"Glitch" allows non US citizens to vote in PA

[GMDino]

(09-25-2017, 10:11 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The article showed Non-Citizens are voting in our elections. I have no how they voted or the number that voted and to me that is irrelevant. The only reasons folks have given to excuse this is "there wasn't that many" or "there are worse things".

I assume those folks just think PA should not try to fix the problem, because........

220 non-citizens have registered in the last 12 years and 90 of them actually voted.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-25-2017, 10:11 AM)bfine32 Wrote: The article showed Non-Citizens are voting in our elections. 1 I have no how they voted or the number that voted and to me 2 that is irrelevant. The only reasons folks have given to excuse this is "there wasn't that many" or "there are worse things".

3 I assume those folks just think PA should not try to fix the problem, because........

1 Then you didn't read the article; 90 voted over a 12 year period out of a population of 1.6 million or 0.006% of the Philadelphia population of 0.0005% when adjusted for the number of years. In otherwords, the vote was 99.9995% free of illegal alien votes.

2 The amount is relevant. If you saw 90 ants in your kitchen would your reaction be the same as if there were 2-5 million ants in your kitchen? Or would your response be proportional to their numbers?

3 You assume wrong unless you can show me one person who thinks PA should do nothing. Can you show me one person who suggested PA do nothing?

[BmorePat87]

Seems like they're fixing the error, which is a good thing. Fortunately it was pretty minor. Those automatic registrations with your license can be great... but I guess there's some flaws.

As for us giving out licenses to immigrants, I don't see an issue with a legal resident having one. I'd rather they get one through the US.

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2017, 10:47 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: 1 Then you didn't read the article; 90 voted over a 12 year period out of a population of 1.6 million or 0.006% of the Philadelphia population of 0.0005% when adjusted for the number of years. In otherwords, the vote was 99.9995% free of illegal alien votes.

2 The amount is relevant. If you saw 90 ants in your kitchen would your reaction be the same as if there were 2-5 million ants in your kitchen?  Or would your response be proportional to their numbers?

3 You assume wrong unless you can show me one person who thinks PA should do nothing. Can you show me one person who suggested PA do nothing?

1) I suppose if we were to take the reported number as absolute gospel; then yes. If you are of the opinion that there's a chance all cases have not been identified and/or reported then you do not know how many.

2) I would look to eliminate the problem when I had 90 ants instead of saying "so" until I had 2-5 Million

3) I suppose we just have different views on what the response "so" means.

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2017, 10:58 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Seems like they're fixing the error, which is a good thing. Fortunately it was pretty minor. Those automatic registrations with your license can be great... but I guess there's some flaws.

As for us giving out licenses to immigrants, I don't see an issue with a legal resident having one. I'd rather they get one through the US.

Pretty much my point.

[Benton]

(09-25-2017, 11:12 AM)bfine32 Wrote:  

3) I suppose we just have different views on what the response "so" means.

As I've said, resources aren't unlimited. Should the problem be fixed? Yes. Should it be a higher priority than deceased people voting or SS numbers being duplicated to create fake voters? No.

Sooooo...

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2017, 11:30 AM)Benton Wrote:


As I've said, resources aren't unlimited. Should the problem be fixed? Yes. Should it be a higher priority than deceased people voting or SS numbers being duplicated to create fake voters? No.

Sooooo...

Thanks

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-25-2017, 11:12 AM)bfine32 Wrote: 1) I suppose if we were to take the reported number as absolute gospel; then yes. If you are of the opinion that there's a chance all cases have not been identified and/or reported then you do not know how many.

2) I would look to eliminate the problem when I had 90 ants instead of saying "so" until I had 2-5 Million

3) I suppose we just have different views on what the response "so" means.

1 If you take that opinion all cases may not have been reported, then you can never know how many there are because there is always a chance they haven't all been reported.

That's the logical fallacy Rumsfeld used for Iraqi WMDs, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Which means no matter how much evidence you have showing something isn't there, you still might be missing something. It's an impossible standard.

What would happen if we applied that same standard to Trump and Russian collusion? Absence of collusion evidence isn't evidence collusion didn't occur. So I guess if you take the reports collusion didn't occur as absolute gospel, then collusion didn't occur. "If you are of the opinion that there's a chance all cases have not been identified and/or reported then you do not know how many." Your words not mine. So if you are of that opinion, then the Trump collusion investigation can continue without end because what if we missed something?

2 Which would means the numbers are relevant to determine your response. If there are 90 ants, you'll probably take care of it yourself. If there are 2-5 million, you will likely call an exterminator.

3 Does that mean you can or can't show me someone suggested PA do nothing?

[*bfine32*]

(09-25-2017, 11:37 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: 1 If you take that opinion all cases may not have been reported, then you can never know how many there are because there is always a chance they haven't all been reported.

That's the logical fallacy Rumsfeld used for Iraqi WMDs, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Which means no matter how much evidence you have showing something isn't there, you still might be missing something. It's an impossible standard.

What would happen if we applied that same standard to Trump and Russian collusion?  Absence of collusion evidence  isn't evidence collusion didn't occur. So I guess if you take the reports collusion didn't occur as absolute gospel, then collusion didn't occur. "If you are of the opinion that there's a chance all cases have not been identified and/or reported then you do not know how many."  Your words not mine. So if you are of that opinion, then the Trump collusion investigation can continue without end because what if we missed something?

2 Which would means the numbers are relevant to determine your response. If there are 90 ants, you'll probably take care of it yourself. If there are 2-5 million, you will likely call an exterminator.

3 Does that mean you can or can't show me someone suggested PA do nothing?

Okey Dokey

[*bfine32*]

Person A: I've got this thorn in my thumb

Person B: So. There are people in the world that have heart issues, diabetes, and lupus.

Person A: Ok, thanks for telling me I should have it removed.

[CKwi88]

Our election process is all sorts of messed up. Between the dozens of illegals that vote because of glitches, and the tens of thousands of citizens that can't vote because of laws meant to deliberately Target and disenfranchise them, the entire process needs to be simplified.

I'm of the opinion that the more citizens that are able to participate in the electoral process the better. Not everyone in politics agrees though.