faithful_servant
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2006
- Messages
- 12,533
- Reaction score
- 5,660
- Location
- Beautiful Central Oregon
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Great article but this is the biggest thing that stuck out to me:
Read more @: Jim Crow returns Millions of minority voters threatened by electoral purge
This is a great article. Too bad none of this is actually a criminal offense. The GOP loves these actions, because its simple, they are taking away people who will not vote for them. The GOP is no friend of democracy.
Hmmm: "the actual lists show that not only are middle names commonly mismatched and suffix discrepancies ignored, even birthdates don’t seem to have been taken into account. Moreover, Crosscheck deliberately ignores Social Security mismatches, in the few instances when the numbers are even collected. The Crosscheck instructions for county election officers state, “Social Security numbers are included for verification; the numbers might or might not match.”
Twenty-three percent of the names — nearly 1.6 million of them — lack matching middle names. “Jr.” and “Sr.” are ignored, potentially disenfranchising two generations in the same family. And, notably, of those who may have voted twice in the 2012 presidential election, 27 percent were listed as “inactive” voters, meaning that almost 1.9 million may not even have voted once in that race, according to Crosscheck’s own records."
"The three states’ lists are heavily weighted with names such as Jackson, Garcia, Patel and Kim — ones common among minorities, who vote overwhelmingly Democratic. Indeed, fully 1 in 7 African-Americans in those 27 states, plus the state of Washington (which enrolled in Crosscheck but has decided not to utilize the results), are listed as under suspicion of having voted twice. This also applies to 1 in 8 Asian-Americans and 1 in 8 Hispanic voters. White voters too — 1 in 11 — are at risk of having their names scrubbed from the voter rolls, though not as vulnerable as minorities...
Minority last names are overrepresented in Crosscheck lists
(followed by graph in artcile)"
--But man. You must be a speed reader! Did you even read the article?
So how does this equate to "Jim Crow laws"?
I think its suppression, but i dont think its the moral equivalent to Jim Crow Laws. Title is dramaitc.
Seriously??? This isn't about putting together a list of people who are going to get booted off the voting rolls, it's a list of potential problems. If they are legitimate, then there's no issue, if they aren't, then they should be booted off the voting rolls. There's no doubt that the algorithm being used needs some fine-tuning, but for something this important, common sense dictates that we should err on the side of finding too many, rather than too few.
\So an admittedly flawed program is suppression?
Not true. Over 40,000 have already been polled from the rolls in Virginia based off this list alone. You're telling me that they proved 40,000 + double voted?Unless they prove that there was a double vote, nothing happens.
This program is designed to try to catch those who would commit voter fraud. Is there a problem with that?? It clearly needs some fine-tuning, but the basic idea is sound - would you agree??
So an admittedly flawed program is suppression? Unless they prove that there was a double vote, nothing happens. This program is designed to try to catch those who would commit voter fraud. Is there a problem with that?? It clearly needs some fine-tuning, but the basic idea is sound - would you agree??
LOL, you mean like taking into account middle names, Jr. and Sr., and perhaps not including on a list of potential voters the 27% on that list classified by the list as inactive for not voting ONCE in recent elections? That kind of 'fine tuning'?
In most circumstances we'd call call those "fatal flaws" to their approach, which normally requires "trash" and start over. What's incredible (obvious but shocking nonetheless) is no one is that stupid, so what's the purpose for adopting a process that will inevitably and obviously produce garbage output. That's the answer those defending this approach need to come up with.
It seems to be the Democrats who are most unwilling to change the system and add greater integrity to the electoral system. Eric Holder is one. Truth Serum: Is there voter fraud in America? | On Air Videos | Fox NewsLOL, you mean like taking into account middle names, Jr. and Sr., and perhaps not including on a list of potential DOUBLE voters the 27% on that list classified by the list as inactive for not voting ONCE in recent elections? That kind of 'fine tuning'?
In most circumstances we'd call call those "fatal flaws" to their approach, which normally requires "trash" and start over. What's incredible (obvious but shocking nonetheless) is no one is that stupid, so what's the purpose for adopting a process that will inevitably and obviously produce garbage output. That's the answer those defending this approach need to come up with.
\
When did CrossCheck (AKA Kobach) say the its "flawed"? I think its purposely flawed, to suppress votes.
Not true. Over 40,000 have already been polled from the rolls in Virginia based off this list alone. You're telling me that they proved 40,000 + double voted?
