Media Meltdown and also Media Bias 101

[ewsieg]

21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

your point is valid that in the abstract, everyone needs to learn to be a responsible citizen regardless of their economic or racial circumstances. The question is whether constructing hurdles to voting that have no other factually supportable purpose than to be hurdles is even a remotely good or effective way to this.

An ID for a ballot was put in place just to screw over POC?  C'mon Man </Biden voice>

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

An ID for a ballot was put in place just to screw over POC?  C'mon Man </Biden voice>

well, you tell me.  Since most states get by perfectly well without it and voter fraud is virtually non-existent in any state, who put it in place and why?

Just a bunch of petty bureaucrats who think dotted i's need be dotted better? If so they need to get over themselves. If not that, any alternative explanation says something less attractive....

Edited Sunday at 09:38 PM by gehringer_2

[gehringer_2]

2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

well, you tell me.  Since most states get by perfectly well without it and voter fraud is virtually non-existent in any state, who put it in place and why?

Just a bunch of petty bureaucrats who think dotted i's need be dotted better? If so they need to get over themselves. If not that, any alternative explanation says something less attractive....

actually, I'll answer my own question. There is one case where the voter bringing in an ID, particularly a machine readable one like an MDL, is if you have a precinct with 5 guys named Joe Smith. That's a case were the particular ID, tied to some other unique identifier like an MDL# serves a legitimate use in administering the election and insuring the Joe Smith #3 doesn't get to polls only to be told he has already voted because a poll worker entered Joe Smith #2 as having voted at Joe Smith #3. Now it that enough justify the burden on every voter? Obviously SCOTUS has said yes because they haven't overturned the requirement anywhere. Personally, I'd say you can get the same result if ID is optional and you advise people with really common names that they are the best served if they bring ID if they have it,  without burdening everyone. 

In MI ID is requested but you can get a provisional ballot if you don't have it. That's not a terrible compromise.

[chasfh]

In the absence of any evidence that there is widespread voter fraud stemming from lack of ID requirements, I can only conclude that the real reason people insist we must have vote ID is that they want fewer eligible voters to be able to exercise their constitutional and statutory right, because that helps the party they prefer win.

[Tigeraholic1]

Dumb question I know. How could you suspect voter fraud if you can't provide ID/Identity of said fraud suspect?

[CMRivdogs]

25 minutes ago, chasfh said:

In the absence of any evidence that there is widespread voter fraud stemming from lack of ID requirements, I can only conclude that the real reason people insist we must have vote ID is that they want fewer eligible voters to be able to exercise their constitutional and statutory right, because that helps the party they prefer win.

Once again it's another MAGA generated non issue. 
(From ChatGPT)

Quote

 

Recent Data & Proven / Alleged Cases (2020–2024)

 

 

475 Potential Fraud Cases in Six Swing States

After the 2020 election, the Associated Press contacted local election officials in six battleground states. They identified 475 “potential voter fraud” cases.

But those 475 cases were a tiny fraction of the more than 25 million ballots cast in those states.

Importantly, “potential cases” ≠ confirmed fraud. Many are referred to prosecutors, reviewed, or dismissed.

 

Referrals and Prosecutions

In Ohio, for example, the Republican Secretary of State (Frank LaRose) said they referred 630 cases to prosecutors across multiple elections.

According to The Washington Post, a review of election integrity units in several states (Florida, Texas, Georgia, Virginia, Ohio, Arkansas) found 136 prosecutions since 2020.

Some of these prosecutions disproportionately target minorities, according to that Post analysis.

 

Mail / Absentee Voting Fraud

According to Brookings, the rate of mail-ballot fraud in the 2016–2022 general elections was about 0.000043% of mail ballots.

This aligns with broader research showing that mail voting remains very secure.

 

Fake Elector Schemes

There have been high-profile legal cases related to “fake elector” schemes from the 2020 election: e.g., in Arizona, 18 people were indicted for submitting alternate slates of electors.

In Georgia, there’s a racketeering prosecution involving operatives accused of breaching election offices after the 2020 election.

