ACORN

[kandrathe]

Well get used to it. A people that reelected George Bush, doesn't really have a lot of credit in that sense.

Get used to being ignored.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Get used to being ignored.

Welcome to the sane side. Not all trolls live under bridges.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

Your first link points to a anti-ACORN piece without references in some OpinionJournal owned by Dow-Jones, and the article from your second link doesn't even mention ACORN, Kandrathe. I'm sure you can do better then that :huh:

Not really. The point I was making was that the Acorn problem comes up every 2 years, not just this year. You don't seem to be able to make rational deductions, so why should I prove to you that 2+2=4. It seems hard for you to fathom that registration fraud leads to voting fraud. This article spells it out more clearly. I'm sure you still don't understand how all this bad data mucks up the system, and makes voting fraud all that more difficult to determine.

But you don't have a problem with phony accusations being used to affect the choice of those same Americans?

What makes a registration of Donald Duck legitimate?

Ah, now I see. Davy Crockett didn't intend to support the widow at all, but he used the donation 'solution' as argument against the tax bill, right? I understand now what you meant with being of a same mind, yes. For the widow's sake, I hope he didn't succeed.

He did succeed. Rep. Crockett stood on the principle that it is a misuse of government to spend public money in that way. There is not a thing in the Constitution that gives congress the power to appropriate any money for charity. However noble the cause, that warm feeling you get from helping people should be done with your own money. Here is a longer version of the story From The Life of Colonel David Crockett, by Edward S. Ellis (Philadelphia: Porter & Coates, 1884).

Warren Buffet is the richest person in the world, recently displacing Bill Gates from the number one spot. In 2008, the US congress voted to give the Shedd Aquarium about 1.5 million dollars which is actually money borrowed from China anyways. If you don't understand why this type of pork makes our federal system a mess, then you might not want to get into debates on the US federal budget.

[vor_lord]

Not really. The point I was making was that the Acorn problem comes up every 2 years, not just this year.

While it has been extremely difficult to prove that any voter fraud has taken place with respect to ACORN (and other similar efforts), it is extremely easy to see that an accusation of fraud, however nebulous, does have measurable political merit when a candidate can be tied to it.

There are people in jail for false accusation on this topic. No one is in jail for voter fraud, are they? I suppose that's because of the liberal bias in law enforcement now?

Noise in the voter registration system is a problem, but Occam's razor will tell you that the source of the problem is pretty obvious when you look at the workforce doing the registrations.

Occam's razor also will answer the question of why this keeps coming up, as you say. And that reason is not that ACORN is succeeding, or even attempting, voter fraud.

[--Pete]

Hi,

There are people in jail for false accusation on this topic. No one is in jail for voter fraud, are they?

These are exactly the type of statements that need support, and good support at that. Without such support, they are just more spin. Where and how to find that support is unclear, especially the statement you disguised as a question. And that (plus the presence of Dutch trolls) is the problem with this type of discussion.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

No one is in jail for voter fraud, are they?

Well, that's a good question. Yes, in fact some are in jail. Not enough though. Many impossibilities (e.g. dead people voting, more votes than population) never get investigated enough to reveal who perpetrated the fraud. I don't think it is on the order of thousands of votes though. Mostly where I've seen election fraud the heaviest has been to sway local elections rather than national ones. Since actual votes are secret, it's hard to tell how many people voted multiple times. We might need to get ink on our fingers like the Iraqi's.

The Consumers Rights League (a libertarian consumer advocacy outfit started by Terry L. Kibbe(CATO) is asking the same questions I am asking.

"We know about the thousands of potentially fraudulent voter registration cards turned in by ACORN and caught by officials. But given the size of ACORN's efforts and the fact that the abuses appear to be systemic, we believe it is fair to question how many more fraudulent registrations have not been discovered, Furthermore, as this mega organization with a decades long history of violating the law is turned to get out the vote efforts, we believe it is fair to question how many fraudulent registrations may lead to fraudulent votes or what other activities they are willing to undertake to influence the election."

