For years, I've watched the constant battle to guarantee an honest election, without fraud. On one side there's the demand for identification, and on the other is the demand to stop the effort for identification, with the statement voter fraud either doesn't exist, or is so minimal it's not important to consider.
You can't really determine if there is voter fraud, unless there's a form of identifying voters. You can't state there is little, or no fraud, if there is no method of determining if a voter has the legal right. So, the paradox, at this time, lies with those that think voter identification is not necessary, while using the excuse there is little, or no voter fraud.
Trump stated he wants an investigation into voter fraud, which is getting negative responses. I can understand a concern for spending money on such an investigation, but think it's important. If the investigation finds nothing, then I'll feel assured an effort was made to guarantee my vote is not negated by someone that doesn't have that right. If it does find fraud at the level Trump believes was reached, then the effort to state voter fraud is inconsequential becomes either ridiculous, or criminal culpability.
In other words, darned if you do. darned if you don't?
ReplyDeleteExactly, except there's a lot of political tooth gnashing in the process.
DeleteUNLESS voter fraud IS found to have occurred in favor of the democrats, BUT a "disgusting video of the prophet" is found to be the cause. It could happen!
ReplyDeleteI think they'll find much voter fraud; especially in California, which should have all Federal funding removed.
Delete