(07-06-2017 09:51 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:41 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  Sorry but this is a bad thing. I do not want President Trump nor any president having my voting history, SSN or what ever they are looking for. If President Obama had requested this, all hell would be breaking on this message board. But because its President Trump the sheep are going along with it blindly.

If there are issues with voter fraud that is on the states not the Fed Govt, for those that want smaller government, this is the exact opposite.

So federal judges who have shot down photo id voter laws passed by the states are wrong and those laws should be enforced, right?

(I personally am for showing ID to vote, but I also want to be able to vote online. If I can file taxes online, I see no reason why we cannot vote online...but that's a different animal)

Well that is different when you are trying to restrict voters (not that I agree, with it). Just like states that are gerrymandering districts

However the courts are different than Congress or the President having access to the information.

(07-06-2017 03:00 PM)Greenroom Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:51 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:41 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  Sorry but this is a bad thing. I do not want President Trump nor any president having my voting history, SSN or what ever they are looking for. If President Obama had requested this, all hell would be breaking on this message board. But because its President Trump the sheep are going along with it blindly.

If there are issues with voter fraud that is on the states not the Fed Govt, for those that want smaller government, this is the exact opposite.

So federal judges who have shot down photo id voter laws passed by the states are wrong and those laws should be enforced, right?

(I personally am for showing ID to vote, but I also want to be able to vote online. If I can file taxes online, I see no reason why we cannot vote online...but that's a different animal)

Well that is different when you are trying to restrict voters (not that I agree, with it). Just like states that are gerrymandering districts

However the courts are different than Congress or the President having access to the information.

And with what is now approaching $30 billion in tax filing fraud plus associated identity theft online, what could go wrong with online voting?

(07-06-2017 10:50 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 10:12 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:41 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  Sorry but this is a bad thing. I do not want President Trump nor any president having my voting history, SSN or what ever they are looking for. If President Obama had requested this, all hell would be breaking on this message board. But because its President Trump the sheep are going along with it blindly.

If there are issues with voter fraud that is on the states not the Fed Govt, for those that want smaller government, this is the exact opposite.

Bingo.

(07-06-2017 03:30 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 03:00 PM)Greenroom Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:51 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:41 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  Sorry but this is a bad thing. I do not want President Trump nor any president having my voting history, SSN or what ever they are looking for. If President Obama had requested this, all hell would be breaking on this message board. But because its President Trump the sheep are going along with it blindly.

If there are issues with voter fraud that is on the states not the Fed Govt, for those that want smaller government, this is the exact opposite.

So federal judges who have shot down photo id voter laws passed by the states are wrong and those laws should be enforced, right?

(I personally am for showing ID to vote, but I also want to be able to vote online. If I can file taxes online, I see no reason why we cannot vote online...but that's a different animal)

Well that is different when you are trying to restrict voters (not that I agree, with it). Just like states that are gerrymandering districts

However the courts are different than Congress or the President having access to the information.

And with what is now approaching $30 billion in tax filing fraud plus associated identity theft online, what could go wrong with online voting?

Yeah...we're light years away from secure online voting. We have to keep voting away from the internet and offline as much as possible.

I'd move the date to a weekend and have polls open for more than one day before I'd worry about taking it online.

(07-06-2017 09:41 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  Sorry but this is a bad thing. I do not want President Trump nor any president having my voting history, SSN or what ever they are looking for. If President Obama had requested this, all hell would be breaking on this message board. But because its President Trump the sheep are going along with it blindly.

If there are issues with voter fraud that is on the states not the Fed Govt, for those that want smaller government, this is the exact opposite.

I'm not arguing with you on that Green (I actually agree with you in that regard.)..

But if that's your stance about your voting history.. you better get rid of every internal white house poll in that regard... cause that's typically one of the key portions ("How did you vote in .. {insert year}")

Quote:This is nothing more than an attempt to intimidate voters and suppress turnout. It's what the Republicans always do

and that's a BS claim and you know it, tom... Oooh, the government is intimidating us!!

(again, I only put in the bit about the numbers, simply because again, if you use anything from CNN... read into everything they claim, because there are going to be questionable statements (if not outright falsehoods)).

(07-07-2017 09:07 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(07-06-2017 09:41 AM)Greenroom Wrote:  Sorry but this is a bad thing. I do not want President Trump nor any president having my voting history, SSN or what ever they are looking for. If President Obama had requested this, all hell would be breaking on this message board. But because its President Trump the sheep are going along with it blindly.

If there are issues with voter fraud that is on the states not the Fed Govt, for those that want smaller government, this is the exact opposite.

I'm not arguing with you on that Green (I actually agree with you in that regard.)..

But if that's your stance about your voting history.. you better get rid of every internal white house poll in that regard... cause that's typically one of the key portions ("How did you vote in .. {insert year}")

Quote:This is nothing more than an attempt to intimidate voters and suppress turnout. It's what the Republicans always do

and that's a BS claim and you know it, tom... Oooh, the government is intimidating us!!

