MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Friday, November 28, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 15.0° F  Light Snow Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

Will Wanggaard want recount?

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Earthling » Wed Jun 20, 2012 11:45 am

Stebben84 wrote:
Earthling wrote: Again to be concise: Tax Breaks DON'T =Taxation.


OMG are you a fucking moron. I'm done with this one.


Tax Break= You don't have to pay
Taxation= You do have to pay

Not sure what there is to debate?
Earthling
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Detritus » Wed Jun 20, 2012 11:51 am

Earthling wrote:OK....one more time.....HOW WOULD THERE BE EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD WHEN THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT EXISTS?

Lessee here, maybe you will understand if I slightly change the noun in your sentence.

HOW WOULD THERE BE EVIDENCE OF PINK ELEPHANTS WHEN THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE THEY EXIST?

Then your "conclusion:"

THEREFORE, THEY EXIST!

I hope you're done with your schooling, cuz what you've gotten so far clearly hasn't helped much.
Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2513
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby minicat » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:10 pm

Earthling wrote:OK....one more time.....HOW WOULD THERE BE EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD WHEN THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT EXISTS?


Exactly. Just one reason we should outlaw all electronic voting machines and require paper ballots for all votes.

Wanna bet the last couple decades of elections would have come out much, much differently?
minicat
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4507
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2002 2:22 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Earthling » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:23 pm

Detritus wrote:
Earthling wrote:OK....one more time.....HOW WOULD THERE BE EVIDENCE OF VOTER FRAUD WHEN THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT EXISTS?

Lessee here, maybe you will understand if I slightly change the noun in your sentence.

HOW WOULD THERE BE EVIDENCE OF PINK ELEPHANTS WHEN THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE THEY EXIST?

Then your "conclusion:"

THEREFORE, THEY EXIST!

I hope you're done with your schooling, cuz what you've gotten so far clearly hasn't helped much.


Perfectly fair comparison. Give me a break. Please explain to me how you would detect voter fraud given the current situation. It does happen on occassion, but you've gotta be pretty stupid to get caught.
Earthling
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:34 pm

If two people try to vote under the same name (the fraudulent voter and the real voter) it certainly would be discovered. I don't hear of that happening. Or do fraudulent voters never choose a name of an actual voter who later shows up (or voted absentee)? Also, since voting records are on online with the GAB, someone who didn't vote could discover that a ballot was cast in their name. Yet one never hears of that happening.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 20164
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby lukpac » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:34 pm

Earthling wrote:Well it kind of matters to me seeing as how I actually give a shit when the government wastes my money, but I suppose it wouldn't matter to you. You don't see the government's money as yours. You see it as theirs. Herein lies the fundamental problem of the left. Tax and spend and tax and spend and tax and spend. Don't actually try to fix any infastructure. Just throw a bunch of entitlement programs at every problem we face, and keep tax tax taxing away.


What do "infastructure" and entitlement programs have to do with recall elections?
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Earthling » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:39 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:If two people try to vote under the same name (the fraudulent voter and the real voter) it certainly would be discovered. I don't hear of that happening. Or do fraudulent voters never choose a name of an actual voter who later shows up (or voted absentee)? Also, since voting records are on online with the GAB, someone who didn't vote could discover that a ballot was cast in their name. Yet one never hears of that happening.


I don't think you can say that it never happens , but obviously people aren't CAUGHT perpetrating voter fraud that often. However, I imagine that if I were going to attempt to vote more than once I'd pick someone that was registered to vote that I knew for one reason or another A) definitely would not be voting in that particular election and B) wouldn't be likely to check voter records. Wouldn't you?

The point is why make it so easy to do? In today's day and age how could there be such a ridiculously minimal amount of security involved in one of the more important processes most of us experience. Regardless of your responses there is nothing you can say to rebut that. The integrity of elections outranks all else.
Earthling
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:44 pm

When thousands of otherwise eliigible voters are disenfranchised because they don't have a certain type of ID, doesn't that impinge upon the integrity of elections?
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 20164
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby lukpac » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:44 pm

Earthling wrote:However, I imagine that if I were going to attempt to vote more than once I'd pick someone that was registered to vote that I knew for one reason or another A) definitely would not be voting in that particular election and B) wouldn't be likely to check voter records. Wouldn't you?


As I asked above (and you didn't answer), how exactly would you pick such a person? How would you know they wouldn't be voting (or would have voted absentee), or that somebody else wouldn't also be voting with their name?

Earthling wrote:The point is why make it so easy to do?


You still haven't shown that it actually *is* so easy to do.
lukpac
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3362
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Earthling » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:49 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:When thousands of otherwise eliigible voters are disenfranchised because they don't have a certain type of ID, doesn't that impinge upon the integrity of elections?