Way more than "fine tuning". More like a restart.
Virginia
Three people were found to have been incorrectly pulled form the rolls and they have been reinstated. It's not like there were 38,000 people wrongly pulled from the rolls, there were three and they were fixed plus, if there are any others, they can still vote using a provisional ballot, so NO ONE got disenfranchised.
As I said, they need to learn from their mistakes and fix them to avoid this kind of thing. Also, you'll note if you read the article linked above, that this was a normal procedure that is done on a regular basis and was upheld in court.
Ok, let's forget Jim Crow. But the article explained and I've pointed out how states are using the list - to send postcards to those on the list that require them to verify their addresses. It's guaranteed that a large number will fail that step, and because of known reasons, MORE likely that poor people will than those not poor, chiefly they're more likely to rent and change addresses.
That's fine, but the FBI guy with a list of 192,000 can't find even ONE person to charge with double voting. Not one. That's all you really need to know about the accuracy of the list.
There really isn't - point me to a single person charged with double voting caught from this list? I haven't seen any, and NC hired a person to do just that who in 5 months found NONE, but maybe there are 20, in all states, and the list is millions long.
Why is this story so familiar - lots of allegations of possible fraud, but all the evidence indicates the problem is actually trivial, at best.
The approach really isn't defensible when they ignore SSN, ignore middle names, and ignore Sr, and Jr. It appears they ignore birthdates and only need a match of first and last name, with a quarter of the suspected double voters classified as inactive because they haven't voted at all recently. It's just a sloppy, laughable approach, so the question is why would a state take that kind of guaranteed to be terrible approach? Are they that incompetent? It's either that or it's a way to legally kick mostly democrats off the registration lists.
"The purge comes a few months after the board said it would use several databases to find voters who were now ineligible to vote, either because they had been convicted of a felony or moved out of state. ".. Hmmm I wonder what database they are using? Oh yea the one named CrossCheck which is incredibly flawed.... Virginia election officials purging almost 40,000 voters - The Washington Post
38,000 were -purged and 37,997 of them were legitimate and the other three were reinstated and if there were any others who were erroneously purged, they can vote using a provisional ballot. Walk in integrity and show the whole story, not just the parts spoon fed to you by Al Jazeera.
Would you rather have someone take an extra look at voting rolls that doesn't need to be made or would you rather just let anyone vote as many as times as they want to?? There's no doubt that this wasn't done well, but at least it's erring on the side of wasting time and resources and not on the side of allowing people to double-vote. You want to toss the whole mess, but that's not what is needed. Fix the problem and move on from there. Learn from the mistakes as you go and make the corrections needed, don't just dump the whole thing.
Howd they get that number? Oh yea using a highly flawed database...
Point me to one person who has been disenfranchised because of this list. And is the "because of known reasons" a Democrat dog whistle or something? People too dumb to return a post card?
Well yay! But wait. He has been on the job 5 months with 192,000 entries to followup on? Hmmm... how many people are under him in the investigation? How many of the 192,000 have been cleared? Since these are interstate registration issues how much jurisdiction does a contractor in NC have in, say, GA? Do you know? How many should he have caught in 5 months?
And while they have found no evidence of voter fraud, guess what? Al Jeez has also found no evidence of disenfranchisement. All Al Jeez does is talk about "potential", and funny how when they come to the potential dangers of the list they don't actually quote anyone but the goblins in the head of the author. If Crosscheck determines that the double entry is because someone moved out of state and they remove them fro the state register am I suppose to scream voter suppression?
You really have a problem with cleaning up election rolls, don't you?
You are making things up at this point. The Crosscheck creates a list of potential double votes that then must be investigate by the states. The states then weed out the entries that aren't voter fraud and clarify the residence of others that appear to have duplicate entries. This is how you update databases.
You're trying to miss the point - never said too dumb, said that poor people RENT and therefore MOVE more often so WILL NOT GET the postcard. See the difference?
See, I know you're not serious. Are you telling me you'd hire someone to prosecute double voting, provide him a list with 192,000 likely fraudulent voters, and if after five months you as his boss can't go to the press with even ONE name, you think he's done his job? LMFAO. If you're honest, you KNOW you'd fire the guy, unless you don't actually expect him to find more than a handful....
The process is bogus, and produces garbage. I'm not sure what more you need to know. And why would you support such obvious incompetence on the part of the people doing the 'match?'