Currently, the FBI is raiding many Acorn offices looking for an organized conspiracy. Acorn would do itself a big favor by cleaning up its own act. I think their heart is in the right place, but they are very sloppy where accuracy matters. This sloppiness can lead to legal challenges that might disenfranchise thousands, or hundreds of thousands of potential valid voters. In the news cycles and politics of anecdotes, one Mickey Mouse, or Jimmy Johns gives the appearance of a wide spread problem.

[vor_lord]

These are exactly the type of statements that need support, and good support at that. Without such support, they are just more spin. Where and how to find that support is unclear, especially the statement you disguised as a question. And that (plus the presence of Dutch trolls) is the problem with this type of discussion.

Actually, my question was exactly that--a question, posed in the hopes someone else had a source on it. It's been a difficult task to unearth hard facts on any topic so politicized.

My first statement (that people were in jail due to false accusations) is wrong -- I reread my reference. To my knowledge no one has had charges brought against them. So thanks for calling me on that one.

[Jester]

This sloppiness can lead to legal challenges that might disenfranchise thousands, or hundreds of thousands of potential valid voters. In the news cycles and politics of anecdotes, one Mickey Mouse, or Jimmy Johns gives the appearance of a wide spread problem.

So, if ACORN gets dragged into court by the RNC over irrelevant, small-potatoes voter registration issues, and this might disenfranchise "thousands, or hundreds of thousands of valid voters," then I ask you this.

Who is disenfranchising whom?

-Jester

[Jester]

Not really. The point I was making was that the Acorn problem comes up every 2 years, not just this year. You don't seem to be able to make rational deductions, so why should I prove to you that 2+2=4. It seems hard for you to fathom that registration fraud leads to voting fraud.

Differentiate for me which of these two hypotheses fits the bill of "rational deduction":

1) ACORN commits voter fraud every 2 years, and is called on it.

2) The RNC finds it a helpful bogeyman to bring up every election, and so drags ACORN to court every 2 years.

It is you who is having difficulties reasoning here, Kandrathe. There is no evidence that these voter registration issues have led to voter fraud. You are simply supposing it into existence. Indeed, if I may borrow the phrase, it seems hard for you to fathom how this *doesn't* lead to voter fraud, despite having an obvious and commonsense explanation that you yourself have given: some people working for ACORN want a free ride, and so fill out cards with nonsense registrations.

There is not a thing in the Constitution that gives congress the power to appropriate any money for charity.

You may not like the way the commerce clause is used, but it is simply a fact of historical jurisprudence that it yields this power to congress, so long as each appropriation can be justified as either a foreign commerce matter, or a matter relating broadly to interstate trade. Most of what has been discussed in this thread clearly falls under the first aegis. Since it is the Supreme Court who gets to decide, and they have decided, your saying otherwise doesn't matter, constitutionally speaking.

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

Differentiate for me which of these two hypotheses fits the bill of "rational deduction":

1) ACORN commits voter fraud every 2 years, and is called on it.

2) The RNC finds it a helpful bogeyman to bring up every election, and so drags ACORN to court every 2 years.

Your first statement is not supported by the facts. A statement that is supported by the facts is "Some members of ACORN attempt voter fraud (nearly?) every national election and ACORN is called on it."

Your second statement is prejudicial (I'm sure that RNC officials will tell you they do it 'for the good of the country' or some such). The simple truth is "The RNC takes ACORN to court every 2 years."

Expressed this way the two statements are now equivalent from two different points of view and thus both "fit the bill".

It is you who is having difficulties reasoning here, Kandrathe. There is no evidence that these voter registration issues have led to voter fraud.

Sorry, he said 'registration fraud leads to voting fraud'. Since voting is the only conceivable purpose for registering, the conclusion seems to fit unless you postulate that registration fraud is simply some people's hobby, an advocation to fill their empty hours. Since, if the registration fraud is discovered, the voting fraud is prevented, then it follows that only undiscovered registration fraud leads to voting fraud. Because of the nature of the secret ballot voting process, voter fraud is extremely difficult to detect. Thus, it may appear that there is no voting fraud, since none is observed, leading you to believe that there is either no undiscovered registration fraud or that the undiscovered registration fraud does not lead to voter fraud. However, both these conclusions are based on the fallacy that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The other information on this point strongly suggests that this is not the case. Now 'voter registration issues' is a much broader topic, which includes 'motor-voter-registration', election day registration, and registration fraud.

. . . so long as each appropriation can be justified as either a foreign commerce matter, or a matter relating broadly to interstate trade.

Or, to put it more bluntly, Congress does not have that power or right unless it can make up a plausible lie. Thank you for clarifying yet another flaw in our government. Maybe I should move to Quebec where everything is perfect.:whistling:

--Pete

[Chesspiece_face]

Since voting is the only conceivable purpose for registering, the conclusion seems to fit unless you postulate that registration fraud is simply some people's hobby, an advocation to fill their empty hours. --Pete

No, i think it is obvious that voting, in this case, is not the only conceivable purpose for registering. Getting paid is another. As long as Acorn pays people to go out and register others there will always be people looking to abuse that.

[--Pete]

Hi,

No, i think it is obvious that voting, in this case, is not the only conceivable purpose for registering. Getting paid is another. As long as Acorn pays people to go out and register others there will always be people looking to abuse that.

Good point, but moot. Only if you contend that ACORN is the only source of registration fraud and that all that fraud is for pecuniary motives does this point negate my argument. Otherwise, it is only a quibble.

--Pete

[Zenda]

In reply to post 143 by Kandrathe

"He did succeed. Rep. Crockett stood on the principle that it is a misuse of government to spend public money in that way."

Somehow, it doesn't seem fair to drag old Davy into our modern-day problems, but if you insist...

Interesting background story. Apparantly Davy Crockett didn't figure it out himself, but got the Truth told to him by a simple farmer. Sounds like a historical Joe the Plumber :D

So a congress member had to learn the meaning of your Constitution from someone working in the fields, who used words like 'legitimate purposes'? Isn't it more likely that the man was just envious about the money used for the people in Georgetown? He was right in one thing, though. It's not about the amount, but about the choices that must be made. When there are many needs, who is going to decide where the money is spent? It would be nice if the Constitution provided a useful list of priorities, but this is not the case. And even then, such a list would be propably be out-dated by now. Then again, I never read the Constitution. Does it mention freeing the people of Iraq from dictators?

That's where politicians get in. Someone has to do the ungrateful job of taking decisions that will never make everyone happy, like figuring out what to do with tax money. You can blame them for making 'bad' choices, but at least they have the courage to make them.


In reply to post 146 by Kandrathe

"Currently, the FBI is raiding many Acorn offices looking for an organized conspiracy. Acorn would do itself a big favor by cleaning up its own act. I think their heart is in the right place, but they are very sloppy where accuracy matters. This sloppiness can lead to legal challenges that might disenfranchise thousands, or hundreds of thousands of potential valid voters. In the news cycles and politics of anecdotes, one Mickey Mouse, or Jimmy Johns gives the appearance of a wide spread problem."

Is the FBI really raiding ACORN offices, searching for conspiracies? Maybe you have better sources (and I'd like to see them if you do), but according to this New York Times article, the FBI is only reviewing reports on the matter. And they don't seem too enthousiactic about it:

"Some officials said privately that they were wary of being pulled into a highly partisan controversy so close to Election Day."

The only offices mentioned are those of the FBI. Perhaps you mixed this up with ACORN offices, and assumed those got raided?

Regarding Micky Mouse, and other 'highlights' of this affaire, you might want to read this article, titled 'The Republican voter fraud hoax'. It doesn't add much that we didn't say already, but you seem to like mud slinging.

[Chesspiece_face]

Hi,
Good point, but moot. Only if you contend that ACORN is the only source of registration fraud and that all that fraud is for pecuniary motives does this point negate my argument. Otherwise, it is only a quibble.

--Pete

Sorry, I thought i was responding in the ACORN thread. I must have misread the title. If your point is that other people attempt to commit voter fraud and/or registration fraud then i have no reason to argue that. If your point, however, is to contend that the registration fraud commited in the ACORN case leads to voter fraud then to take your own statement: "Show me the proof." It is not enough to see valid registration fraud and then presuppose that it would automatically result in valid voter fraud.

[--Pete]

Hi,

. . . If your point, however, is to contend that the registration fraud commited in the ACORN case leads to voter fraud then to take your own statement: "Show me the proof."

Follow the thread of the argument.

kandrathe claims that, "registration fraud leads to voting fraud."

Jester replies that, "There is no evidence that these voter registration issues have led to voter fraud.", and makes it clear that he does not think there is voter fraud.

I pointed out that absence of evidence does not mean that it is not happening. I suggest you reread that paragraph. Now, if it is your contention either that all registration fraud (by ACORN or not) is caught, or that the registration fraud that does get through does not lead to fraudulent votes (because it was just done for money, or whatever other reason), then nothing that I can do will convince you otherwise.

--Pete

[Occhidiangela]

A company(or person) that willingly brings dangerous waste to development countries to have people danger their life over there (because they know this) is criminal in my point of view. This has absolutely nothing to do with socialism or other companies.

You still don't get it. The companies, if they knowingly do that, are enabled to do that by the government of the nation where they go. That is wilfull neglect. As I have noted elsewhere, I do not agree with the lopsided regulation and enforcement of a variety of good environmental stewardship. For example, when I lived in Europe in the 90's, the US had been unleaded for just under two decades. Europe was still burining regular gas. How environmentally correct is that?

You, Pete and Kandrathe keep bringing up other examples and reacting to things that were not said by Zenda and me.

Try just talking to me, as I'll not try to answer for Pete, nor for Kandrathe.

If a mexican commits a murder do you say all mexicans are murderers?

No, only an idiot like you would say that. In fact, you seem to have done so in the opening line of your post.

Occhi

[Chesspiece_face]

Hi,
Follow the thread of the argument.

kandrathe claims that, "registration fraud leads to voting fraud."

Jester replies that, "There is no evidence that these voter registration issues have led to voter fraud.", and makes it clear that he does not think there is voter fraud.

I believe i've followd the thread of argument perfectly. It started with the issue of ACORNS registration fraud. Then like you said Kandrathe made his claim that "registration fraud leads to voting fraud." now in some cases this may be true, but it is not guaranteed. If = Voter Fraud, Then = Registration Fraud. If = Registration Fraud /= Then = Voter Fraud. As this whole issue is related to ACORN's registration fraud it is correct to say that and only that registration fraud has taken place. If Kandrathe, you, or anyone else wishes to contend that Voter Fraud will result from these fraudulant registrations then I restate my postion: "Show me the proof." If all you have is presuppositions and fears of voter fraud than that is all you have, presuppositions and fears, and you use slimey logic to disguise that fact.

I pointed out that absence of evidence does not mean that it is not happening. I suggest you reread that paragraph. Now, if it is your contention either that all registration fraud (by ACORN or not) is caught, or that the registration fraud that does get through does not lead to fraudulent votes (because it was just done for money, or whatever other reason), then nothing that I can do will convince you otherwise.

--Pete

No, the absence of evidence does not mean that it is not happening but if you wish to make the claim that it is happening it is your responsibility to back up that claim with evidence. The irony that just earlier in this thread you were saying the same thing to Zenda is thick. I go back to the ever used logical example of the blue cow. It is not enough to say that a blue cow exists, one must be willing to provide evidence of a blue cow. You cannot prove a negative, I could say "there is no such thing as a blue cow" and all you would have to do is say "well you haven't looked in my basement." when i ask to look in your basement you just say "no i can't allow that, but trust me there is a blue cow there."

So I say again, In the case of ACORN, if you believe that the issues of registration fraud lead to voter fraud show me the evidence. If all you want to do is make a claim and then pick up your toys and walk away when someone asks you to back it up then you are no better than the other posters here that you decry.

edit: in summation, I do believe that voter fraud exists. I do believe it is something that we should be concerned with. But I also believe that a lot of this is just political ballyhoo and distracts from the real issues in our voting system. I don't believe that any of the decried fraud in ACORN's case will lead to voter fraud as the chances of Mickey Mouse coming to vote or the whole Dallas Cowboys team showing up in Colorado is as close to 0 as possible.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I do believe that voter fraud exists.

Well, thank you for that.

I do believe it is something that we should be concerned with.

How nice of you.

But I also believe that a lot of this is just political ballyhoo and distracts from the real issues in our voting system.

I believe that if you look back a bit, you'll find

No system is perfect, and any system can be beaten. People make a big deal about what is a minor item. In theory, the election could swing on a few votes, but that's seldom the case in practice. Besides, the fraud level is probably right there with the honest error level.

So, I guess I agree with you.

I don't believe that any of the decried fraud in ACORN's case will lead to voter fraud as the chances of Mickey Mouse coming to vote or the whole Dallas Cowboys team showing up in Colorado is as close to 0 as possible.

Right, because those are the only two cases where ACORN was associated with registration fraud. Oh, wait, there might be some more.

So, to recap, you believe that ACORN personnel were involved in registration fraud. You believe that voter fraud exists. You just don't believe that the registration fraud associated with ACORN has ever led to voter fraud. Rather selective in your beliefs, aren't you?

As to my proving my contention, I would find it hard to show, on October 19th that something happened on November 4th, given that my crystal ball is on the fritz. Kidding aside, I know you would like evidence from past elections. No such evidence can exist. Once the registration forms are turned in and accepted, there is no link back to ACORN. Only while the forms are being examined for acceptance does such a link exist, in that the forms can be kept apart till vetted. So, even in the unlikely case that a person could be accused of voter fraud, the most one could get is an unsubstantiated claim that ACORN was involved. ACORN could simply deny responsibility, and the burden of proof would be almost insurmountable. Even if a case was brought, ACORN could claim that it is not their responsibility to verify registrant's' data (true), that they do try as well as they can to do so anyway (probably true), and that that registrants fooled them just as much as it fooled the authorities responsible for verification (undecidable).

As to the logic lesson, start with Jester's "There is no evidence that these voter registration issues have led to voter fraud." Since he says that in rebuttal to kandrathe's claims that, "registration fraud leads to voting fraud.", the conclusion is that Jester is, in effect implying that registration fraud does not lead to voter fraud. Voter fraud exists, even you grant that. For a fraudulent vote to be cast, the voter must obtain a ballot. To obtain that ballot, the voter must be on a list (under the fraudulent alias) either to vote in person or to receive an absentee ballot, or there needs to be collusion between the voter and the workers at the polling place. There are observers at the polling places to ensure that such collusions do not take place. So, if there are fraudulent votes (as you admit there are) then they must be the result of fraudulent registration, contrary to Jester's implication. To make his implied statement false does not take all fraudulent registrations causing fraudulent votes. If even a single case occurred, then that is sufficient.

--Pete

[Chesspiece_face]

So, to recap, you believe that ACORN personnel were involved in registration fraud. You believe that voter fraud exists. You just don't believe that the registration fraud associated with ACORN has ever led to voter fraud. Rather selective in your beliefs, aren't you?

--Pete

I don't think i'm selective in my beliefs at all. I choose to place my beliefs in things which can be verified. Nor do I assert that "no registration fraud associated with ACORN has ever led to voter fruad." What i do assert is that "there is no evidence to believe that any of the registration fraud related to the political caucophony associated with ACORN will result in voter fraud."

Much of the position Kandrathe stated and that you, in turn, supported reads to me as It has been shown that shady registrations have occured at ACORN and thus it is reasonable to believe that more, even shadier, actions are being perpetrated by ACORN and my response to that is: No it is not reasonable to believe that, it is a patently unreasonable belief. Nor is it reasonable to imply such. The fact that it is not a reasonable belief, however, does not mean that it isn't happening. Come November 4th evidence could arise that shows that ACORN or any group for that matter has in fact perpetrated such acts and as such would shift the scales of believability.

In other news, it is my perception that ACORN views the possibility of people abusing their organization to commit registration fraud in exchange for monetary payments as less important than the amount of valid voters they can register and encourage to become a part of the voting populace. I am not associated with ACORN in any way, nor do I speak for them, but personally I do not have any disagreement with this viewpoint. I view it much as the ethical dilema of the legal system. Is it worse to send an innocent person to jail, or to set a guilty man free? I believe it is worse to send an innocent man to jail. Related to that I also believe it is worse to deny a valid voter their right to vote than to create the possibility that someone will abuse their voting rights.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Come November 4th evidence could arise that shows that ACORN or any group for that matter has in fact perpetrated such acts and as such would shift the scales of believability.

For the reason I already gave, no such evidence will appear. There will be cases of discovered voter fraud as there is bound to be anytime a nation of 300 plus million votes. But there will never be evidence leading back to ACORN or any such organization. That proves nothing, either way.

In other news, it is my perception that ACORN views the possibility of people abusing their organization to commit registration fraud in exchange for monetary payments as less important than the amount of valid voters they can register and encourage to become a part of the voting populace.

I'm sorry, but just how do people who have to be rounded up and herded like cows "become a part of the voting populace"? Oh, they can cast a vote, alright, but shouldn't a voter be a little more? Like at least aware of the issues? Like motivated enough to take five minutes to register when renewing a driver's license? Do we really want large numbers of apathetic and ignorant people voting the way they are paid to vote, or the way that their demagogue of choice tells them to vote?

Now, if even a sizable minority of the people ACORN recruits are concerned, knowledgeable, citizens who couldn't or didn't register because of external restrictions, then ACORN is doing some good (the amount of good, in my opinion, is measured by the ratio of "good" voters to "bad" voters registered, where by 'good' and 'bad' I mean degree of civic responsibility accepted by the individuals). But if nearly all the ACORN recruits are civically apathetic sheep, then I fail to see how ACORN is aiding the democratic part of the republican process of our government. In signal terms, they are adding noise to the channel, causing the little signal that exists to be further drowned.

I view it much as the ethical dilema of the legal system. Is it worse to send an innocent person to jail, or to set a guilty man free? I believe it is worse to send an innocent man to jail.

Bad analogy. Voting is a civic right which each individual has the right to participate in or abstain from. Going to trial is usually not an option (plea bargains, etc,. aside). As an aside to this aside, do you believe that there can be a perfect system? Because, if not, then there *will* be innocent people going to jail and guilty people being turned loose. So, it is not the simple 'either-or' choice you present. How many guilty people are you willing to set free for each innocent convicted? And how many of the future victims of these criminals are you willing to console for their loss of property, dignity, or life because of your philosophy. Many in this country feel as do you, and one of the highest crime rates in the world is the price we pay.

Related to that I also believe it is worse to deny a valid voter their right to vote than to create the possibility that someone will abuse their voting rights.

I agree, but this is a non sequitor. Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see where ACORN was addressing this. What I've seen is ACORN registering people who couldn't be troubled to register themselves. Not fighting for people who are being denied their rights, but simply people who didn't care to exercise them. I'm not even sure how ACORN would go about doing this, since then it becomes a matter of law. The organization I do see addressing this problem is the ACLU, and in this case, I cheer them (about two thirds of the time, I cheer the ACLU and in the other third I curse them -- but that's what makes them a good watch dog.)

--Pete