraud can and does happen. Kansas had to vote three times on the issue of being a slave state or free state. Those damned Missourians kept crossing the border and stuffing the ballot boxes.

So...voter fraud HAS happened.....CAN happen.....and undoubtedly does happen.

Secondly, you just have to love the hypocrisy of saying "Voter fraud is a paranoid delusion thought up by xenophobes - except where Bush is concerned. Yeah. That was voter fraud. Yup yup"

It saved the dead from having to vote.

Non-existent, huh?

Hey timmytard, did you know that when US federal court districts cross-check names of registered voters called for jury duty with immigration status, as many as 3% turn out to be non-citizens?

Did you know it's a federal crime for a non-citizen to register to vote in federal elections?

Do you think 3% is significant enough to swing most elections?

Did you know the DHS keeps fighting requests for immigration info from states seeking to clean up their voter registration lists?

If you don't want to fix this problem because doing so would hurt your candidates, just say so. But don't lie and say the problem is "non-existent".

. Originally Posted by lustylad

You follow me around like a puppy wanting to please it's alpha dog.

Voter fraud is a fiction. Voter fraud involving undocumented/illegal immigrants is a ridiculous fiction.

Try to think about it dumbass.....think hard.....don't you just know that every undocumented/illegal person in the country immediately troops down and registers to vote as soon as possible. Right? Isn't that your premise? That there are illegals who just can't wait to go down, register to vote, vote in an election and get caught and charged with a felony? I mean, that makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Think, dumbass. You're an idiot, it makes zero sense. Undocumented immigrants try to have as little as possible to do with anything governmental. Registering to vote is the last thing on their minds and believe me....serving on a jury is something that never ever occurs to them. They are too busy trying to find a job to feed their family.

That is why it never or very very very rarely happens.

Show me any link, any citation, any support at all for the proposition that illegal aliens voting in an election had any impact on that election,

I'm listening.

Oh, and what is the source for your statements about district courts "cross-checking" names of voters? Be interested to see where that came from.

Here's something else for you to chew on moron. I realize this will be a chore for you...in fact, I realize that this is a task almost certainly beyond your limited intellectual capabilities. But, give it a try. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shredding arguments relating to Voter ID laws in Texas.

The republicans voter id law may have the effect of preventing almost 600,000 US citizens from voting. Of course, most of them are black or Hispanic. You can lie about it, you can prevaricate, you can make up whatever kind of bullshit you want to about it. Your voter ID laws are designed to suppress the votes of minority citizens of the United States of America because you don't like the way they vote. Unbelievable.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...4a393_08m1.pdf

1 Cite as: 574 U. S. ____ (2014) G

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Nos. 14A393, 14A402 and 14A404

MARC VEASEY, ET AL. 14A393 v. RICK PERRY, GOVERNOR OF TEXAS, ET AL.

ON APPLICATION TO VACATE STAY

TEXAS STATE CONFERENCE OF NAACP BRANCHES, ET AL. 14A402 v. NANDITA BERRY, TEXAS SECRETARY OF STATE, ET AL.

ON APPLICATION TO VACATE STAY

UNITED STATES v. TEXAS, ET AL. 14A404

ON APPLICATION TO VACATE STAY

[October 18, 2014]

The applications to vacate the stay entered by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on October14, 2014, presented to Justice Scalia and by him referredto the Court are denied. The motion for leave to file the response to the applications under seal with redactedcopies for the public record is granted.

JUSTICE GINSBURG, with whom JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR and JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting.

I would vacate the Fifth Circuit’s stay of the DistrictCourt’s final judgment enjoining the enforcement of Senate Bill 14.

This case is unlike the Ohio and North Carolina applications recently before the Court concerning those States’ 2 VEASEY v. PERRY GINSBURG, J., dissenting
election procedures. Neither application involved, as this case does, a permanent injunction following a full trial and resting on an extensive record from which the DistrictCourt found ballot-access discrimination by the State. I would not upset the District Court’s reasoned, recordbased judgment, which the Fifth Circuit accorded little, if any, deference. Cf. Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U. S. 1, 5 (2006) (per curiam) (Court of Appeals erred in failing to accord deference to "the ruling and findings of the DistrictCourt"). The fact-intensive nature of this case does not justify the Court of Appeals’ stay order; to the contrary, the Fifth Circuit’s refusal to home in on the facts found bythe district court is precisely why this Court should vacatethe stay.

Refusing to evaluate defendants’ likelihood of success on the merits and, instead, relying exclusively on the potential disruption of Texas’ electoral processes, the Fifth Circuit showed little respect for this Court’s establishedstay standards. See Nken v. Holder, 556 U. S. 418, 434 (2009) ("most critical" factors in evaluating request for a stay are applicant’s likelihood of success on the merits and whether applicant would suffer irreparable injury absent astay). Purcell held only that courts must take careful account of considerations specific to election cases, 549
U. S., at 4, not that election cases are exempt from traditional stay standards.

In any event, there is little risk that the District Court’s injunction will in fact disrupt Texas’ electoral processes. Texas need only reinstate the voter identification procedures it employed for ten years (from 2003 to 2013) and infive federal general elections. To date, the new regime, Senate Bill 14, has been applied in only three lowparticipation elections—namely, two statewide primaries and one statewide constitutional referendum, in which voter turnout ranged from 1.48% to 9.98%. The November 2014 election would be the very first federal general elec3 Cite as: 574 U. S. ____ (2014) GINSBURG, J., dissenting
tion conducted under Senate Bill 14’s regime. In all likelihood, then, Texas’ poll workers are at least as familiar with Texas’ pre-Senate Bill 14 procedures as they are withthe new law’s requirements.

True, in Purcell and in recent rulings on applications involving voting procedures, this Court declined to upset aState’s electoral apparatus close to an election. Since November 2013, however, when the District Court established an expedited schedule for resolution of this case,Texas knew full well that the court would issue its rulingonly weeks away from the election. The State thus had time to prepare for the prospect of an order barring theenforcement of Senate Bill 14. Of greater significance, the District Court found "woefully lacking" and "grossly" underfunded the State’s efforts to familiarize the publicand poll workers regarding the new identification requirements. No. 13–cv–00193 (SD Tex., Oct. 9, 2014), pp.20, 31–32, 91, n. 398 (Op.). Furthermore, after the District Court’s injunction issued and despite the State’sapplication to the Court of Appeals for a stay, Texasstopped issuing alternative "election identification certificates" and completely removed mention of Senate Bill 14’s requirements from government Web sites. See Emergency Application to Vacate Fifth Circuit Stay of Permanent Injunction 11 and App. H. In short, any voter confusion or lack of public confidence in Texas’ electoral processes is inthis case largely attributable to the State itself.