Not at all. I just have a problem with a process to allegedly do that that is so obviously incompetent and produces predictable garbage? Ignores Jr. and Sr.? Middle names? You have to be kidding me.
But if you are an election administrator, tell me any reason in the world you'd want a list of people whose middle names do not match? Your first step is tossing those right off the bat. Also, those with inactive registrations on one side or the other - they're not double voters. Why would you want YOUR staff to figure that out? Etc. You're defending incompetence. Not sure why.
Or do you advocate for not following the law?
You are supposed to send the election board a notice of address change. Whose fault is it if the election board was not notified?
Well, first your formulation of your statement is wrong. He was hired to check the list, not find voter fraud. If the list has found no fraud in 5 months guess what: NOBODY WAS DISENFRANCHISED.
Secondly, I guess it's because you are a Democrat, but you assume that the goal here is a political stunt, it's not. It is to verify the US voter rolls. Whether the end result is no fraud and a verfied voter list or some fraud and a verified voter list is a mission accomplished.
That isn't incompetent, it is what is known in data management as a first-pass. Many millions of voters were eliminated on 0 and 1 degree of correlation, 2 degrees and above were passed to the human checkers. Then the state takes these lists and pairs them down, eliminating the entries where only a few criteria match. I am more willing to level incompetence on, say, a website that dies the day it is turned on than a first-pass data clean up that contains false positives.
Fun Fact: The middle name on my official birth Certificate is different than my middle name on my social security card due to a screw up by the hospital. I've never really fixed it because I have gained government security clearances, loans etc. without it ever being a problem. I could, theoretically, register to vote in one state with my drivers license and social security card and register in another state with my birth certificate and my middle name would not match.
This would be especially easy living in the Washington DC area since I have 4 states and Washington DC withing an hour's drive of my home.
I don't do that, but it's possible.
This measure seems to be highly discriminatory against double voters.
You're supposed to, but very few do, especially if you're moving every 6 months or year, which is obviously more common for the poor than the wealthy.
Not what the press release from NC said. “Stuber’s focused experience will enhance our Agency’s ability to detect and combat voter fraud and violations of campaign finance law....investigate cases of possible voter fraud identified by an interstate cross-check comparing election records from 28 states."
I assume it's a political stunt because it's been led from the beginning by a very partisan republican, Kris Kobach, and is being pursued almost entirely in red states. And at its core it's not hard at all to see that it's just another form of voter caging. Instead of registered mail, they're sending out postcards. Probably more effective than most cases of voter caging. If that's the case, lots of false positives is a feature, not a bug. Hmm....... Partisan GOPer leading an effort that identifies lots of false positives, which can be used by republican election officials to purge voters off the registration rolls.
I'm sorry, but I see no advantage for the 'human checkers' to bother with a list that doesn't distinguish between different middle names.
Yes, but every state has a record of your vote, your SSN and birth date, your last name. And each time you'd be committing a felony. Seems to deter about 99.9999% or more of potential fraudsters.
And for some odd reason, this list of double voters has been in use since 2005. At best (from what I found) it identified 14 possible cases in Kansas, no convictions, and similar trivial amounts of possible cases, with no or less than a handful of convictions elsehwhere. So it's not identifying fraud more than the trivial. And when a partisan engages in massive efforts that generates millions of names, and almost NO cases of actual fraud, I'm wondering what the real point is. If the point is a different type of voter caging, the strategy makes sense. If it's to identify double voters and "voter fraud" it doesn't. So I go with the one that makes sense.
If they don't then IT IS THEIR FAULT, not the fault of people who have been hired to clean up the voter rolls.
And the screening has at this point found little or no double voting fraud. The left has spun this into insane, bulls*** "Jim Crow" claims. You say you want tto just ignore the "Jim Crow" thing but that won't happen. The attempts to make this a racial hot point is the real problem here, not the process to check for voter fraud.
The political stunt in the left wing nut jobs screaming "JIM CROW!!" because someone wants to check the voter rolls for errors.
It is a first pass screening. It isn't supposed to do anything other than filter out the very low correlation data. I'm sorry you don't understand how the process works.
Maybe, but it is a really wierd thing for you to say since you seem so vehemently opposed to confirming that is the case.
The problem, JasperL, is that regular routine screening of voter eligibility, when regular and routine, will not turn up a lot of voter fraud because it is regular and routine. It's like bitching that there are security guards at a bank when it has never been robbed.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?