(again, I only put in the bit about the numbers, simply because again, if you use anything from CNN... read into everything they claim, because there are going to be questionable statements (if not outright falsehoods)).

Well, since there is NO EVIDENCE to support trump's lie bout millions of illegals voting (many states have already said so), what else could this be then?

(07-06-2017 08:37 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  LOL... and the 44 states is now a shown LIE from... who else #CNNFAkeNews

Washinton Examiner

Quote:Kris Kobach, vice chair of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, said Wednesday that only 14 states and the District of Columbia have refused the commission’s recent request for voter data, disputing reports that dozens of states had rejected the request.

“At present 20 states have agreed to provide the publicly available information requested by the commission and another 16 states are reviewing which information can be released under their state laws,” Kobach said in a statement. “In all, 36 states have either agreed or are considering participating with the Commission’s work to ensure the integrity of the American electoral system.”

CNN reported on Wednesday that 44 states “have refused to give certain voter information” to the election commission, which President Trump created by executive order to examine weaknesses in the country’s voting system.

CNN just can't help themselves... unless they can't add ... (at least Obama said there were only 57 states, CNN claiming there are now 80 states? (44+36)?)

Kobach could also be disbarred from the state of Kansas for some ethical issues.

There is one way voter fraud still could happen. Fake ids. Just show the fake id, and bombed, voter fraud takes place.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

(07-11-2017 09:28 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

It's funny that you omit that Colorado is one of only three states that didn't oppose this trump commission request

(07-11-2017 09:28 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

1. He's not investigating election fraud, he's on a witch hunt to intimidate voters.
2. If it's public information, then why do the states need to provide it?

The states resources should be spent handling state elections and their own legitimate fraud investigations. Not telling Uncle Sam my personal information regardless if it's public information or not. Especially since they intend to house it all in one place ripe for hacking or misuse.

(07-11-2017 11:42 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 09:28 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

1. He's not investigating election fraud, he's on a witch hunt to intimidate voters.
2. If it's public information, then why do the states need to provide it?

The states resources should be spent handling state elections and their own legitimate fraud investigations. Not telling Uncle Sam my personal information regardless if it's public information or not. Especially since they intend to house it all in one place ripe for hacking or misuse.

how is he on a witch hunt to intimidate voters?

(07-11-2017 11:48 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:42 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 09:28 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

1. He's not investigating election fraud, he's on a witch hunt to intimidate voters.
2. If it's public information, then why do the states need to provide it?

The states resources should be spent handling state elections and their own legitimate fraud investigations. Not telling Uncle Sam my personal information regardless if it's public information or not. Especially since they intend to house it all in one place ripe for hacking or misuse.

how is he on a witch hunt to intimidate voters?

Hundreds of voters un-register after Trump voter fraud panel demands info

(07-11-2017 12:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:48 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:42 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 09:28 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

1. He's not investigating election fraud, he's on a witch hunt to intimidate voters.
2. If it's public information, then why do the states need to provide it?

The states resources should be spent handling state elections and their own legitimate fraud investigations. Not telling Uncle Sam my personal information regardless if it's public information or not. Especially since they intend to house it all in one place ripe for hacking or misuse.

how is he on a witch hunt to intimidate voters?

Hundreds of voters un-register after Trump voter fraud panel demands info

that still doesnt answer the question...

(07-11-2017 12:05 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 12:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:48 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:42 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 09:28 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.denverpost.com/2017/07/10/vot...c-records/

"...In Colorado, like most states, why someone wants a record is almost always irrelevant. All that matters is that the record is public. Anyone from a blogger in Boulder to the president’s commission can receive Colorado voter registration records....

Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal."

1. He's not investigating election fraud, he's on a witch hunt to intimidate voters.
2. If it's public information, then why do the states need to provide it?

The states resources should be spent handling state elections and their own legitimate fraud investigations. Not telling Uncle Sam my personal information regardless if it's public information or not. Especially since they intend to house it all in one place ripe for hacking or misuse.

how is he on a witch hunt to intimidate voters?

Hundreds of voters un-register after Trump voter fraud panel demands info

that still doesnt answer the question...

Sure it does...this is exactly what they were hoping for.

(07-11-2017 01:18 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 12:05 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 12:01 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:48 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(07-11-2017 11:42 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  1. He's not investigating election fraud, he's on a witch hunt to intimidate voters.
2. If it's public information, then why do the states need to provide it?

The states resources should be spent handling state elections and their own legitimate fraud investigations. Not telling Uncle Sam my personal information regardless if it's public information or not. Especially since they intend to house it all in one place ripe for hacking or misuse.

how is he on a witch hunt to intimidate voters?

Hundreds of voters un-register after Trump voter fraud panel demands info

that still doesnt answer the question...

Sure it does...this is exactly what they were hoping for.

link?