How likely for save act to pass senate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:46 of 47 countries in Europe.

and the government provides the ID FOR FREE.

Why are blue states so inept?

This thread is TLDR, so I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but I just want to throw out there that I live in MN, one of the states that doesn't require an ID.

The requirements to vote are either a valid ID, or an expired ID [/b]along with a SSN[/b]. You also must bring a utility bill or lease to show that you live in MN. So it's not like ANYONE can just roll up and vote with no verification.

Non citizens are given driver’s licenses and can bring a utility bill

Please show where non-citizens are voting. See the Heritage Foundation report and the Cato Institute reports (hardly liberal institutions) that show this to be a miniscule problem. In fact, I would ask, if there is so much illegal voting taking place, then how did the GOP win the House, senate and white House in 2024? Why was this an issue for the 2020 election when Trump was president, but not an issue in 2016 or 2024 when Trump won?

I don’t have to. As long as the possibility is there, that’s all that matters to me

It’s also possible an alien could abduct you at any moment and stick a probe you. Do you walk around with a stick up your a** all day long to protect against that “possibility” too?

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. None. Everyone knows that, including you. This is not about preventing illegal voting. It’s about sowing distrust so that your anti-democratic, fascist in chief can create an excuse to ignore the outcome of an election he doesn’t like. You’re pathetic.

Wow. If a dog can vote twice in California, what makes you think human non-citizens cannot vote?

But you’ll definitely trust a birth certificate from California as absolute proof of U.S. Citizenship, right? Same state that let the dog vote twice?

You can self certify by checking a box in California that you are a citizen. That is why we need the Save Act.

But the Save Act says a birth certificate issued by this very state you clearly can’t stand is proof positive of citizenship. You trust them 100% to issue proof of citizenship, right?

Didn't say I could not stand California. You said that. But, clearly, if the SAVE ACt passes, there would be better documentation and confidence in the system.

Self checking citizenship is pretty weak. But, hey, the dog was likely born in the U. s.

There was plenty of confidence in the system in 2024 when Trump and the GOP swept the election, right? Or are you saying the 2024 election was fraudulent?

+1

Redo 2024 then if you GOP are so committed.

Let's all admit that they feel they deserve to win and the only true result is when they win

Disenfranchisement of Americans is the name of their game.

Yeah, well, multiple people being registered to vote at vacant buildings, UPS Stores and non- existent addresses is pretty disenfranchising.

Multiple? Like what 100, 200?

Cite?

And you don't know the meaning of disenfranchise. Typical MAGA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of voter fraud--most of it from absentee ballots.

There are many cases that have been prosecuted--mostly for local elections. However, if there is so much fraud in local elections, what makes you think there is little fraud in national elections?

It is difficult to find fraud unless someone "turns." (That is according to an Assistant US attorney who has successfully prosecuted voter fraud cases.) There are many more reported that cannot be prosecuted because people are afraid to speak up. Unless a witness is willing to take the stand, a prosecutor will not likely take the case to trial.

Voter ID would clear up the voter rolls--it would help put integrity into the system.

Citation for this?

Because there are multiple safeguards in place to prevent this from happening. Only people who think there aren't any safegaurds and don't understand the process make this claim. I mean Utah has been using Mail-in ballots for years without issue, and every state uses their model because it is sot strong.

So ya, I want to see the evidence that there is all this mail-in voter fraud, because the allegation really impacts GOP voters more as the users askew older and from GOP areas, so the assertion thus implies GOP has been cheating in elections using this method for quite some time.

Don't tell us about multiple safeguards on paper. I wanna see multiple safeguards in practice.

That also means you don't force election observers to stand 100 feet away, cover up windows from viewing and count ballots when only half the people who are supposed to be there are there.

You get what I'm saying?

You get your news from FOX

I saw all this play out in 2020 locally. Your side tried to start something and couldn't carry it through but you are back for round 2. It won't work. All this talk but it won't pass. Go cry somewhere else. Only the chumps who still are die hard Trump ( 30 something %) believe you.