Thousands huh? You want to talk about proof. How about proof that these thousands of people who will become "disenfranchised" actually exist? Remember we are talking about people who vote but have no form of identification. I'm sure there are THOUSANDS of them. Give me a break.

If you want to vote take your fucking ass down to the DMV and get yourself an ID. It won't even cost you anything if you tell them that it is for the purposes of voting.
Earthling
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:08 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby DCB » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:53 pm

Earthling wrote:
Perfectly fair comparison. Give me a break. Please explain to me how you would detect voter fraud given the current situation. It does happen on occassion, but you've gotta be pretty stupid to get caught.

As I said in a different thread, AG Van Hollen already did the research. He came up with 19 cases that could be called fraud in the 2008 election.
For example, felons caught voting. How do you check this? you take a list of everybody who voted, and compare to a list of known felons who can't vote. Time-consuming, but straightforward.

If you have a problem with his methodology, or you can think of other potential fraud scenarios, go talk to the AG.
DCB
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2768
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 5:08 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Jun 20, 2012 12:58 pm

Earthling wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:When thousands of otherwise eliigible voters are disenfranchised because they don't have a certain type of ID, doesn't that impinge upon the integrity of elections?


Thousands huh? You want to talk about proof. How about proof that these thousands of people who will become "disenfranchised" actually exist? Remember we are talking about people who vote but have no form of identification. I'm sure there are THOUSANDS of them. Give me a break.

If you want to vote take your fucking ass down to the DMV and get yourself an ID. It won't even cost you anything if you tell them that it is for the purposes of voting.

The permament injunction against the Voter ID law was granted because it was likely to be proven at trial that thousands of Wisconsinites would be wrongfully denied their right to vote. Those who brought that issue to court submitted evidence of that.

In less populated rural counties, there is only one DVM office, some of which are only open a few days a month, sometimes for only half a day. See for yourself.
http://dot.wi.gov/about/locate/dmv/scmap.htm
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 20164
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:04 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:In less populated rural counties, there is only one DVM office, some of which are only open a few days a month, sometimes for only half a day. See for yourself.
http://dot.wi.gov/about/locate/dmv/scmap.htm


Come on Henry. Earthy doesn't like links or proof or facts. That muddles their opinion.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 5118
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby O.J. » Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:05 pm

lukpac wrote:
Earthling wrote:However, I imagine that if I were going to attempt to vote more than once I'd pick someone that was registered to vote that I knew for one reason or another A) definitely would not be voting in that particular election and B) wouldn't be likely to check voter records. Wouldn't you?


As I asked above (and you didn't answer), how exactly would you pick such a person? How would you know they wouldn't be voting (or would have voted absentee), or that somebody else wouldn't also be voting with their name?

Earthling wrote:The point is why make it so easy to do?


You still haven't shown that it actually *is* so easy to do.


This actually happened to Earthling! Earthling, why aren't you repeating this sordid tale to prove that voter fraud is rampant?

Earthling wrote:This has happened to me once. After putting up quite a fuss I was allowed to vote (I actually pulled out my driver's license), but I imagine my vote only served to cancel out the vote of the person who voted under my name.
O.J.
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3002
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 10:13 am

Re: Will Wanggaard want recount?

Postby Earthling » Wed Jun 20, 2012 1:06 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:
Earthling wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:When thousands of otherwise eliigible voters are disenfranchised because they don't have a certain type of ID, doesn't that impinge upon the integrity of elections?


Thousands huh? You want to talk about proof. How about proof that these thousands of people who will become "disenfranchised" actually exist? Remember we are talking about people who vote but have no form of identification. I'm sure there are THOUSANDS of them. Give me a break.

If you want to vote take your fucking ass down to the DMV and get yourself an ID. It won't even cost you anything if you tell them that it is for the purposes of voting.

The permament injunction against the Voter ID law was granted because it was likely to be proven at trial that thousands of Wisconsinites would be wrongfully denied their right to vote. Those who brought that issue to court submitted evidence of that.

In less populated rural counties, there is only one DVM office, some of which are only open a few days a month, sometimes for only half a day. See for yourself.
http://dot.wi.gov/about/locate/dmv/scmap.htm


Again the fact that these people exist doesn't mean that they vote. I would say the opposite is most likely true. If you are not involved in society to the extent that you don't have a legal photo ID wouldn't you say it's more likely that you aren't going to be too concerned with political issues? At least not to the extent that you are going to actually get off your couch and away from your soap operas long enough to go through the huge hastle of voting. Afterall obtaining an ID (which is now a one time thing as far as actually having to go to the DMV is concerned) is such a huge burden for these people. You are trying to sell ice to an eskimo my friend. Go sell crazy some place else.
Earthling
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 2:08 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar