WWTBAM Bored

According to the Indianapolis Star, 677,400 people have registered to vote in Indianapolis this year (Indianapolis has a consolidated city-county government).

http://tinyurl.com/4ruo3y

However, according to US census records, there are only 644,000 people over age 18 in the city.

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/profiles/pr18097.html

Now, the census figures and percentages over the age of 18 may be a bit inaccurate, but it looks as of now that over 105% of the voting age population of Indianapolis has registered to vote. Of course, this is easy to do when you have people registering 40 or 50 times each.

How many of these bogus registrations nationwide will be caught by local election officials? And how many cases of people voting multiple times (or fictitious voters) will there be?

Maybe dead people are registering to vote in Indiana. And here, I thought that happened only in New York, Florida, and Chicago.

Maybe college students?

silverscreenselect wrote:According to the Indianapolis Star, 677,400 people have registered to vote in Indianapolis this year (Indianapolis has a consolidated city-county government).

http://tinyurl.com/4ruo3y

However, according to US census records, there are only 644,000 people over age 18 in the city.

http://www.stats.indiana.edu/profiles/pr18097.html

Now, the census figures and percentages over the age of 18 may be a bit inaccurate, but it looks as of now that over 105% of the voting age population of Indianapolis has registered to vote. Of course, this is easy to do when you have people registering 40 or 50 times each.

How many of these bogus registrations nationwide will be caught by local election officials? And how many cases of people voting multiple times (or fictitious voters) will there be?

It's strange. According to the article the county says in 2004 they had 602,918 registered voters. Even that number seems way too high as well.

The more I read about this I think that the problem is that Indiana has had trouble removing people from the voter rolls in the past.

I read a couple of places about a court case that cited a study of Motor-Voter that voter rolls in Indiana were inflated by up to 40% because people who had moved or died had not been removed. And that study was done prior to 2004.

andrewjackson wrote:The more I read about this I think that the problem is that Indiana has had trouble removing people from the voter rolls in the past.

I read a couple of places about a court case that cited a study of Motor-Voter that voter rolls in Indiana were inflated by up to 40% because people who had moved or died had not been removed. And that study was done prior to 2004.

Aha... I was right. There will be dead people voting in Indiana this year.

Now if only dead people could vote in Kentucky... then I would never have to worry about my vote not counting. My voice will be heard year after year after year after year...

NellyLunatic1980 wrote:Aha... I was right. There will be dead people voting in Indiana this year.

I think I was in line behind a couple of them when I voted in the primary.

nelly:

Aha... I was right. There will be dead people voting in Indiana this year.

Yes, and only Haley Joel Osment will be able to see them...

Just a facet of the upper midwest mindset.

Indian, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa

All part of the Big 10 with 11 teams. 105% is nothing to be concerned about.

I hate geting in line behind the dead people at the voting booth. Most of them are really slow.

Some of them smell bad too.

jaybee wrote:I hate geting in line behind the dead people at the voting booth. Most of them are really slow.

Some of them smell bad too.

Hey!

Remember this thread?

Indianapolis may have had more registered voters than adults but they didn't have more voters.

A total of 368,734 people voted in the Presidential race in the county.

andrewjackson wrote:Remember this thread?

Indianapolis may have had more registered voters than adults but they didn't have more voters.

A total of 368,734 people voted in the Presidential race in the county.

It's a lot easier to practice massive voter registration fraud than massive voter fraud because you usually need an actual person to show up to cast each fraudulent vote. However, especially in states that have no voter ID requirements, a few individuals can cast a large number of votes, which could make a difference in a close race.

silverscreenselect wrote:

andrewjackson wrote:Remember this thread?

Indianapolis may have had more registered voters than adults but they didn't have more voters.

A total of 368,734 people voted in the Presidential race in the county.

It's a lot easier to practice massive voter registration fraud than massive voter fraud because you usually need an actual person to show up to cast each fraudulent vote. However, especially in states that have no voter ID requirements, a few individuals can cast a large number of votes, which could make a difference in a close race.

\

Indiana requires a currently valid government-issued photo ID with a name that matches the registration to vote.

Results for Marion County:

Barack Obama (Dem) 237,275
John McCain (Rep) 131,459


Also, 1,547 more people voted in the Governor's race in the county than in the Presidential one. And the results were pretty much the opposite by party:

Mitch Daniels (Rep)* 205,693
Jill Long Thompson (Dem) 157,336
Andy Horning (Lib) 7,252

BackInTex wrote:Just a facet of the upper midwest mindset.

Indian, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa

All part of the Big 10 with 11 teams. 105% is nothing to be concerned about.

silverscreenselect wrote:

andrewjackson wrote:Remember this thread?

Indianapolis may have had more registered voters than adults but they didn't have more voters.

A total of 368,734 people voted in the Presidential race in the county.

It's a lot easier to practice massive voter registration fraud than massive voter fraud because you usually need an actual person to show up to cast each fraudulent vote. However, especially in states that have no voter ID requirements, a few individuals can cast a large number of votes, which could make a difference in a close race.

Apparently, if the 2nd Congressional District race was closer, lawsuits were ready to be filled to reject several illegally-cast and fraudulently-cast ballots related to the efforts of ACORN in Omaha.

If the Presidential vote tightens even more here, then I wonder if they still will be filed. (If the info will be shared between campaigns.)

andrewjackson wrote:Also, 1,547 more people voted in the Governor's race in the county than in the Presidential one. And the results were pretty much the opposite by party:

Mitch Daniels (Rep)* 205,693
Jill Long Thompson (Dem) 157,336
Andy Horning (Lib) 7,252

I know people in both parties who said going into the election that they would not vote for President (or vote for a write-in which won't register in a lot of vote totals) because of disagreements with Obama or McCain but an unwillingness to commit to vote for the other. These people then voted on down-ticket races.

Also, in some states, you can vote a straight ticket ballot by throwing a lever to that effect which does not include a party-line vote for President. Every time this happens some people don't realize this and wind up failing to vote for President.

silverscreenselect wrote:

andrewjackson wrote:Also, 1,547 more people voted in the Governor's race in the county than in the Presidential one. And the results were pretty much the opposite by party:

Mitch Daniels (Rep)* 205,693
Jill Long Thompson (Dem) 157,336
Andy Horning (Lib) 7,252

I know people in both parties who said going into the election that they would not vote for President (or vote for a write-in which won't register in a lot of vote totals) because of disagreements with Obama or McCain but an unwillingness to commit to vote for the other. These people then voted on down-ticket races.

Also, in some states, you can vote a straight ticket ballot by throwing a lever to that effect which does not include a party-line vote for President. Every time this happens some people don't realize this and wind up failing to vote for President.

Everything you've said here is true. None of it applies to the specific example which started the thread, that is, voter registration in Indiana.

According to the ACLU and other groups, Indiana has THE TOUGHEST voter ID law in the nation. There may be fraudulent votes and registrations, but wouldn't you agree that it is less likely in the state of Indiana than in other states, with looser voting requirements?

And I can tell you from recent personal experience that a straight ticket ballot in Indiana includes a vote for that party's nominee for President.

The reason voter registration totals look fishy in Indiana, especially in a year when great efforts were made to increase voter rolls, is that where this state IS deficient is in voter roll purging. There is no way to crosscheck or purge a voter who moves and then re-registers at a new address, even if it's just across town. Rolls are SUPPOSED to be purged every four years, but I can tell you, again from recent personal experience, that it doesn't happen that way, especially in urban areas like Indianapolis.

Also, the college voters, who again signed up this year in record numbers, are in a vast majority voting fraudulently by law. Not by intent, but by the fact that Indiana requires you to state that the address where you are registering is your permanent address. So if you want to go after voter fraud, hit the college campuses, at least in Indiana. And have fun with that.

In short, if you're going to make an attack, at least make sure that the specific example you're using is germane to the topic you're attacking.

Yeah. Like that's going to happen.

mrkelley23 wrote:
In short, if you're going to make an attack, at least make sure that the specific example you're using is germane to the topic you're attacking.

Yeah. Like that's going to happen.

I wasn't trying to "attack" anything. I was trying to offer up two possible explanations why 1500 more people would vote for governor than president. One of them (the deliberate refusal to vote) I know is valid, although to what extent I'm not sure. The other (partyline) is valid in some states; I'm certainly no expert on Indiana voting law, but I offered it as a possibility that came to mind. I'm not about to completely research Indiana voting law while sitting at my desk at work on a Thursday afternoon.

And the number of people who actually voted is not germane to the subject of possible voter fraud anyway. Intentionally registering non-existat voters is criminal and it makes actual voter fraud more likely, although how much more likely, and to what extent, is questionable.

The 2000 Florida presidential election was decided by less than 500 votes. So is this year's Minnesota senate race and a number of Congressional races. So even a few fraudulent votes could make a difference.

SSS, I don't know if you're being disingenuous, or if you truly don't realize how strongly worded your posts are. Maybe years of writing reviews has jaded you to the impact of words. But I challenge you to go back and look at the first post in this thread, and tell me you weren't attacking anything.

I quoted your last response, but my full post makes it clear (and I notice you only quote the last two lines, hmmmmm) that I was responding to all of your comments in this thread, including the incendiary statements at the beginning.

mrkelley23 wrote:SSS, I don't know if you're being disingenuous, or if you truly don't realize how strongly worded your posts are. Maybe years of writing reviews has jaded you to the impact of words. But I challenge you to go back and look at the first post in this thread, and tell me you weren't attacking anything.

I quoted your last response, but my full post makes it clear (and I notice you only quote the last two lines, hmmmmm) that I was responding to all of your comments in this thread, including the incendiary statements at the beginning.

There was voter registration fraud. How much of it remains to to be seen. Frankly, based on the actual numbers of people who voted, it appears that turnout in 2008 nationwide will be at best marginally higher than in 2004, even though people were amazed at the large number of new registered voters.

Of course, registering to vote and actually voting aren't the same thing, and people could easily have registered and then decided not to vote for a number of reasons. But the documented number of cases that have turned up with rudimentary investigation indicates that this is a serious problem that should be addressed.

Occasionally, as in the Indianapolis case, the numbers show something that should be addressed. Even if it's merely a case of being slow to purge the rolls, having large numbers of improperly registered people on the rolls is a problem and one that lends itself to actual voter fraud.

Criticizing me doesn't change things. Any city should be embarrassed to have more registered voters than residents of voting age in the city and should do something about it. In this election there has been documentation that an organization with close ties to a presidential candidate was heavily involved in the voter registration fraud nationally. That should upset people a lot more than it has.

Again, it doesn't take many votes, real or fraudulent, to change an election. Just ask Al Gore.