Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

thedailybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 154 posts

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#131

Post by lutorm »

munk-a wrote: post #104
rcthompson wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unfortunate irony is that 2/3 of state legislatures will never vote to abolish the electoral college in favor of the popular vote, because a vast majority of states get relatively more voting power than they would with the popular vote, since every state gets a minimum of 3 electoral votes no matter how small their population is. This comes at the expense of the few most populous states (e.g. California), which a…

My own state of Vermont has signed on to this [1] particular proposition, so no, not every tiny state demands that it have a voice disproportionate with its size. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Intersta...

Hawaii, too.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#132

Post by wang_li »

ch4s3 wrote: post #109
wang_li wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proof of what? That voting fraud happens? It assuredly happens, as does more generalized election fraud. In my state of Washington there have been confirmed cases of people voting their dead family member's ballot[1]. And in the 2004 Gubernatorial election there were more illegal votes cast than the margin of victory.[2] Or do you mean that parties fight against efforts to make the voting process more trustworthy? Fe…

You own second citation contains the following passage: >ridges removed the five votes from the final count: four for Rossi and one for Ruth Bennett.[32] No evidence was brought before the court of any of the illegal votes benefitted Gregoire.[32] The final margin of victory for Gregoire over Rossi was 133 votes.[33] Rossi did not appeal to the state Supreme Court[34] and the Washington State Republican party settled…

You'll note that I said more general election fraud happens. That was the point of the 2004 election reference.

>Even in this case, there is no proof of substantial voter fraud deciding an election.

Perhaps not voter fraud, but certainly the fact that there were substantially more improperly cast ballots than the outcome of the election makes it impossible to know which candidate received more votes. The judge's ruling does not change reality.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#133

Post by MR4D »

I get the obvious point of the article; something is clearly fishy.

However, let’s look at the numbers.

According to https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/IN , the population of Indiana is roughly 6.6 million. Roughly 85% are white ( so about 5.6 million people) and ~15% are non-white ( roughly 1 million people).

Now, the article says “50 percent of U.S. racial minorities share the same last names, as opposed to 30 percent of white Americans”. So just using this as an issue, about 1.7 million whites and 0.5 million non-whites hit the first hurdle.

Honestly, if they really are using this against minorities, then they sure suck at it. They’ve already got MORE THAN 3 TIMES as many white folks as non-whites thru the first hurdle towards un-registering them!!

Serves them right if the article is anywhere close to being correct!

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#134

Post by wang_li »

vkou wrote: post #126
wang_li wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When we're talking about voter disenfranchisement, though, we're not talking about mail-in ballots. We're talking about people showing up at polling stations, and being unable to vote. A counted ballot cast by an ineligible voter disenfranchises a eligible voter. How is that less of an issue than preventing someone from casting a ballot in the first place? If the second is a concern then the first should be also.

It's not an issue. People passing laws that disenfranchise voters aren't doing it in states with mail-in ballots. Your examples of voter fraud are in a mail-in ballot state. Please provide equivalent, widespread, impactfull, examples in an in-person voting state. You won't because you can't. Never mind that adding an extra vote to a voting pool does not have the same effect as denying a person the right to vote. Stea…

I'm not in favor of preventing legal voters from voting, yet one could just as easily say that you cannot provide an example where preventing people without ID from voting would have widespread impact on the results of an election.

>Never mind that adding an extra vote to a voting pool does not have the same effect as denying a person the right to vote.

It has exactly that effect, unless you are saying that allowing a person to vote and then removing that person's ballot from the ballot box has no effect on their right to vote. Is that what you are saying? Otherwise every ineligible vote for one candidate nullifies a lawful vote for a competing candidate.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#135

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wang_li wrote: post #122
vkou wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Washington uses mail-in ballots. Obviously, filling in, and mailing a ballot for a dead, comatose, or absentee relative is possible. When we're talking about voter disenfranchisement, though, we're not talking about mail-in ballots. We're talking about people showing up at polling stations, and being unable to vote.

>When we're talking about voter disenfranchisement, though, we're not talking about mail-in ballots. We're talking about people showing up at polling stations, and being unable to vote. A counted ballot cast by an ineligible voter disenfranchises a eligible voter. How is that less of an issue than preventing someone from casting a ballot in the first place? If the second is a concern then the first should be also.

> If the second is a concern then the first should be also

You're ignoring observed magnitudes. If hundreds are dying because cars are going too fast, but two are potentially being saved because the ambulances can go faster, that doesn't make the issues equal.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#136

Post by ifhd »

zo1 wrote: post #105
mikeash wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few people object to the concept of voter ID. They object to its implementation in the US, which is virtually always done to disenfranchise legitimate voters. The fight against voter ID laws is really a fight against voter laws accompanied by biased ID requirements and intentional difficulties foisted on the opposition voters.

How exactly can you have a citizen that is unable to get a government-issued ID? That is a failure of the government. They either have the documents and/or government records to prove that they are a citizen, or they're not a citizen. A law requiring citizens to have IDs to vote is not the problem. The problem is the processes that aren't assisting citizens that struggle to get IDs.

because that's exactly the point.

Make it as hard as you can to get IDs, make those IDs required to vote. There, you just effectively disenfranchised a group.

Then you gerrymander the districts a bunch to split up blocs of voters and prevent them having a majority.

Then you reduce the voting hours, eliminate early voting, and reduce number of places you can vote. This causes massive lines, making it harder to vote.1

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#137

Post by masonic »

Bud wrote: post #112
jerf wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the best of my knowledge, you are correct that Democrats do not typically purge the rolls. Their strategy is to get dead people to vote, and to bus people around to vote fraudulently in multiple districts. Of course both parties cheat at as large a scale as they can get away with. If nothing else, if you really must conceptualize the Democrats as wholly good without a spot of blemish on them, then how can you beli…

There is, of course, zero evidence of any of the allegations you mention. But there's ample evidence of voter suppression by Republicans. You need to focus more on the evidence.

  There is, of course, zero evidence of any of the allegations you mention
Actually, there's lots. A Freedom of Information Act disclosure showed Chicago had more votes than voters in 2016 elections: 1,101,178 voters, 1,115,664 votes cast[2].

Detroit: voting machines in more than one third of precints recorded more votes than there were voters!

In California, 11 counties have more registered voters than voting age citizens.

A few other examples:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/in-los-angeles-144-voters-for-...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/chicago-had-more-votes-than-vo...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/stream-of-voter-fraud-cases-em...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/official-thousands-of-indiana-...

Judicial Watch keeps uncovering more and more examples.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#138

Post by mikeash »

zo1 wrote: post #105
mikeash wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few people object to the concept of voter ID. They object to its implementation in the US, which is virtually always done to disenfranchise legitimate voters. The fight against voter ID laws is really a fight against voter laws accompanied by biased ID requirements and intentional difficulties foisted on the opposition voters.

How exactly can you have a citizen that is unable to get a government-issued ID? That is a failure of the government. They either have the documents and/or government records to prove that they are a citizen, or they're not a citizen. A law requiring citizens to have IDs to vote is not the problem. The problem is the processes that aren't assisting citizens that struggle to get IDs.

You're treating it as two separate problems, but in reality they're intertwined.

In an ideal world, you create a voter ID policy in order to ensure the integrity of the vote. You figure out sensible policies to ensure that every eligible voter can vote, and enact them. Separately, you create an ID system that all citizens can use.

In reality, voter ID policies are often created with the intent of making it more difficult for certain groups to vote. They figure out policies to ensure that voters on the "right" side can vote, and voters on the "wrong" side can't. For example, they might accept a form of ID commonly held by one group, and not accept a different form of ID commonly held by the other group. Or they might restrict hours or shut down ID offices in areas populated by the "wrong" side to make it more difficult for them to obtain acceptable ID. Both of these have actually been done in various states.

Voter ID laws and making it more difficult for certain groups to obtain ID are two sides of the same coin here.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#139

Post by boomboomsubban »

lightbyte wrote: post #73
boomboomsubban wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The history of Democrats doing this is so rich there's a Constitutional Ammendment addressing it. The current climate only benefits Republicans purging voters, but both sides manipulate voting to benefit themselves.

Are you referring to the 15th or 17th amendment? Both of those were put in place before political parties switched their ideologies. The Republican Party of the 1800s was the liberal party, not the conservative beast it is today.

24th, passed in 1960. Democrats were liberal in many areas at that time, but accepting blacks was a late move by them.

Re: Indiana Purging Voters Using Software That’s 99% Inaccurate

#140

Post by masonic »

vkou wrote: post #126
wang_li wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When we're talking about voter disenfranchisement, though, we're not talking about mail-in ballots. We're talking about people showing up at polling stations, and being unable to vote. A counted ballot cast by an ineligible voter disenfranchises a eligible voter. How is that less of an issue than preventing someone from casting a ballot in the first place? If the second is a concern then the first should be also.

It's not an issue. People passing laws that disenfranchise voters aren't doing it in states with mail-in ballots. Your examples of voter fraud are in a mail-in ballot state. Please provide equivalent, widespread, impactfull, examples in an in-person voting state. You won't because you can't. Never mind that adding an extra vote to a voting pool does not have the same effect as denying a person the right to vote. Stea…

  You won't because you can't.
A Freedom of Information Act disclosure showed Chicago had more votes than voters in 2016 elections: 1,101,178 voters, 1,115,664 votes cast[2].

Detroit: voting machines in more than one third of precints recorded more votes than there were voters!

In California, 11 counties have more registered voters than voting age citizens.

A few other examples:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/in-los-angeles-144-voters-for-...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/chicago-had-more-votes-than-vo...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/stream-of-voter-fraud-cases-em...

https://www.theepochtimes.com/official-thousands-of-indiana-...

Post reply on HN