In Michigan, there are also prosecutions related to false electors who created fraudulent certificates claiming Trump won.

 

Election Infrastructure Tampering

In Colorado, a former county clerk (Tina Peters) was sentenced to 9 years in prison for illegally tampering with voting machines.

While not “typical” voter fraud (i.e., impersonation or mail fraud), this is a serious breach of election infrastructure.

 

Nature of the Claims vs. Reality

According to the Brennan Center for Justice, many fraud claims post-2020 were based on misinformation, especially about mail voting or noncitizen voting.

Statistical and forensic analyses (e.g., regression-based studies) have found no evidence of large-scale coordinated fraud in 2020.

A recent working paper looking at Georgia’s 2020 election noted “no indication of widespread fraud” even while identifying some process errors.

 

 

Quote

 

1.  
   • The Brennan Center for Justice estimates impersonation fraud (someone voting as someone else) is between 0.0003% and 0.0025% of votes in studied elections.
   • In a closely examined 2004 Washington State election, fraud occurred at a rate of ~0.0009%, and in a similar Ohio election it was ~0.00004%.
   • Brookings looked at Heritage Foundation data: for example, in Arizona over 25 years, the fraud rate was ~0.0000845%
   •  

 

[ewsieg]

18 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

well, you tell me.  Since most states get by perfectly well without it and voter fraud is virtually non-existent in any state, who put it in place and why?

I have lived in my current home since 2017. Not once has it been broken into, yet my wife insists that we lock our doors at night.  I'm not going to lie, I don't think it's a big deal if I forgot to do it, but I try to remember to do it every night just to satisfy her.   She'll throw out some line like "just because it hasn't happened before, doesn't mean it won't happen".

I feel like if I advertised that I don't think people should lock their doors at night, that could lead to some trouble eventually though.

36 minutes ago, chasfh said:

In the absence of any evidence that there is widespread voter fraud stemming from lack of ID requirements, I can only conclude that the real reason people insist we must have vote ID is that they want fewer eligible voters to be able to exercise their constitutional and statutory right, because that helps the party they prefer win.

And ironically, your same insistence on telling minorities they shouldn't have to get an ID, as I've proven, only hurts the people you claim to want to help.  

[CMRivdogs]

Regarding ID's. I don't have a problem as long as they can be easily provided for all eligible voters. Something conservatives are reluctant to do...

Quote

 

1. In-Person Impersonation Fraud Is Extremely Rare
   • According to election-fraud research, only ~31 credible incidents of in-person voter impersonation have been documented over more than a billion ballots.
   • This is the type of fraud that photo ID laws are often supposed to prevent. But because it’s so rare, even strict ID requirements have limited real fraud-prevention benefit.
   • As the Brennan Center notes, a lot of the fraud people talk about simply isn’t the kind that ID laws address.
2.  
3. Strict Voter ID Laws Can Disenfranchise People Without IDs
   • Many Americans do not have a photo ID that meets strict voter-ID requirements: low-income people, seniors, people of color, and those in rural areas are disproportionately affected.
   • According to one major survey, nearly 21 million voting-age U.S. citizens lack a current driver’s license or state ID.
   • In some real-world cases, voters without acceptable ID actually arrived at polling places and were turned away: for example, in Indiana in 2007.
4.  
5. Impact on Turnout and Elections Is Small but Non-Zero
   • A working paper by economists (Hoekstra & Koppa) found that strict ID laws in Florida and Michigan would at most reduce turnout by a very small percentage (0.06% in Florida; 0.2% in Michigan) under worst-case assumptions.
   • Even if all those disenfranchised votes went to one candidate (a very extreme assumption), only a tiny fraction of elections would be affected.
   • In other words: the “benefit” (fraud reduction) vs the “cost” (disenfranchisement) trade-off is real, and the cost can be meaningful for certain communities.
6.  
7. ID Laws Don’t Address Other Types of Fraud
   • Some of the more common concerns about election misconduct—like absentee/mail ballot fraud, misinformation at polling places, or voter intimidation—are not solved by photo ID laws.
   • The Brennan Center argues that educating poll workers and improving registration systems may be more effective than strict ID mandates for many types of misconduct.
8.  

