I was honestly most interested in how you would quantify the relative harm of preventing a legitimate voter from voting vs allowing an illegitimate voter to vote.
For the same reason that the left pushes for allowing illegals to vote by virtue of having zero qualification checks in place, because they think itâll help them.
I donât think the status quo moves the needle either way, to be honest. The number of people weâre talking about are not beyond the margins of most outcomes. I think the relative harm of eliminating any sort of checks against voter eligibility would absolutely create serious questions about the integrity of our elections. Weâre accusing Russia of swinging the election by buying some Facebook ads. Imagine if we give 4chan free reign to imagine ways of flooding the system with fraudulent votes. I donât know who the hero of the alt-right basement dwelling crowd is these days, but I wouldnât rule out the possibility of Air Bud winning the 2024 race if we adopt the type of âfree and open electionsâ that you probably have in mind.
So maybe in that sense I answered your question. I think the current system maintains more good than it does harm, even if both options are bad for different reasons.
Show an example of this ever actually happening.
1 Like
I donât get the point of this. Or the big problem with banning assholes from a small internet forum.
1 Like
Because it is harder to see ink stains on black people?
That doesnât really answer my question. Letâs call letting an illegitimate voter vote a Type I error and preventing a legitimate voter from voting a Type II error.
What I want to do is ignore any assumptions about the frequency of either type of error and just start by assigning a quantitative value to the harm caused by each error. Once we do that, then we can argue about how likely each error is to happen under various conditions.
I donât think anyone is arguing against eliminating all checks of voter eligibility. Those that disagree with you can be understood as thinking that some checks of voter eligibility are not cost-effective. The argument that some pose to you can be boiled down to the idea that preventing Type I errors can have the cost of creating more Type II errors, for certain methods of prevention. A cost-benefit analysis of that argument begins by establishing the harm caused by each error.
You were so excited to present this dunk that you neglected to read the rest of the sentence before smashing that Quote button.
âUnintendedâ but ridiculously obvious consequences to certain decisions should be part of the discussion when talking about policy changes.
Everybody looks great in blaze orange.
Youâve never shown that these consequences ever happen. Youâre bulshitting us and you know it.
Itâs really impossible at this point to determine whether right-wingers are posting in good faith or not because pure bullshit has become their main way of communicating.
1 Like
It always feels a bit pointless to engage in arguments that cover well-trod ground. Itâs more interesting to me to ask questions where you donât know how they will reply because they wonât have a stock answer prepared and they canât predict how you will respond to their reply, so they wonât know if they are âowning the libsâ.
By design, all votes are equal so x = y, no?
You and I both know that the data required to accomplish this is not exactly something readily available. At best you can identify cases of people casting multiple votes using the same voter data. Youâll never catch the fraudulent registrations because thatâd necessitate door-to-door canvasing.
What you can do is use your imagination and ask yourself how difficult it would be to photoshop a utility bill and provide a fake name to accompany a voter registration card. Not very.
I run into this problem often. Me vs 200 people on a lefty forum, some of which treat being right on the internet as a full time job. I know I canât compete. But I think I covered my stance on Voter ID well enough here. We can help people without IDs obtain them freely and easily. We cannot prevent people from submitting a few thousand fake registrations when the system is designed to be as easy as possible.
To finalize my thoughts on voter ID and election fraud, Iâll point to the time when Congresswoman Gwen Mooreâs son went to Milwaukee GOP headquarters at 3am on the morning of one of the Bush presidential elections and slashed all the tires on the Republican get out the vote vans. This type of brazen act is something that they had to know theyâd get caught doing.
If they instead couldâve submitted thousands of easy to produce voter registration cards and then drove their own vans around from polling place to polling place casting ballots, knowing full well that thereâs no mechanism in place to catch them doing this, would they? I think youâd be a fool to think they wouldnât have.
Regarding Trolleyâs question, why donât you just answer it instead of manufacturing a different question to answer? I have no history with you and am giving you the benefit of the doubt here, but you seem disingenuous so far.
This one provides a little data regarding duplicate voting.
Trolly is asking me to provide evidence of the type of fraudulent votes Iâm talking about where it isnât just some idiot voting twice in two different wards like I could have in 2012 and 2016. I believe a few states have tried this recently by purging the voter rolls of many names and addresses without corroboration in any other government database. The lefties had a fit. If there were any legitimate voters on that purged list, they can quickly and easily re-register. If there were any fake people on that list, at the very least you are asking criminals to put forth the effort to get them back on. I see no downside, especially in a world with same-day voter registration. Itâs trivial to get yourself a ballot, and Iâve done it three times myself using the same-day system.
Are you prepared to admit that you were wrong about the prospects of WoW Classicâs success?
2 Likes
Instead of imagining why donât you submit one piece of real evidence, ever?
1 Like
I wonder how many left wing lawmakers we have on video saying thisâŚ
Seems like a good argument against voter registration cards!
If this is the case, then Type I errors are the equivalent of Type II errors and we should be trying to minimize errors, regardless of type. So, this then becomes a game of determining whether more Type I or Type II errors occur.
I could possibly come around to your point of view if we actually did help people without IDs obtain them freely. But we donât, as evidenced by the over 10% of Americans who donât have a government-issued photo ID.
It is hard for some people to get these supposedly free IDs because it costs money to get the documents required to obtain an ID and the burden of transportation can be quite high. Should government help these people obtain an ID and, if so, how?
It seems to me that this would be very hard to do without being noticed. Itâs why the urban legends of voters being brought in on buses from Detroit or Chicago donât ring true; someone would see it if done in numbers big enough to matter.
Am I wrong in thinking this means that you think they do this in places where voter ID laws are weak and did this a lot in places where voter ID laws used to be weak? If such a thing happens, is there any reason to believe that Democrats do it more often than Republicans, where such a thing is possible?