XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politcs.liberalism, alt.politics.democrats   
   XPost: alt.politics.liberal, alt.politics.obama   
   From: emoneyjoe@iglou.com   
      
   On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 18:41:06 -0700, Yoorghis@Jurgis.net wrote:   
      
   >On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 19:21:12 -0500, emoneyjoe    
   >wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 16:06:23 -0700, Yoorghis@Jurgis.net wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 16:59:45 -0500, emoneyjoe    
   >>>wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>>Dead people CANNOT Vote, you idiot   
   >>>>   
   >>>>       But you can using their name.  :-)   
   >>>   
   >>>Not.   
   >>>   
   >>>You have to present identification   
   >>   
   >>     Yeah, like criminals have trouble   
   >>getting fake picture IDs.   
   >   
   >So, you think that that there's going to be hundreds and hundreds of   
   >"fake ID's" to match voter rolls supplied by the SECSTATE?   
      
          I could write a lot of jokes here, but it   
   is not a laughing matter.   
      
      
   >You simply ain't got brain a one.   
      
          The way it was originally was supposed   
   to work was when a person signed in to   
   vote, the multi-party precinct workers were   
   able to challenge the voter if they did not   
   recognize them or they were not on the list.   
      
         But with early voting and absentee   
   voting, anything is possible.    The problem   
   is that after the election, it isn't possible   
   to prove much of anything.   
         If there is a lot of registration fraud   
   or irregularities, how can anybody be   
   sure that there was no votes that were   
   fraudulent?   
      
      
        Why is there any objection to using   
   modern technology to document who   
   votes?   
      
        There is a good argument for having   
   the whole thing done in one appearance.   
   Why does there have to be a voting day,   
   why not just have a voting period, say   
   the entire month of October and the   
   days up until the traditional election day.   
      
        Your objection to that will be that   
   not everybody can make an appearance.   
      
        The sad fact is, that no matter what   
   the rules, there will be instances of   
   voter fraud, "lost" ballots, "misplaced"   
   ballots, more ballots than registrations,   
   more voters than voter signatures,   
   "substituted" ballots, "mismarked"   
   ballots, and a number of other tricks   
   by vain people thinking they are   
   doing something important.   
      
      
        My impression is, those who   
   object to attempting to have a   
   system that is hard to cheat on,   
   are the people that would cheat.   
      
        I trust everybody, until they   
   show they can't be trusted.   
       But that wouldn't work unless   
   there was a way to prove a voter   
   was not who they claimed to be,   
   or that they voted more than once,   
   and that no ballots could be lost   
   or mismarked, or substituted or   
   extra ballots entered.   
      
        I give up the election is over,   
   stolen, or not.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)