Experts: California voter registration system 'highly susceptible' to fraud

[natsb]

Let's see now - You have a system where when you get a driver's licence, you are automatically registered to vote unless you check a box that states that you are not in this country legally. If you check that box and then the political climate of CA changes or a good INS official gets a court order for those records, you could very well be setting yourself up for deportation at best and criminal charges at worst. So the system is set up to encourage people to not check that box. This means that with a simple choice to not check one box on a form, ANY illegal immigrant can become a registered voter.

Don't forget the added bonus to the California motor voter law. If the illegal voter does get caught, they are automatically deemed not guilty of voter fraud. What a nice deal. They are not supposed to vote, but if they do, it is not their fault. Why would they not vote? There is no risk for them.

 

[Kal'Stang]

When it comes to actual voter fraud...voter registration fraud is pretty irrelevant, too.

So instead of just looking California's voter registration...why not look at how Wisconsin got caught "vote padding", too?

Math "error" in Wisconsin county hints at how state may have been rigged for Donald Trump - Palmer Report


If it happened there it could happen anywhere.

Why not look into them both? Like you say, if it happened there it could happen anywhere. So why not institute programs to identify them all? Not just select ones.

 

[katzgar]

As I've said multiple times. There can be no proof in either direction when there is no system in place to detect the kind of fraud that we are talking about. So claiming that there is none going on because "there is no proof" is nothing more than a lie based on no factual information. Heck, you couldn't even give a decent response to what I said. Just denials.

There is no response to be made didily is didily it's that simple

 

[JackA]

The Left hates me...because even though they call me this or that - I am usually eventually proven correct.

I've been standing fast to my belief that Hillary did not win the popular LEGAL vote and that eventually this would be revealed.....

As predicted, that evidence will slowly come to light. It begins. Of course, they're only saying what makes common sense.
In numerous posts in the past, I posted precisely why I came to that conclusion.
The deniers will continue to deny, even after the proof becomes public.
Just as they denied Trump could ever win, and after he did, claimed that he is an "illegitimate".

In addition to California. many other blue states will be shown to have had substantial voter fraud. The underlying cause being that the commander in chief basically approved.
Red states on the other hand did not have the degree of fraud, because they were fearful of the DOJ under Obama who would not approve.

Experts: California voter registration system 'highly susceptible' to fraud | Fox News

I'm on the Left. I get weary of the simple mindedness behind your posts and those of many others on the ideological Right, but I don't hate you. My sense is that other liberals don't hate you either. I think your confusion about this is another manifestation of the simple mindedness I just mentioned. The linked article from Fox is about problems with voter registration. The article glibly assumes that these problems mean voter fraud exists on a massive scale. The article fails to mention the many studies that have shown this not to be true and also fails to mention even a single study that shows it is true. But, no worries, you and your compadres are happy not to be bothered with having to make the trying mental leap from point A to point B. You seldom are.

 

[Kal'Stang]

There is no response to be made didily is didily it's that simple

:shrug: If you don't want to ensure that our voting is secure that is your problem. I'll support almost anything that improves the security of it.

 

[katzgar]

:shrug: If you don't want to ensure that our voting is secure that is your problem. I'll support almost anything that improves the security of it.

Now your post suggest that you think you know what's going on in my brain pitiful diddly is Diddley is diddley

 

[Kal'Stang]

Now your post suggest that you think you know what's going on in my brain pitiful diddly is Diddley is diddley

Nope, I just know what you have said. :shrug:

 

[katzgar]

Nope, I just know what you have said. :shrug:

when you get some proof of fraud come back, until then you got diddly

 

[Kal'Stang]

when you get some proof of fraud come back, until then you got diddly

When you get some proof that there isn't then get back to ME. Oh wait, you can't get such proof because there's nothing that actually checks for illegal immigrants voting. :doh

 

[katzgar]

When you get some proof that there isn't then get back to ME. Oh wait, you can't get such proof because there's nothing that actually checks for illegal immigrants voting. :doh

the assertion is yours so the need for proof is in your court.

 

[Kal'Stang]

the assertion is yours so the need for proof is in your court.

And the assertion that they're not is yours so the proof for that is in your court. I on the other hand have admitted that there is no direct proof. But that there is circumstantial evidence that it may be happening. You can't even give that much.

 

[katzgar]

And the assertion that they're not is yours so the proof for that is in your court. I on the other hand have admitted that there is no direct proof. But that there is circumstantial evidence that it may be happening. You can't even give that much.

proof is proof, until than it is just foolishness.

 

[ocean515]

Really? How, exactly, is the election system here corrupted and when did that happen?

One could say October 10, 2015, when Gov. Brown signed the efforts of his liberal/socialist progressive legislators, providing the means to allow illegal aliens to vote without repercussions.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1461

Excerpt:

This bill would provide that if a person who is ineligible to vote becomes registered to vote by operation of the California New Motor Voter Program in the absence of a violation by that person of the crime described above, that person’s registration shall be presumed to have been effected with official authorization and not the fault of that person. The bill would also provide that if a person who is ineligible to vote becomes registered to vote by operation of this program, and that person votes or attempts to vote in an election held after the effective date of the person’s registration, that person shall be presumed to have acted with official authorization and is not guilty of fraudulently voting or attempting to vote, unless that person willfully votes or attempts to vote knowing that he or she is not entitled to vote.​

So a rational person would look at the provision in bold, and underlined, and ask, why did the Liberal/Socialist Progressives who run California insert that language into law, if it were impossible for an in-eligible voter to become registered to vote, and in fact vote as a result?

So, you were saying?

 

[Kal'Stang]

proof is proof, until than it is just foolishness.

Something which you still have yet to provide. Even circumstantial would be something. You've not provided any at all. All you've done is deny, deny, deny, deny. You do realize that just because you deny something doesn't mean that it can't be true right?

 

[katzgar]

Something which you still have yet to provide. Even circumstantial would be something. You've not provided any at all. All you've done is deny, deny, deny, deny. You do realize that just because you deny something doesn't mean that it can't be true right?

trying to tranfer your foolishness to me is just plain absurd. aqain until there is proof there is no proof

 

[Kal'Stang]

trying to tranfer your foolishness to me is just plain absurd. aqain until there is proof there is no proof

No direct proof either way. I at least admit that. Why can't you? No proof does not equal no possibility of proof. Every scientist worth their salt in any scientific profession would say that. They would also admit that the only way to get proof for either side would be to set up a system to determine whether the statement is true or false. Something which you are not even willing to consider setting up. Why is that?

 

[katzgar]

No direct proof either way. I at least admit that. Why can't you? No proof does not equal no possibility of proof. Every scientist worth their salt in any scientific profession would say that. They would also admit that the only way to get proof for either side would be to set up a system to determine whether the statement is true or false. Something which you are not even willing to consider setting up. Why is that?

I am certainly prepared to admit there is no proof. there is no conversation except to say get some proof. this stuff aint hard.

 

[Kal'Stang]

I am certainly prepared to admit there is no proof. there is no conversation except to say get some proof. this stuff aint hard.

Then I'm quite sure that you support Trumps call to investigate to find out if illegal aliens are voting...right? Particularly in major hubs of illegal immigrants?

 

[katzgar]

Then I'm quite sure that you support Trumps call to investigate to find out if illegal aliens are voting...right? Particularly in major hubs of illegal immigrants?

come back when you have proof until then you got diddly

 

[Kal'Stang]

come back when you have proof until then you got diddly

That's what I thought. Thanks for playing. :2wave:

 

[katzgar]

That's what I thought. Thanks for playing. :2wave:

nothing to play till there is proof

 

[Tanngrisnir]

One could say October 10, 2015, when Gov. Brown signed the efforts of his liberal/socialist progressive legislators, providing the means to allow illegal aliens to vote without repercussions.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1461

Excerpt:

This bill would provide that if a person who is ineligible to vote becomes registered to vote by operation of the California New Motor Voter Program in the absence of a violation by that person of the crime described above, that person’s registration shall be presumed to have been effected with official authorization and not the fault of that person. The bill would also provide that if a person who is ineligible to vote becomes registered to vote by operation of this program, and that person votes or attempts to vote in an election held after the effective date of the person’s registration, that person shall be presumed to have acted with official authorization and is not guilty of fraudulently voting or attempting to vote, unless that person willfully votes or attempts to vote knowing that he or she is not entitled to vote.​

So a rational person would look at the provision in bold, and underlined, and ask, why did the Liberal/Socialist Progressives who run California insert that language into law, if it were impossible for an in-eligible voter to become registered to vote, and in fact vote as a result?

So, you were saying?

A. The poster stated it happened 'years ago', so one would think there would a be something of more substance over a greater time span.
B. What you cited isn't evidence of any corruption, since there's no evidence of illegals voting.
C. A rational person would understand that substantiating the claim of CA's system becoming corrupt would include evidence of actual corruption.
D. There are no socialists in the CA legislature.

So, you were saying?

 

[ocean515]

A. The poster stated it happened 'years ago', so one would think there would a be something of more substance over a greater time span.
B. What you cited isn't evidence of any corruption, since there's no evidence of illegals voting.
C. A rational person would understand that substantiating the claim of CA's system becoming corrupt would include evidence of actual corruption.
D. There are no socialists in the CA legislature.

So, you were saying?

Do you really think your waving of a hand deletes the ramifications of legislation that makes it legal for illegal aliens to vote?

Why would they adopt and pass it, if there was no possibility such votes could or have taken place?

Obviously, you had no idea the California Legislature, and Gov. Brown made it legal for illegal aliens to vote. All they have to do is say oops I didn't know, and their vote is already in the ballot box, and they can just walk away, every time..

Since votes are anonymous, there is no way to do anything about it. Can't say they did vote, and can't really say they didn't if no one is looking.

You should work harder to hide your lack of credibility on this issue and how your partisanship blinds you from indisputable facts.

 

[calamity]

Is this like the story where FoxNews claimed that an anti-Trump Republican committed voter fraud? Or how about the time they claimed Hillary was going to be indicted because of the Clinton foundation?

Fox News still hasn't apologized for claiming a Moroccan shot up the mosque in Canada.

I think the OP needs to find another source.

I bet fox makes no mention of the people in Trump's inner circle who are registered to vote in more than one state.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Do you really think your waving of a hand deletes the ramifications of legislation that makes it legal for illegal aliens to vote?

What can be asserted w/out evidence can be dismissed w/out evidence. Duh.

Why would they adopt and pass it, if there was no possibility such votes could or have taken place?

You offer conjecture. I asked for evidence of this so-called 'corruption.

Obviously, you had no idea the California Legislature, and Gov. Brown made it legal for illegal aliens to vote. All they have to do is say oops I didn't know, and their vote is already in the ballot box, and they can just walk away, every time..

I'm quite familiar with the details; I live here and make it my business to know. Obviously you have no idea what 'evidence' or 'supporting an argument' mean. There is no evidence that what you're speculating about has actually happened.

Since votes are anonymous, there is no way to do anything about it. Can't say they did vote, and can't really say they didn't if no one is looking.

You should work harder to hide your lack of credibility on this issue and how your partisanship blinds you from indisputable facts.

You should consider getting assistance in forming a cogent argument based on actual facts and not conjecture and speculation.

And, no, I'm not a dem and not partisan, regardless of how much you wish I were.

Stee-rike two.