"The amount of voter fraud is so marginal ..." the Establishment media is always saying, but brings out very little facts to prove it, only a few flimsy studies trying to (
a) prove a negative and (
b) almost always these claims are parroted by people who would benefit most from the types of voter fraud that are usually discussed. But more importantly,
a. Proving the negtative. You're a pretty logical person, I think. How can you prove voter fraud is
not there when in many places anyone can just walk in and cast a vote, basically rendering any study of voter fraud at that level (which would include voting by non-citizens, people various identities, whatever) impossible to determine. Take a look at the map at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws_in_the_United_States, the law largely, but not entirely, breaks down on a "red/blue state" level, unsurprisingly. Now why would that be? Because the Democrat Party does better in elections which don't require ID, and when it is in power (or in fact perhaps even more rabidly when it is not) fights to get these laws repealed because of supposed "racism," which is mostly absurd, and contains the kernel of a racist characterization in itself; while they, of course, abuse any governmental power they can get to get out
their vote (viz. mailing of ballots to welfare recipients.)
Manipulations like "Gerrymandering," of course, are a venerable American tradition used by both parties. The repetition of this message supposedly marginal (or even nonexistent) voter fraud, keeping in mind it would be very difficult to keep records of or it, even by more cerebral papers like the
Times, is clearly self-serving for the liberals. And, yes, putting up barriers for certain populations who tend to vote Democrat is advantageous to the Republicans, and vice-versa; so what? It's party politics, as old as the nation itself, and practiced by both parties. And even if voter fraud is marginal, it can make an important difference in marginal states, which quite often make the decision in elections.
To take this a bit more further and be more extreme about it, I, for one, think that we made a series of large mistakes in
making it easier to vote; more barriers to voting are good things, because people who would be barred thereby from voting are unmotivated voters who are almost invariably low-information voters. Fuck 'em. The more people we disenfranchise, the better TBH. If you're a Democrat, ask "what's the matter with Kansas?" (or not; it's an imbecilic book, better titled, "where did the Democrat party lose all touch with reality as regards it's social agenda," a question that laudably is being raised in the party after the Trump win); if you're a conservative, think of all the groups that vote for the Democrat party almost invariably.
That is, both sides of the aisle are damaged by low-information, low-motivation voters (recall the YouTube videos made of asking random people about whether they liked Obama's policy on x,y,z, and actually telling them McCain [or Romney's] policy.) Do a good start on getting rid of them and maybe our national political discourse can start to head back to the times when we regularly had debates between Vidal & Buckley on regular new networks and Kennedy-Nixon type debates instead of the inanities of today. But this, of course, is why I think this system doesn't work, anyway. People managed to develop most of civilization and more beautiful artworks than the world has seen before or since under the rule of kings and princes and popes, China is outstripping us economically ... democracy is dead. Had a bit of a renaissance but was always dead in it's soul. Lead us down a lot of very bad roads. It's not just dead, but mouldering. And the sooner that we realize this and fix it, we'll be better off tremendously.
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")