 

Quote

 

There is evidence of a negative effect, especially for racial minorities and lower-income voters, though the magnitude can vary a lot depending on the study.

The overall effect on turnout (in many states) is small in some rigorous macro-level studies — but “small” does not necessarily mean “zero,” and even a small percentage drop can matter in close races or for specific communities.

A key mechanism of suppression may not be just “voters turned away on Election Day,” but fewer people registering in the first place because of ID barriers.

The harms are not evenly distributed — according to several studies, the burden falls more heavily on underrepresented groups (young people, people of color, low-income).

 

Quote

 

 

According to the Brookings Institution, between 6 and 46 mail-voting fraud cases were identified in each general election, depending on how inclusive you are in counting.

That analysis converts to about 0.000043% fraud rate for mail ballots in the 2016–2022 general elections.

The Brennan Center notes many security features that guard against mail fraud: signature verification, barcodes, tracking, ballot curing, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interpretation: What These Cases Mean in Context

 

 

Real but very rare: The fact that there are prosecuted cases doesn’t mean mail-ballot fraud is rampant. The documented cases are isolated when compared to the millions of mail ballots cast.

Not systemic fraud: There’s no credible evidence from these cases of a widespread, coordinated fraud effort via mail ballots.

Systems work—but are imperfect: The detection in some of these cases (handwriting analysis, signature mismatches) shows that election systems can and do catch fraud. But not all fraud will necessarily be caught.

High-risk scenarios are narrow: Many of the prosecuted cases involve very specific kinds of fraud (forgery, impersonation, deceased voters), not mass-scale ballot buying or wholesale ballot interception.

We are talking about 500 ballots nationwide...

 

 

[ewsieg]

14 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

Once again it's another MAGA generated non issue. 
(From ChatGPT)

I'll give you it was generated by one party, but the refusal to address it by the other party is what made it an issue.  

As I stated before, if you care about someone in the United States, you should be recommending to them that they get a state issued ID.  An additional benefit, on top of the ones I've mentioned and other benefits that I have missed, is it would completely derail this 'non' issue for MAGA.

[CMRivdogs]

17 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I'll give you it was generated by one party, but the refusal to address it by the other party is what made it an issue.  

As I stated before, if you care about someone in the United States, you should be recommending to them that they get a state issued ID.  An additional benefit, on top of the ones I've mentioned and other benefits that I have missed, is it would completely derail this 'non' issue for MAGA.

I agree a state issued ID would be a great solution. It also should be a bipartisan effort to see getting done. Go to the communities and hold several days of opportunities to get an ID, work with local community groups to set up sites and events to do so. Provide counseling or other means to help folks get thru the hoops to obtain the proper papers, birth certificates or whatever to make the process easier on those who don't understand the system.

But what do I know, I'm an old white suburban male

[chasfh]

4 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Dumb question I know. How could you suspect voter fraud if you can't provide ID/Identity of said fraud suspect?

Would you please share with us the data you have at your disposal proving the US electoral system is besieged with widespread voter fraud necessitating voter ID laws? None of us can find any. Anything you can share on this, we'd appreciate. Thanks.

Also, reminder: anecdotes are not data.

[chasfh]

4 hours ago, ewsieg said:

And ironically, your same insistence on telling minorities they shouldn't have to get an ID, as I've proven, only hurts the people you claim to want to help.  

I don't know where you're getting this one, but I have told nobody anything of the sort.

[Tigeraholic1]

38 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Would you please share with us the data you have at your disposal proving the US electoral system is besieged with widespread voter fraud necessitating voter ID laws? None of us can find any. Anything you can share on this, we'd appreciate. Thanks.

Also, reminder: anecdotes are not data.

If there is no requirement to show ID how can you find fraud? Thats the point. 

[gehringer_2]

20 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

If there is no requirement to show ID how can you find fraud? Thats the point. 

