woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25864 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Certainly. In my opinion, we in Ohio opened the door to voter fraud with mail in voting and this same day registration. Eliminating these two practices would reduce the possibility of voter fraud in our state.
Voting is not that difficult. You go to the polls, wait in line, and then cast your ballot. How could it be any simpler? And of course, we have always had provisions for people that absolutely could not make it to the polls.
While I am a partisan voter, I want to see fair elections and fair outcomes. I think voting is a serious thing and it should take some effort to do so. As I see it, the problem in our country is we have way too many people voting that don't know a thing about the candidates or a thing about the issues. Making it more convenient for these people to vote only does harm to our election process.
If it were up to me, only taxpayers would be allowed to vote. You would have to take a short and simple test before being able to cast your ballot. Nothing too hard, just some basic questions that any voter should be able to answer like who is our Vice President, what party does he represent? Who holds leadership of Congress and Senate? Things like that.
Secretary of state Jon Husted(R) closed the investigation into possible voter fraud in the 2012 election, declaring "voter fraud does exist, but it is NOT AN EPIDEMIC".
Huston noted that the 135 cases of 'possible' voter fraud referred for further investigation are a TINY percentage of more than 5.6 MILLION votes cast in the presidential election.
MOST of these cases involved people who tried to double vote in two different precincts or sending an absentee and then showing up at the polls. Most of these voters were not trying to swing the election ILLEGALLY, but were worried that there ballots got lost in the mail or followed incorrect instructions from poll workers.
Husted EMPHASIZED the fact that the safeguards in the voting system prevented these people from ACTUALLY getting both of their votes counted. Provisional are used if there is some question of eligibility, and are OFTEN DISCARDED even if the voter is LEGITIMATE.
After the investigation, however, Husted observed that "A PHOTO ID WOULDN'T HAVE MATTERED in most of these cases.
A teabaggers dream law was passed in Virginia in early 2013 that just makes them drool.

Virginia's legislature passed a new voter-identification law that ELIMINATES the use of SOCIAL SECURITY cards or utility bills as proof of identity, but ACCEPTS GUN PERMITS.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25866 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know what it takes to get a gun license? You have to have a clean criminal record, are checked out by our law enforcement agencies, electronically fingerprinted, and then you have to have your picture taken to place on the ID no different than a drivers license.
How hard is it for somebody to take an electric or gas bill out of somebody's mailbox, scan it to their computer, and alter it so they would be able to use it and vote? All our utility bills come at the same time every month.
The right to vote is in the Constitution, I don't see anything in that document about gun licenses. A Social Security Card is a NATIONAL ID that you idiots scream about that we need voter ID laws. CCW's are also a lot like a Driver's License. If you don't pass the tests, you don't get one, and neither one of them are a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. You idiots grasp at anything to sway the votes. That's the only way you have a chance to steal elections, and it's getting smaller and smaller and smaller.

As usual you ignored the findings from the GOP's own Husted about any problems of voter fraud. You folks hate it when the REAL truth backfires on you, and coming from your own party makes it even more obvious, and even funnier.

I like how when you all get outed it always turns into shoulda', woulda', coulda' deflection and excuses.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25867 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
Uh-oh liberals. It looks like your goose may be cooked next election here in our state:
Kasich to sign restrictive Ohio voting bills
02/21/14 12:53 PM—UPDATED 02/21/14 01:23 PM
Gov. John Kasich of Ohio plans to sign a pair of restrictive voting bills passed this week by GOP lawmakers, a spokesman for the Republican governor confirmed to msnbc.
“He will sign them both, possibly later today,” said Rob Nichols in an email Friday morning.
The news takes the steam out of an effort by a coalition of voting-rights groups to pressure Kasich to veto the bills. It means opponents of the measures will have to rely on a potential legal challenge, whose prospects are uncertain. If left in place, the twin bills could have a real impact on turnout this fall and in 2016, especially among minorities.
At issue are two GOP-backed voting bills passed by the state legislature Wednesday night. One would cut six days from the state’s early voting period. Those six days are the so-called “Golden Week,” when Ohioans can register and vote on the same day—among the most effective ways of bringing new voters into the process. The other would make it far harder for voters to receive absentee ballots, and make it easier to reject absentee ballots if they’re missing certain information.
The bills’ impact on turnout, especially among minorities, could be significant. In 2012, 59,000 Ohioans voted during the Golden Week that’s being eliminated. Studies show blacks are far likelier than whites to use early voting and same-day registration.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ohio-kasich-sign-r...
I love it!
Oh, yeah. Have you seen the latest poll numbers on the Gov's race? They are not going the way you want. The gap is closing so let's change the laws again. They tried voter suppression in the Presidential election and it didn't work. The smart voters made sure of that, no matter how long the lines were at the polling places, it didn't work.
Helen Roper

Columbus, OH

#25868 Feb 22, 2014
We need conservatives! We need to let those who don't work starve to death.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25869 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me give you some examples. I'll use baseball since I live in the Cleveland suburbs:
What if our sports teams left it up to the public to choose players? How good of a baseball team would the Cleveland Indians be if left to the choice of people like myself who has very little interest in it yet alone knowledge?
How successful would a company be if employees got to choose their CEO? Those employees would not be focusing on the success of the company, they would be more interested in how much more money it meant for them.
If we here in Topix had the ability to vote to take away your money so we would have more, how is that fair to you? If you don't think that would be fair, how is it fair when people that don't pay taxes vote to take my money or yours so it could benefit them someway? That's why non-taxpayers shouldn't be allowed to vote with the exception of retired people.
Voter fraud is one of those things that is very difficult to calculate because anybody cheating the system has to get caught first before we know about it. Don't get me wrong, people get caught all the time, but I believe there is much more fraud going on than we are aware of.
Let's look at the CEO thingy there.
If the workers had control of the company, they would make sure to keep the company profitable so they could ensure that they kept their jobs and God forbid earn a livable wage. They are not going to cut their own noses off to spite themselves. Look at all the numbers of CEO's who led their companies into bankruptcy and walked away with millions in salary and bonuses. They can usually make a phone call or two and step right into another job handed to them by a crony-filled Board of Directors. The workers can't do that, but they get all the blame for it.
If the REAL workers were able to make good wages they would be out there spending it therefore creating even more and more jobs. They wouldn't be hoarding the money and hiding it in offshore accounts. And God forbid that all of that new tax money coming in would go towards repairing the crumbling infra-structure and creating, God forbid again, even more jobs.
You know, fixing those roads and bridges that you use weekly to make your living. I could continue on what the REAL TRICKLE DOWN economy SHOULD look like.

An example with real math on your most favorite corporation:
An average full-time Walmart employee earning $12.67 an hour would have to work 785 YEARS to earn the equivalent of Walmarts CEO's ANNUAL salary of $20.7 million- ASSUMING the employee worked 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year, and DIDN'T pay ANY taxes.
That don't even touch on what the Walton family makes.
But if the workers ran it the taxpayers wouldn't be liable for the billions every year that subsidizes those same workers while your CEO buddies laugh all the way to the bank. God forbid that they ever have to get a REAL job.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25870 Feb 22, 2014
Helen Roper wrote:
We need conservatives! We need to let those who don't work starve to death.
A perfect example of why abortion should stay legal. You're mommy should have swallowed you.

“PLANET EARTH”

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#25871 Feb 22, 2014
http://os.care2.com/care2/ #!/entry/ohio-governors-reelec tion-may-not-be-a-given-and-go p,5308a173025312186cd563e3

This is interesting......
Looks like it will be nail biter after all........
hog heaven

Cincinnati, OH

#25873 Feb 22, 2014
BizzyBee wrote:
http://os.care2.com/care2/#!/e ntry/ohio-governors-reelection -may-not-be-a-given-and-gop,53 08a173025312186cd563e3
This is interesting......
Looks like it will be nail biter after all........
Try http://www.care2.com/causes/ohio-governors-re...

“PLANET EARTH”

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#25875 Feb 22, 2014
hog heaven wrote:
Thanks dear! appreciate it!
I have been having trouble with this site....
=~}

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#25877 Feb 22, 2014
Hey, X, could you address some of the questions I asked a page back? I'm rather interested in the answers, if you could provide them!

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#25880 Feb 22, 2014
These, please.
tranpsosition wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm afraid that we're still not getting any useable content to fuel this discussion, rather very general platitudes. If I could gently ask again for a bit more information about your ideas:
There are some very concrete figures and some projected figures based around a range of models (of varying soundness). You've talked in very concrete terms about how early voting and on day registration raised voter fraud. Can you point me to the evidence that helped you come to this conclusion? If you're unable to furnish evidence, what brought you to this conclusion?

To rephrase my other questions, in hope of getting an answer: would you support means testing to vote that may exclude you, in hopes that this would better the nation in the same ways that you suggest that your proposed means testing might? Would you support a university degree being the bar to vote, for example? Or a debt free home ownership? A percentage share in publicly held companies? Could you talk a bit about why or why not?

And again, how do you think that your proposed means testing might mirror or differ from historical means testing in the US? Do you think that historical means testing was effective and fairly adjudicated? Why or why not?
Reality Check

Van Wert, OH

#25881 Feb 22, 2014
tranpsosition wrote:
These, please.
<quoted text>
It's really simple. The truck driving weather expert wants the "freedom" to ignore votes that don't line up with his maniacal conservative overlord's corporate agenda.
"If you know you can't win, just change the rules."
Canton

Canton, OH

#25883 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay. So the employees get to pick the CEO. They know nothing about making profit, nothing about the market, nothing about business, and they get to pick the CEO.
As I stated would likely happen, they pick a guy that will give them more money. However that means less pay for the CEO. So instead of paying a CEO five million dollars per year, they hire one for a million a year.
Pretty soon, company sales start sinking, then company profits. Now the CEO has to layoff workers. Then their stockholders get wind of this, and they start to dump company stocks. This means the company has much less revenue to work with.
How did all this happen to your company? Simple. You picked the cheap CEO, and the good CEO that wanted 5 million dollars per year to work for your company now works for your competitor, and it's your competitor that's responsible for your slumping sales, profits and sales of stock. Eventually, that competitors CEO is going to put you out of a job.
That's why no company allows their employees to pick their CEO.
A climate expert and prophet in the business world that can predict the outcome of any scenario. You're so dreamy. That is when you're not pissing in a bottle and hooking up with lot lizards. Was there any particular reason why you were so interested in what I call reliable sources? I mean other than the fact that you were going to try to call me out on them and you fell flat on your Rush Limbaugh the liar loving face.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25884 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like they did in the Democrat led Senate???? Or maybe like DumBama has with Commie Care nearly 30 times?
Let's all Google "Bush stole the election" and see what we can find. Oh. and according to many sources, it doesn't matter which election you choose. Seems a lot like the man didn't get elected at all.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25885 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay. So the employees get to pick the CEO. They know nothing about making profit, nothing about the market, nothing about business, and they get to pick the CEO.
As I stated would likely happen, they pick a guy that will give them more money. However that means less pay for the CEO. So instead of paying a CEO five million dollars per year, they hire one for a million a year.
Pretty soon, company sales start sinking, then company profits. Now the CEO has to layoff workers. Then their stockholders get wind of this, and they start to dump company stocks. This means the company has much less revenue to work with.
How did all this happen to your company? Simple. You picked the cheap CEO, and the good CEO that wanted 5 million dollars per year to work for your company now works for your competitor, and it's your competitor that's responsible for your slumping sales, profits and sales of stock. Eventually, that competitors CEO is going to put you out of a job.
That's why no company allows their employees to pick their CEO.
If the employees got to pick out the CEO, then how could the owner ever be able to hand it to his inept, lazy and unqualified son? There's what you say, and on the opposite side of the coin, there's the real world.
Canton

Canton, OH

#25886 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean like they did in the Democrat led Senate???? Or maybe like DumBama has with Commie Care nearly 30 times?
Or maybe the most ineffective and obstructionist Congress in all of history, trying to shoot down the health care act over and over again, while accomplishing nothing else.(Also see the reason why the GOP suddenly views the Tea Party like a bunch of lepers)
sdfghjk

Cincinnati, OH

#25887 Feb 22, 2014
boooo

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#25892 Feb 22, 2014
tranpsosition wrote:
These, please.
<quoted text>
Or, I suppose if the questions are too difficult or too much trouble, that you needn't bother. Shame though, I was pretty interested.

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#25894 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe I answered your questions, so which answer were you unhappy with or feel I didn't address?
Sorry, I didn't see any of my points addressed, just a very general ramble. If you could repost them?

To keep it very short, I was looking for:

What data makes you think voter fraud increased during early voting and same day voting? If there is no data, what supports your conclusion?

Would you support means testing for voting that excluded you? If not, why?

How would you place your proposed means testing in a context with historical means testing in the US? Do you feel that historic means testing in the US was effective and just?
xgdkygfch

Cincinnati, OH

#25895 Feb 22, 2014
me too

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Springboro Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Photos 12 hr Net Nut 1
Jerkwad Jabbar-shooting details emerge: 15 hr Dennis E Gannon 6
Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) 15 hr bridges on fire 31,553
Police: Teen shot dead by shopper wanted shoes 18 hr Net Nut 4
The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 18 hr Sheboon 19,565
Merry Knobby Christmas 19 hr The Duke of Hazard 2
Despite this Hannity Insanity: 19 hr The Duke of Hazard 8
Springboro Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Springboro People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Springboro News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Springboro

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:56 am PST

ESPN10:56AM
Pettine: Manziel will get chance to compete
NBC Sports11:18 AM
Rookie Shaw excited about chance to start for Browns - NBC Sports
NFL11:45 AM
Injury roundup: A.J. Green misses Bengals practice
NBC Sports 1:46 PM
Mike Pettine: Our first-round picks aren't busts
Bleacher Report 2:15 AM
Should New England Patriots Rest Key Starters in Week 17?