The rest of us have eyes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

You are talking about a handful of votes over the course of 30 years. It is staistically meaningless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line is that if ID documemts cost money, it is a poll tax. I have yet to see any Republican speak up in support of providing a free ID (as Indiana does) so that this complies with the constitution. The solution is obvious, so support free voter ID! If you do not, you are just being disingenuous.

Actually many Americans reject this effort as federal government overreach. Nothing in the constitution grants the federal government the right to gather such a centralized database. States’ rights.

Hence the stalemate. Dems are fine with voter ID if it isn't a poll tax. And Libertarians don't want the government overreach. So what is the GOP solution? Worst of both worlds, naturally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:46 of 47 countries in Europe.

and the government provides the ID FOR FREE.

Why are blue states so inept?

This thread is TLDR, so I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but I just want to throw out there that I live in MN, one of the states that doesn't require an ID.

The requirements to vote are either a valid ID, or an expired ID [/b]along with a SSN[/b]. You also must bring a utility bill or lease to show that you live in MN. So it's not like ANYONE can just roll up and vote with no verification.

Non citizens are given driver’s licenses and can bring a utility bill

Please show where non-citizens are voting. See the Heritage Foundation report and the Cato Institute reports (hardly liberal institutions) that show this to be a miniscule problem. In fact, I would ask, if there is so much illegal voting taking place, then how did the GOP win the House, senate and white House in 2024? Why was this an issue for the 2020 election when Trump was president, but not an issue in 2016 or 2024 when Trump won?

I don’t have to. As long as the possibility is there, that’s all that matters to me

It’s also possible an alien could abduct you at any moment and stick a probe you. Do you walk around with a stick up your a** all day long to protect against that “possibility” too?

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. None. Everyone knows that, including you. This is not about preventing illegal voting. It’s about sowing distrust so that your anti-democratic, fascist in chief can create an excuse to ignore the outcome of an election he doesn’t like. You’re pathetic.

Wow. If a dog can vote twice in California, what makes you think human non-citizens cannot vote?

But you’ll definitely trust a birth certificate from California as absolute proof of U.S. Citizenship, right? Same state that let the dog vote twice?

You can self certify by checking a box in California that you are a citizen. That is why we need the Save Act.

But the Save Act says a birth certificate issued by this very state you clearly can’t stand is proof positive of citizenship. You trust them 100% to issue proof of citizenship, right?

Didn't say I could not stand California. You said that. But, clearly, if the SAVE ACt passes, there would be better documentation and confidence in the system.

Self checking citizenship is pretty weak. But, hey, the dog was likely born in the U. s.

There was plenty of confidence in the system in 2024 when Trump and the GOP swept the election, right? Or are you saying the 2024 election was fraudulent?

+1

Redo 2024 then if you GOP are so committed.

Let's all admit that they feel they deserve to win and the only true result is when they win

Disenfranchisement of Americans is the name of their game.

Yeah, well, multiple people being registered to vote at vacant buildings, UPS Stores and non- existent addresses is pretty disenfranchising.

Please show where people tried to vote with an address at a vacant building. Just because there is an old name on a voter roll doesn't make it so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of voter fraud--most of it from absentee ballots.

There are many cases that have been prosecuted--mostly for local elections. However, if there is so much fraud in local elections, what makes you think there is little fraud in national elections?

It is difficult to find fraud unless someone "turns." (That is according to an Assistant US attorney who has successfully prosecuted voter fraud cases.) There are many more reported that cannot be prosecuted because people are afraid to speak up. Unless a witness is willing to take the stand, a prosecutor will not likely take the case to trial.

Voter ID would clear up the voter rolls--it would help put integrity into the system.

Citation for this?

Because there are multiple safeguards in place to prevent this from happening. Only people who think there aren't any safegaurds and don't understand the process make this claim. I mean Utah has been using Mail-in ballots for years without issue, and every state uses their model because it is sot strong.

So ya, I want to see the evidence that there is all this mail-in voter fraud, because the allegation really impacts GOP voters more as the users askew older and from GOP areas, so the assertion thus implies GOP has been cheating in elections using this method for quite some time.

Don't tell us about multiple safeguards on paper. I wanna see multiple safeguards in practice.

That also means you don't force election observers to stand 100 feet away, cover up windows from viewing and count ballots when only half the people who are supposed to be there are there.

