Depends on how voting laws are situated in state. In California for example, they have an issue with “motor voter” policies, that is an attempt to automatically enable voting for those who apply for a drivers license. I can’t say what Ohio does, without knowing their laws further. But it’s worth clarifying if that’s what’s going on there.
Depends on how voting laws are situated in state. In California for example, they have an issue with “motor voter” policies, that is an attempt to automatically enable voting for those who apply for a drivers license. I can’t say what Ohio does, without knowing their laws further. But it’s worth clarifying if that’s what’s going on there.
You are an example of adding to a story to muddy it up to change the story, the rules are the same in every state, you have to be a citizen to vote. I'm not sure if California is a state that is issuing immigrant driver's licenses or not, but immigrant licenses are clearly marked they are immigrants and would not be "automatically" registered. All others applying for a license have to show proof of citizenship, before issued an ID or DL and there is nothing wrong with "automatically" registering them, unless you want to have less citizens not use their right to vote that is.
There’s no muddying or “changing it up”, using that language is an intentional attempt you are making to malign someone (or dismiss a point) who brought up something valid.. whether or not it’s true for Ohio, I don’t know, and I mentioned that in my comment. It’s an issue in California though.
Don't have to malign you, just stating fact, do you have proof they are registering illegals to vote, if you do, fine, if you don't, you are adding opinion into the story, thus mudding the story to make it seem illegals are voting.
Every legitimate study ever done on the question shows that voting by noncitizens in state and federal elections is vanishingly rare. That includes the Brennan Center’s own study of 42 jurisdictions in the 2016 general election. We found that election officials in those places, who oversaw the tabulation of 23.5 million votes, referred only an estimated 30 incidents of suspected noncitizen voting for further investigation or prosecution. In other words, even suspected — not proven — noncitizen votes accounted for just 0.0001 percent of the votes cast. But you don’t have to take our word for it: the Cato Institute will also tell you, “Noncitizens don’t illegally vote in detectable numbers.”
Maybe you’re thinking that there are a bunch of noncitizens voting and getting away with it. Again, consider the fact that in order to commit these crimes you create a government record of having committed them. Indeed, anyone can look up your voter history on public voter files. And election officials conduct regular maintenance of these voter lists — in fact, they’re required to by federal law. Moreover, these are crimes that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers are instructed to look into during the naturalization process. So, if you ever try to become a citizen, you’ll be caught.
It should come as no surprise then that in the extremely rare instances when a noncitizen does cast a ballot, it’s usually an accident. Sadly, there have been times when noncitizens are misled by mistaken officials into thinking that they’re eligible — and they can face serious consequences even as a result of a mistake.
But noncitizen voting is simply not a widespread or even a significant occurrence. And it’s already illegal. We don’t need new laws to stop it from happening. If Congress wants to improve our electoral system, it should focus instead on guaranteeing and protecting the freedom to vote for eligible voters.
There are ways to have a conversation, one is to throw "mudding the story" and accusations of "changing it up".. that thing you are doing, anyone can read into it. The other is to bring up points and dismiss what someone said. That's fine if you want to do the later, we all do that here... but the first is just poking someone in the eye on your way over. Good luck, stay cool and collected, you are the internet's hero bud.
Depends on how voting laws are situated in state. In California for example, they have an issue with “motor voter” policies, that is an attempt to automatically enable voting for those who apply for a drivers license. I can’t say what Ohio does, without knowing their laws further. But it’s worth clarifying if that’s what’s going on there.
You are an example of adding to a story to muddy it up to change the story, the rules are the same in every state, you have to be a citizen to vote. I'm not sure if California is a state that is issuing immigrant driver's licenses or not, but immigrant licenses are clearly marked they are immigrants and would not be "automatically" registered. All others applying for a license have to show proof of citizenship, before issued an ID or DL and there is nothing wrong with "automatically" registering them, unless you want to have less citizens not use their right to vote that is.
There’s no muddying or “changing it up”, using that language is an intentional attempt you are making to malign someone (or dismiss a point) who brought up something valid.. whether or not it’s true for Ohio, I don’t know, and I mentioned that in my comment. It’s an issue in California though.
Don't have to malign you, just stating fact, do you have proof they are registering illegals to vote, if you do, fine, if you don't, you are adding opinion into the story, thus mudding the story to make it seem illegals are voting.
Every legitimate study ever done on the question shows that voting by noncitizens in state and federal elections is vanishingly rare. That includes the Brennan Center’s own study of 42 jurisdictions in the 2016 general election. We found that election officials in those places, who oversaw the tabulation of 23.5 million votes, referred only an estimated 30 incidents of suspected noncitizen voting for further investigation or prosecution. In other words, even suspected — not proven — noncitizen votes accounted for just 0.0001 percent of the votes cast. But you don’t have to take our word for it: the Cato Institute will also tell you, “Noncitizens don’t illegally vote in detectable numbers.”
Maybe you’re thinking that there are a bunch of noncitizens voting and getting away with it. Again, consider the fact that in order to commit these crimes you create a government record of having committed them. Indeed, anyone can look up your voter history on public voter files. And election officials conduct regular maintenance of these voter lists — in fact, they’re required to by federal law. Moreover, these are crimes that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers are instructed to look into during the naturalization process. So, if you ever try to become a citizen, you’ll be caught.
It should come as no surprise then that in the extremely rare instances when a noncitizen does cast a ballot, it’s usually an accident. Sadly, there have been times when noncitizens are misled by mistaken officials into thinking that they’re eligible — and they can face serious consequences even as a result of a mistake.
But noncitizen voting is simply not a widespread or even a significant occurrence. And it’s already illegal. We don’t need new laws to stop it from happening. If Congress wants to improve our electoral system, it should focus instead on guaranteeing and protecting the freedom to vote for eligible voters.
There are ways to have a conversation, one is to throw "mudding the story" and accusations of "changing it up".. that thing you are doing, anyone can read into it. The other is to bring up points and dismiss what someone said. That's fine if you want to do the later, we all do that here... but the first is just poking someone in the eye on your way over. Good luck, stay cool and collected, you are the internet's hero bud.