34Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteWe are a country that is so technologically advanced, we can bomb cities and conduct wars by using joy sticks, 15,000 miles away.
Yet we still account our elections using an abacus.
Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Moderator
Yeah... yeah... critics here of voter ID and other laws cracking down on voter fraud tell us all the time they’re unnecessary because fraud is nonexistent.
Proven voter fraud, statistically, happens about as often as death by lightning strike they insist.
Well, lightning is suddenly all over Hamilton County which includes Cincinnati, Ohio.
But wait! There's more!The Hamilton County Board of Elections is investigating 19 possible cases of alleged voter fraud following months of investigation after the 2012 election.
Twenty-eight subpoenas have been issued as a result of the investigation, which includes 19 Hamilton County voters and nine witnesses who still need to answer questions to satisfy the board.
The board started with 80 suspicious cases and now are down to 19. Officials say the majority of the cases turned out to be simple misunderstandings.
Melowese Richardson, a Madisonville resident, first learned of the allegations when approached by 9 On Your Side reporter Tom McKee Wednesday. Even though she admits to voting twice in the last election, she said the news came as surprise.
"I would think that something this important would come to me first and that I wouldn't have to be enlightened about this through you," said Richardson.
According to county documents, Richardson's absentee ballot was accepted on Nov. 1, 2012 along with her signature. On Nov. 11, she told an official she also voted at a precinct because she was afraid her absentee ballot would not be counted in time.
"There's absolutely no intent on my part to commit voter fraud," said Richardson.
According to BOE records, her name appeared on an absentee ballot list prior to Election Day. The board's report states poll workers should have updated the signature poll book by flagging "absentee voter" next to the names of those who appeared on the list. Upon investigation it was found that none of the voters who appeared on the list were flagged, which included Richardson. The staff could not locate that supplemental list when asked.
Richardson voted at the Madisonville Recreation Center where she worked as a paid worker on Election Day.
She has worked the polls since 1988. Richardson said in her youth she would accompany her mother, who also worked at the polls, even thought she wasn't old enough to vote at the time.
"I, after registering thousands of people, certainly wanted my vote to count. So, I voted. I voted at the poll," she said.
The board's documents also state that Richardson was allegedly disruptive and hid things from other poll workers on Election Day after another female worker reported she was intimated by Richardson.
However, Richardson claims she was the one intimidated while doing her job.
"I think I was intimidated because she's new and wasn't doing her job very efficiently and like I said, I've been working the pools for several years. I let her know how it should have been taken care of," said Richardson.
But hey... she thought voting for other people was legal... But as far as she is concerned, it was all for a good cause...During the investigation it was also discovered that her granddaughter, India Richardson, who was a first time voter in the 2012 election, cast two ballots in November.
Documents show when India was contacted on Jan. 17 concerning the two ballots, she denied voting absentee.
She stated, "No, my grandmother filled that out and voted my ballot because she didn't think I would go do it, but I did. I voted provisionally at my polling place on Election Day," according to the report.
Richardson admitted to sending one of her granddaughter's ballots in the mail.
"I did let her know that I was getting the absentee ballot for her and sending it in. I had to get her Social Security number for that. I assumed she forgot or was just excited and she went to the polls herself," said Richardson.
Another claim is absentee ballots for Montez Richardson, Joseph Jones and Markus Barron all came from Richardson's Whetsel Avenue address were received by the board the same time as Richardson's and the handwriting on all four of them was similar.
"Markus Barron lives here. Joseph Jones is my brother. He's here from time-to-time. I am Montez's power-of-attorney. I voted for her in her absence," said Richardson.
She said she thought all of the votes were legal. The matter may still wind up before the Hamilton County prosecutor.
This is just one county, in a state were Obama only won by 166,214 votes. All the voting under investigation is Democratic."Absolutely. Absolutely, I'll fight it for Mr. Obama and for Mr. Obama's right to sit as president of the United States."
If we once had an election that was fair, honest, and only had legal votes by legal citizens the Democrats would lose by a mile...
Poll worker accused of voter fraud in Hamilton County speaks out
Secretary of Defense
We are a country that is so technologically advanced, we can bomb cities and conduct wars by using joy sticks, 15,000 miles away.
Yet we still account our elections using an abacus.
I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and …to have the rewards of their own industry. -Calvin Coolidge
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
Your last statement is just pure conjecture and I'm sure assumes that voter fraud only occurs on the D side since the R side is all as pure as Galahad.Originally Posted by tsquare
There are 88 counties in Ohio. And if this is in Cincinnati, it's likely a heavily populated county. If all counties had 20 fraudulent voters than that would be about 1700 votes or about 1% of the margin of victory. Even if the other counties had a rate 10 times higher, I can't get from there to your win by a mile.
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie
Secretary of Defense
What are these abacuses you speak of? UK elections are still counted by hand with the thought of computerized voting being like some magic from Narnia we just find suspicious.
You'd laugh your arses off if you could see the state of some of the polling booths my Mum and I have set up. We proudly run our elections on a shoestring with a pencil being about the most high tech piece of technology unless you count blue tack.
Secretary of Defense
If that is the case, Peter, I hereby extend an official U.S. welcome to the club: You can now be as embarassed as we are.
This is pretty typical avoidance and misdirection, Herm.
When confronted with something about which "you" (not you specifically, but "you" generically) don't want to hear or don't want to further understand, "you" typically respond with something like your minimizing comment, above. Sure, I guess it COULD be the case that they've only found 20 in that one county so there can only be 20 anywhere else in the state (or the country), but I see that as pretty darned unlikely. Possibly, they only found 20 amongst those 80 they looked at. If that was an adequate sampling size, your 1% extrapolation is woefully inadequate. If 80 is an appropriate sample, they found 25% of those to be suspect which is a much larger number than your 1%, right?
I figure 19 is but the tip of the iceberg and Hamilton County but one of (as you say) 88 counties of varying size which will necessitate sample sizes of varying size to yield statistically relevant data.
Now, as to your opening gambit (that we're only concerned when the democraps profit from fraud), it is irrelevant to T's opening post. Since Obama won Ohio, it doesn't really matter whether or not the Republicans also cheated. NOW, if you'd like to open a full investigation into the fraud, I'm certain the sample sizes would appropriately increase to cover both parties and let the chips fall where they may: If both parties cheated, then let's get it to an "adjusted net vote" and whomever owns the higer ANV, they win the state. Then, let's move on to all 50 states, just to be fair.
I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and …to have the rewards of their own industry. -Calvin Coolidge
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
Well, I did give t the benefit of an assumed rate 10x higher than the one actually seen, so I don't think I'm overly minimizing there. I mean that is a whole power of 10, I think generously conservative.If that is the case, Peter, I hereby extend an official U.S. welcome to the club: You can now be as embarassed as we are.
This is pretty typical avoidance and misdirection, Herm.
When confronted with something about which "you" (not you specifically, but "you" generically) don't want to hear or don't want to further understand, "you" typically respond with something like your minimizing comment, above. Sure, I guess it COULD be the case that they've only found 20 in that one county so there can only be 20 anywhere else in the state (or the country), but I see that as pretty darned unlikely. Possibly, they only found 20 amongst those 80 they looked at. If that was an adequate sampling size, your 1% extrapolation is woefully inadequate. If 80 is an appropriate sample, they found 25% of those to be suspect which is a much larger number than your 1%, right?
I figure 19 is but the tip of the iceberg and Hamilton County but one of (as you say) 88 counties of varying size which will necessitate sample sizes of varying size to yield statistically relevant data.
Now, as to your opening gambit (that we're only concerned when the democraps profit from fraud), it is irrelevant to T's opening post. Since Obama won Ohio, it doesn't really matter whether or not the Republicans also cheated. NOW, if you'd like to open a full investigation into the fraud, I'm certain the sample sizes would appropriately increase to cover both parties and let the chips fall where they may: If both parties cheated, then let's get it to an "adjusted net vote" and whomever owns the higer ANV, they win the state. Then, let's move on to all 50 states, just to be fair.
The 80 cases reviewed were already suspected fraud, so finding 25% off ALL votes fraudulent is hard to get behind if only 25% of suspected fraud bears out. You don't seriously believe 1 in 4 votes to be suspect, do you?
We are already talking abut a heavily populated and D leaning county as our sample case so I think I was being pretty fair in extrapolating that to the more morally upstanding heartland counties, no?
So overall I don't think I am unrealistically minimizing like you say "I" am.
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie
Moderator
And all this over something that many on the left insist doesn't happen at all.
AND... it can all be fixed by applying the very same standards of ID that we use if you want to buy a beer or cigarettes.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
I think the big thing here is that to not be considered a "Poll Tax" the Id would have to be provided free. So far nobody has posted any real evidence of widespread voter fraud. We can all certainly agree it must exist, but the only published numbers I can find for convicted cases are so low as to be absolutely meaningless and probably less than the margin of error in the count itself. So even if we only catch 1 in a 100 it is still not enough fraud to affect an election.
And let's be fair, the story you quote is till under investigation, and so far all you have here is anecdotal evidence of 3 or 4 fraudulent votes, the 19 cases are still not closed.
To me personally, this voter ID seems a "feel good" measure but the reality of providing the ID is that it would cost more than the real gain. It's kind of like drug testing welfare recipients, it was proven in Florida that it cost more to administer than the savings realized by kicking positive testers off the program. I am not in favor of spending money for a "moral victory" that ends up costing me more tax money than maintaining the status quo. I'm sure that's because I don't have any moral compass, but that's another story.
It's a big deal here in Texas, our voter ID law got shot down recently and it's pissing off all the Rs, but really I think they are greedy, they just want to win by even bigger margins. They already control the whole state but are still not satisfied for some reason.
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie
Moderator
I believe there is massive fraud but I don't believe it's at the individual voter level to that extent. I believe the big fraud is at the precincts and above. Ballot boxes and computer tapes, etc. When someone finds hundreds of votes in their trunk days after a close election or people vote in several places, those can add up. I believe it will be a problem with illegal aliens voting when we have no control over who registers to vote and no ID requirements when they do vote.
The modern Liberal is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. OMD
Secretary of Defense
How many (if any) of the 19 alleged cases would have been stopped by a photo ID law?
It doesn't look like it would have mattered in any of the specific instances described.
The problem with tackling voter fraud through IDs is that it would only stop the rarest, most cumbersome, and least efficient sort of fraud. Anyone who seriously wants to defraud the election is going to use absentee ballots (or go after the vote-counting process itself). You could spend all day running from one polling place to another and maybe cast, what, 100 votes? Or you could spend an hour with a database and a laser printer and crank out a few thousand, all with much less personal risk of being caught.
"He has shown you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God."
Micah 6:8
President
Ohio Officials: Poll Worker May Have Voted Six Times - By Eliana Johnson - The Corner - National Review Online
Now she may have voted 6 times.. just in case that ballot didnt get there!
How many of "her" are out there?
Secretary of Defense
In terms of reviewing (or providing) statistically relevant data on which to base a judgement or a decision, what you "think" is entirely irrelevant.
I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and …to have the rewards of their own industry. -Calvin Coolidge
Secretary of State
Voter fraud is going to happen, but even the article does not suggest that fraud occurred enough for Obama to win Ohio (or even Hamilton County.) It would require finding more like 166,000 instances of voter fraud state wide, in Hamilton County it would require finding just shy of 26,000 instances of voter fraud. The link to the "fraud.pdf" from the OP has what, less than 20 (or so) instances. Are we really prepared to say Obama won based on fraud?
- Frustrated Independent
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
"Every time something really bad happens, people cry out for safety, and the government answers by taking rights away from good people.” - Penn Jillette amazingly enough, and I agree.
Forum Administrator 2012 USPOL Most Valuable Poster (MVP)
What I find most interesting in this is that Hamilton County, OH is the Republican equivalent to Illinois's Cook County. If the GOP can't control their "machine" in Hamilton County, then I'd suggest that John Kasich is in deep, deep trouble next year.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
If you want to go down that road, then I see no basis for discussing voter fraud based on any available statistically relevant data, and no point to the thread. If nobody can statistically prove voter fraud influencing an election I can see no logical reason to spend resources to try to prevent it.
This land was made for you and me
-Woody Guthrie
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks