10-19-2008, 10:33 PM
Hi,
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
Quote:I do believe that voter fraud exists.Well, thank you for that.
Quote:I do believe it is something that we should be concerned with.How nice of you.
Quote: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
Quote: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.
Quote: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
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?