Because showing ID has little to do with it. Your precinct has a voter role. You sign your voter application - they match you to an entry from the voter registration role, you vote. If someone else tries to show up using your name - it's immedately obvious something was wrong, if you show up and someone has tried to use your name already - just as obvious. No official ID required for the system to check itself. You don't get to vote by proving who you are on Election Day, you get to vote because you are registered. There is little need for any system of proof beyond the person's attestation because impersonating other people is just not an effective form of voter fraud. What few cases of voter  fraud there are come mostly from people registering where or when they are not legal voters. ID at the poll gets you nowhere against that if the person is already on the rolls but shouldn't be.

Edited 17 hours ago by gehringer_2

[CMRivdogs]

If someone really wants to commit voter fraud, showing a plastic card at the polls isn’t the thing that’s going to stop them. States without photo-ID laws still verify people through registration checks, signature matching, electronic poll books, and audits. You can’t just stroll in, vote as “Bob Smith,” and disappear into the night — the system would flag it long before your imaginary crime spree got off the ground.

Pretty much the same as we've been doing since before you were in diapers. 

[gehringer_2]

6 hours ago, ewsieg said:

have lived in my current home since 2017. Not once has it been broken into, yet my wife insists that we lock our doors at night.  I'm not going to lie, I don't think it's a big deal if I forgot to do it, but I try to remember to do it every night just to satisfy her.   She'll throw out some line like "just because it hasn't happened before, doesn't mean it won't happen".

It's a fairly apt metaphor, but the difference is that your house being broken into isn't a matter of Constitutional rights (granted that's cold comfort if it happens to you, but it is what it is 😉 ), so Constitutional practice demands that there be a actual showing of need before *any* burden is imposed, and for my money the SCOTUS has just been plain been wrong on this issue in letting any state require it - and certainly in any absence of a positive mandate that the state undertake provision of ID to everyone. But in the grand scheme of things to me it's not the hill to die on that something like Gerrymandering or CU are (and that CU should be to more people.)

Edited 16 hours ago by gehringer_2

[smr-nj]

This perpetuation of the lie “there’s been all kinds of voter fraud!!” is so freaking idiotic.  The amount of time, money, & energy being spent to mollify a horde of Chicken Littles is ridiculous and some brave soul needs to step up and call it DONE.  
 

Epically stupid.  There is no “broken” to fix.

[Tigermojo]

They need to believe they are the majority. The only explanation is voter fraud. They are the minority and hopefully shrinking fast and back under their rocks.

[oblong]

It’s about suppression.  That’s just as effective 

[pfife]

Meanwhile heres fraud from lolicks crew he reps with every post, crazy coincidence 

 

[ewsieg]

2 hours ago, pfife said:

Meanwhile heres fraud from lolicks crew he reps with every post, crazy coincidence 

This is obviously fake news because voter fraud does not happen.  

[gehringer_2]

48 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

This is obviously fake news because voter fraud does not happen.  

to be accurate, this is not Voter fraud (fraud by a voter), it's Election fraud (an attempt by Candidates or other people in the system to rig an election). They are two different things. There is even a thread here somewhere about the difference. You can certainly try to put individual voters up to voter fraud as part of an election fraud scheme, but that part still wouldn't be an effective strategy.

Voter ID isn't an election fraud remedy either. I don't think anyone here has ever said they don't worry about election fraud - esp with the current crop of GOP crazies.

Edited 11 hours ago by gehringer_2

[pfife]

1 hour ago, ewsieg said:

This is obviously fake news because voter fraud does not happen.  

This is election fraud though

[pfife]

I see g2 already mentioned that, apologies 

[chasfh]

15 hours ago, oblong said:

It’s about suppression.  That’s just as effective 

It is, in fact, and institutional form of voter suppression by the party in power for the specific purpose of hurting the out-of-power party at the polls. And that party in power is always the Republicans, and that party out of power is always the Democrats.

I challenge anyone to provide an example of when Democrats attempted to enact a voter ID law and the Republicans objected. I'll just wait here.