|
joether -> RE: Ed Rendell (3/28/2014 3:13:33 AM)
|
From your first 'source' Phydeaux....
"Specifically, Swirsky singles out the Inquirer's coverage of the '93 scandal in the Second Senatorial District, in which backers of Democrat Bill Stinson paid $1 bonuses to volunteers who rounded up absentee ballots. The Inky's intensive focus on this story, says Swirsky, "distorted people's views of the system and the process.""
Last I checked, its not against the law to handle someone else's absentee ballot as long as said ballot is on its way to the correct designation once signed. This might be alittle hard for your to understand, but there exists many people that have trouble getting to polling locations. Due to being deployed over seas. Or job hours shifted but the person wants to vote. A recent injury leaves them stranded from getting to the polling station. Or any of a thousand other reasons. So volunteers went about collecting the ballots to make sure people could vote. Are you against US Citizens voting, Phydeaux?
So this person puts up a bounty to volunteers to add an extra incentive to help get the votes in. The ballots have to be sealed before they can be given to others in most cases. Those that are blinded can allow another to see the ballot and make the appropriate checks. I guess in your fantasy land, there are no blind people. But in America, there are a number of them.
Again from your first source....
""I absolutely believe fraud should be rooted out and exposed," says Swirsky. "[But] the obsessive concern with fraud is what depresses voter turnout and registration in Philadelphia. It contributes to this ultimately destructive view that 'My vote doesn't matter, the whole system is corrupt.' The Inquirer has done a grave disservice to democracy to this city. They have exaggerated the pervasiveness of fraud in elections.""
I think Gerrymandering undermines the vote the most. Particularly in those red states that have places Democrats in a small little corners, while maximizing the number of possible Republicans that can win in an election. How about we outlaw the practice?
BTW, people that live in most cities in the country, tend to vote Democrat. They tend to be well informed, able to accept information easily, and are exposed to many different ideas and cultures. Unlike their counter parts 'out in the sticks' who are never really challenged for their views, nor have many outlets to obtain information.
The rest of that first article is one tirade of fantasy and Democrat bashing by an author that fails to show....EVIDENCE....of fraud. If your going to make an actual ACCUSATION of a crime, its fair to ask for....EVIDENCE....that can support the argument. And that evidence has to be of a nature that can not be questionable and free of tampering/fabrication.
This thread concept of yours has come up several times. And in each one, you FAIL to show any REAL evidence of voter fraud. What is the penalty for actually committing voter Fraud in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania there, Phydeaux?
In modern America, when many US Citizens vote, Democrats tend to win seats in Congress and the White House. When there is few voting, Republicans win. Now what would Republicans gain by helping people get their votes to the polling station, Phydeaux? What would they gain by voter suppression?
|
|
|
|