Senate Bill 14 replaced the previously existing voter identification requirements with the strictest regime in the country. Op. 20–21. The Bill requires in-person voters to present one of a limited number of governmentissued photo identification documents. Ibid. Texas will not accept several forms of photo ID permitted under theWisconsin law the Court considered last week.* For ex
——————
*The District Court enjoined Wisconsin from implementing the law,the Seventh Circuit stayed the District Court’s injunction, and in turn, 4 VEASEY v. PERRY GINSBURG, J., dissenting
ample, Wisconsin’s law permits a photo ID from an instate four-year college and one from a federally recognizedIndian tribe. Texas, under Senate Bill 14, accepts neither. Nor will Texas accept photo ID cards issued by the U. S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs. Those who lack the approved forms of identification may obtain an "electionidentification certificate" from the Texas Department ofPublic Safety (DPS), but more than 400,000 eligible voters face round-trip travel times of three hours or more to the nearest DPS office. Op. 18, 76. Moreover, applicants foran election identification certificate ordinarily must present a certified birth certificate. Id., at 70. A birth certificate, however, can be obtained only at significant cost—at least $22 for a standard certificate sent by mail. Id., at 22. And although reduced-fee birth certificates may be obtained for $2 to $3, the State did not publicize that option on DPS’s Web site or on Department of Health and Human Services forms for requesting birth certificates. Id., at 70.
On an extensive factual record developed in the course of a nine-day trial, the District Court found Senate Bill 14irreconcilable with §2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it was enacted with a racially discriminatorypurpose and would yield a prohibited discriminatory result. The District Court emphasized the "virtually unchallenged" evidence that Senate Bill 14 "bear[s] more heavily on" minority voters. Id., at 133. In light of the "seismic demographic shift" in Texas between 2000 and 2010, making Texas a "majority-minority state," the District Court observed that the Texas Legislature and Governor had an evident incentive to "gain partisan advantage by suppressing" the "votes of African-Americans and Latinos." Id., at 40, 48, 128. Cf. League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry, 548 U. S. 399, 438–442 —————— this Court vacated the Seventh Circuit’s stay. See Frank v. Walker, ante, p. 1. 5 Cite as: 574 U. S. ____ (2014) GINSBURG, J., dissenting
(2006) (Texas Legislature acted with a "troubling blend ofpolitics and race" in response to "growing" minority participation). The District Court also found a tenuous connection between the harms Senate Bill 14 aimed to ward off, and the means adopted by the State to that end. Between 2002 and 2011, there were only two in-person voter fraud cases prosecuted to conviction in Texas. Op. 13–14. Despite awareness of the Bill’s adverse effect on eligible-tovote minorities, the Texas Legislature rejected a "litany of ameliorative amendments" designed to lessen the Bill’s impact on minority voters—for example, amendmentspermitting additional forms of identification, eliminating fees, providing indigence exceptions, and increasing votereducation and funding—without undermining the Bill’spurported policy justifications. Id., at 35–37, 132 144–147. Texas did not begin to demonstrate that the Bill’s discriminatory features were necessary to prevent fraud or toincrease public confidence in the electoral process. Id., at 133; see also Id., at 113 (proponents of Bill unable to "articulate any reason that a more expansive list of photoIDs would sabotage" their efforts at detecting and deterring voter fraud). On this plain evidence, the DistrictCourt concluded that the Bill would not have been enacted absent its racially disparate effects. Id., at 133.
The District Court further found that Senate Bill 14 operates as an unconstitutional poll tax—an issue neither presented by any of the recent applications nor before the Court in Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd., 553
U. S. 181 (2008) (upholding Indiana voter identificationlaw against facial constitutional challenge). See Id., at 186, and n. 4. Under Senate Bill 14, a cost attends every form of qualified identification available to the generalpublic. Op. 140. Texas tells the Court that any number of incidental costs are associated with voting. But the cost at issue here is one deliberately imposed by the State. Even at $2, the toll is at odds with this Court’s precedent. See 6 VEASEY v. PERRY GINSBURG, J., dissenting
Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U. S. 663 (1966).And for some voters, the imposition is not small. A voter whose birth certificate lists her maiden name or misstates her date of birth may be charged $37 for the amended certificate she needs to obtain a qualifying ID. Texas voters born in other States may be required to pay substantially more than that. Op. 71–74.
The potential magnitude of racially discriminatory voterdisenfranchisement counseled hesitation before disturbing the District Court’s findings and final judgment. Senate Bill 14 may prevent more than 600,000 registered Texasvoters (about 4.5% of all registered voters) from voting in person for lack of compliant identification. Id., at 50–51,
54. A sharply disproportionate percentage of those voters are African-American or Hispanic. Ibid.
Unsurprisingly, Senate Bill 14 did not survive federalpreclearance under §5 of the Voting Rights Act. A threejudge District Court unanimously determined that the law would have a prohibited discriminatory effect on minority voters. See Texas v. Holder, 888 F. Supp. 2d 113, 115, 138 (DC 2012) (Tatel, J.). Although this Court vacated thepreclearance denial in light of Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U. S. ___ (2013), racial discrimination in elections inTexas is no mere historical artifact. To the contrary,Texas has been found in violation of the Voting Rights Act in every redistricting cycle from and after 1970. Op. 7. See, e.g., Texas v. United States, 887 F. Supp. 2d 133 (DC 2012) (Griffith, J.). The District Court noted particularly plaintiffs’ evidence—largely unchallenged by Texas— regarding the State’s long history of official discriminationin voting, the statewide existence of racially polarized voting, the incidence of overtly racial political campaigns,the disproportionate lack of minority elected officials, andthe failure of elected officials to respond to the concerns of minority voters. Op. 3–13, 122–126, 144–147.
The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in 7 Cite as: 574 U. S. ____ (2014)

G

this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters. To prevent thatdisenfranchisement, I would vacate the Fifth Circuit’s stayof the permanent injunction ordered by the District Court.

Voter fraud is a fiction. Voter fraud involving undocumented/illegal immigrants is a ridiculous fiction.

Try to think about it dumbass.....think hard.....don't you just know that every undocumented/illegal person in the country immediately troops down and registers to vote as soon as possible. Right? Isn't that your premise? That there are illegals who just can't wait to go down, register to vote, vote in an election and get caught and charged with a felony? I mean, that makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Think, dumbass. You're an idiot, it makes zero sense. Undocumented immigrants try to have as little as possible to do with anything governmental. Registering to vote is the last thing on their minds and believe me....serving on a jury is something that never ever occurs to them. They are too busy trying to find a job to feed their family.

That is why it never or very very very rarely happens.

Show me any link, any citation, any support at all for the proposition that illegal aliens voting in an election had any impact on that election,

I'm listening.

Oh, and what is the source for your statements about district courts "cross-checking" names of voters? Be interested to see where that came from. Originally Posted by timpage

You want a "link, any citation, any support at all" for my claims? Ok, you asked for it. Here's a lengthy, impressively researched, carefully footnoted, eye-opening link. I urge you to read it in its entirety. Or as someone else might put it:

"I realize this will be a chore for you...in fact, I realize that this is a task almost certainly beyond your limited intellectual capabilities. But, give it a try."

The opening sentence mentions the General Accounting Office (GAO) as the source of the finding that up to 3% of all registered voters called for jury duty in one US district court were non-citizens. Did you think I made it up, timmytard?

As for your insistence that "registering to vote is the last thing on the minds" of undocumented immigrants, I will let the link answer you:



The frequent claim that illegal aliens do not register in order "to stay below the radar"[16] misses the fact that many aliens apparently believe that the potential benefit of registering far outweighs the chances of being caught and prosecuted. Many district attorneys will not prosecute what they see as a "victimless and non-violent" crime that is not a priority.[17]

On the benefit side of the equation, a voter registration card is an easily obtainable document - they are routinely issued without any checking of identification - that an illegal alien can use for many different purposes, including obtaining a driver's license, qualifying for a job, and even voting.[18] The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, for example, requires employers to verify that all newly hired employees present documentation verifying their identity and legal authorization to work in the United States.[19] In essence, this means that new employees have to present evidence that they are either U.S. citizens or legal aliens with a work permit. The federal I-9 form that employers must complete for all new employees provides a list of documentation that can be used to establish identity - including a voter registration card.[20]

How aliens view the importance of this benefit was illustrated by the work of a federal grand jury in 1984 that found large numbers of aliens registered to vote in Chicago. As the grand jury reported, many aliens "register to vote so that they can obtain documents identifying them as U.S. citizens" and have "used their voters' cards to obtain a myriad of benefits, from social security to jobs with the Defense Department."[21] The U.S. Attorney at the time estimated that there were at least 80,000 illegal aliens registered to vote in Chicago, and dozens were indicted and convicted for registering and voting.[22]

The grand jury's report resulted in a limited cleanup of the voter registration rolls in Chicago, but just one year later, INS District Director A. D. Moyer testified before a state legislative task force that 25,000 illegal and 40,000 legal aliens remained on the rolls in Chicago. Moyer told the Illinois Senate that non-citizens registered so they could get a voter registration card for identification, adding that the card was "a quick ticket into the unemployment compensation system."[23] An alien from Belize, for example, testified that he and his two sisters were able to register easily because they were not asked for any identification or proof of citizenship and lied about where they were born. After securing registration, he voted in Chicago.

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...citizen-voting



Still think it makes "zero sense" for undocumented folks to register to vote? Still think voter fraud is a "ridiculous fiction"? As someone else might put it:

"Try to think about it, dumbass.....think hard....."

.

Here's something else for you to chew on moron....Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg shredding arguments relating to Voter ID laws in Texas.... Originally Posted by timpage

Hey timmytard, isn't that the just-released decision where Ginsburg is in the minority? I guess that means her arguments didn't sway the rest of the Court, did they?

Question - where is the majority opinion? Is it online yet? Did you read it? If not, how can you be sure that Ginsburg "shredded" the arguments embraced by the majority?

An impartial judge or attorney doesn't make up his/her mind until they have heard BOTH sides of an argument, right timmytard?

.

Yes, more non-existent vote fraud. And yes, we will say it appears the machine was not calibrated. Isn't that what the article that you posted up says? Without refutation by anyone? Originally Posted by timpage

You don't really understand do you? Why aren't you in the circus with the other pinheads. How many people used that "uncalibrated" voting machine and cast votes for democrats? By the way, I was an election judge a few times and the judges don't do any "calibrations".

Of course we now have reports of voter fraud in South Carolina and Georgia using the black churches and the NAACP.

I always get a kick out of the "voter fraud doesn't exist" argument.

First off, being a Kansan, and remembering my state's history, I know first hand that voter fraud can and does happen. Kansas had to vote three times on the issue of being a slave state or free state. Those damned Missourians kept crossing the border and stuffing the ballot boxes.

So...voter fraud HAS happened.....CAN happen.....and undoubtedly does happen.

Secondly, you just have to love the hypocrisy of saying "Voter fraud is a paranoid delusion thought up by xenophobes - except where Bush is concerned. Yeah. That was voter fraud. Yup yup" Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

Hey! My ancestors did that in self defense. We were tired of John Brown killing our farmers. Until recently you did have Fred Phelps doing almost the same thing.

It saved the dead from having to vote. Originally Posted by i'va biggen

It's not the dead, it's the elderly. We have a shitload of 164 year old New Yorkers registered to vote.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

You follow me around like a puppy wanting to please it's alpha dog.

Voter fraud is a fiction. Voter fraud involving undocumented/illegal immigrants is a ridiculous fiction.

Try to think about it dumbass.....think hard.....don't you just know that every undocumented/illegal person in the country immediately troops down and registers to vote as soon as possible. Right? Isn't that your premise? That there are illegals who just can't wait to go down, register to vote, vote in an election and get caught and charged with a felony? I mean, that makes perfect sense, doesn't it? Think, dumbass. You're an idiot, it makes zero sense. Undocumented immigrants try to have as little as possible to do with anything governmental. Registering to vote is the last thing on their minds and believe me....serving on a jury is something that never ever occurs to them. They are too busy trying to find a job to feed their family.

That is why it never or very very very rarely happens.

Show me any link, any citation, any support at all for the proposition that illegal aliens voting in an election had any impact on that election,

I'm listening.

Oh, and what is the source for your statements about district courts "cross-checking" names of voters? Be interested to see where that came from. Originally Posted by timpage

Here you go. Clay County, MO. A couple of dozen illegal Somalis voted in an election. The winner, the guy they voted for won by a single vote. The results of the election were changed by the votes of non citizens voting illegally. Now you can kiss my ass and forever more you must admit that voter fraud exists and people have been convicted of it.

http://www.kshb.com/news/political/r...to-voter-fraud

The 1960 election was extremely close. When the votes were finally counted in the Electoral College, Kennedy won the election over Nixon by a margin of 303 to 219. However, Kennedy won by just 112,000 votes out of 68 million cast, or a margin on 0.2 percent of the popular vote. The two states that gave the election to JFK were Texas -- where LBJ had already demonstrated how he could cheat at the polls -- and Illinois:

Chicago's Mayor Daley already had a reputation for stuffing ballot boxes and giving ward bosses and precinct captains vote quotas. Two recounts of Chicago-area voting later showed that Democrats had likely stolen tens of thousands of votes, but most were in the Cook County state's attorney race.

Between classes at the University of Chicago and into the night, sometimes until 2 a.m., Schiller joined other members of Wexler's team to conduct interviews and cull through ballots and election judges' tallies. When Schiller misplaced a draft of a report, a supervisor feared someone had broken in and stolen it.

Wexler's report, issued in April 1961, found "substantial" miscounts in the 1,367 precincts it examined, including unqualified voters, misread voting machines and math mistakes. In one precinct, voters asked where to deposit tickets for a drawing for hams. In another, a precinct captain handed out slips of paper entitling voters to free lunches.

Wexler brought contempt charges against 667 election officials, but the cases were dismissed by a Democratic judge. Three people were convicted on criminal charges.

Schiller thinks now that a Democratic "mechanism was in place" to make sure that party's candidates won — not just in the presidential race, but in local contests. As for the Kennedy-Nixon results in Illinois, he says, "looking at the margin of victory, it's very hard to believe that there wasn't at least a significant likelihood that the outcome would have been different in the state...."

"One of the major consequences is that you can draw a link ... to Watergate in the sense that the lesson Nixon took out of all this is, 'I'm not going to be cheated again. The Democrats play unfairly.' "

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...politics_N.htm