You get what I'm saying?

then look at how EVERY state does it, but Utah and Washington are the model you should look at first. It isn't on paper, it is in practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of voter fraud--most of it from absentee ballots.

There are many cases that have been prosecuted--mostly for local elections. However, if there is so much fraud in local elections, what makes you think there is little fraud in national elections?

It is difficult to find fraud unless someone "turns." (That is according to an Assistant US attorney who has successfully prosecuted voter fraud cases.) There are many more reported that cannot be prosecuted because people are afraid to speak up. Unless a witness is willing to take the stand, a prosecutor will not likely take the case to trial.

Voter ID would clear up the voter rolls--it would help put integrity into the system.

Citation for this?

Because there are multiple safeguards in place to prevent this from happening. Only people who think there aren't any safegaurds and don't understand the process make this claim. I mean Utah has been using Mail-in ballots for years without issue, and every state uses their model because it is sot strong.

So ya, I want to see the evidence that there is all this mail-in voter fraud, because the allegation really impacts GOP voters more as the users askew older and from GOP areas, so the assertion thus implies GOP has been cheating in elections using this method for quite some time.

Don't tell us about multiple safeguards on paper. I wanna see multiple safeguards in practice.

That also means you don't force election observers to stand 100 feet away, cover up windows from viewing and count ballots when only half the people who are supposed to be there are there.

You get what I'm saying?

So you are ok with ICE hiding their faces but have a problem with election workers trying to do their jobs and not have idiots so close to them they impact their ability to run the ballots through counters without hassle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:46 of 47 countries in Europe.

and the government provides the ID FOR FREE.

Why are blue states so inept?

This thread is TLDR, so I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but I just want to throw out there that I live in MN, one of the states that doesn't require an ID.

The requirements to vote are either a valid ID, or an expired ID [/b]along with a SSN[/b]. You also must bring a utility bill or lease to show that you live in MN. So it's not like ANYONE can just roll up and vote with no verification.

Non citizens are given driver’s licenses and can bring a utility bill

Please show where non-citizens are voting. See the Heritage Foundation report and the Cato Institute reports (hardly liberal institutions) that show this to be a miniscule problem. In fact, I would ask, if there is so much illegal voting taking place, then how did the GOP win the House, senate and white House in 2024? Why was this an issue for the 2020 election when Trump was president, but not an issue in 2016 or 2024 when Trump won?

I don’t have to. As long as the possibility is there, that’s all that matters to me

It’s also possible an alien could abduct you at any moment and stick a probe you. Do you walk around with a stick up your a** all day long to protect against that “possibility” too?

There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. None. Everyone knows that, including you. This is not about preventing illegal voting. It’s about sowing distrust so that your anti-democratic, fascist in chief can create an excuse to ignore the outcome of an election he doesn’t like. You’re pathetic.

Wow. If a dog can vote twice in California, what makes you think human non-citizens cannot vote?

But you’ll definitely trust a birth certificate from California as absolute proof of U.S. Citizenship, right? Same state that let the dog vote twice?

You can self certify by checking a box in California that you are a citizen. That is why we need the Save Act.

But the Save Act says a birth certificate issued by this very state you clearly can’t stand is proof positive of citizenship. You trust them 100% to issue proof of citizenship, right?

Didn't say I could not stand California. You said that. But, clearly, if the SAVE ACt passes, there would be better documentation and confidence in the system.

Self checking citizenship is pretty weak. But, hey, the dog was likely born in the U. s.

There was plenty of confidence in the system in 2024 when Trump and the GOP swept the election, right? Or are you saying the 2024 election was fraudulent?

+1

Redo 2024 then if you GOP are so committed.

Let's all admit that they feel they deserve to win and the only true result is when they win

Disenfranchisement of Americans is the name of their game.

Yeah, well, multiple people being registered to vote at vacant buildings, UPS Stores and non- existent addresses is pretty disenfranchising.

It’s literally not. You don’t even know what the word “disenfranchise” means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

I hardly think that showing documents is the equivalent of castrating men. I also don't think the harm done is "nonexistent."

And, that data posted is only the fraud that was proven. There are far more cases than go to trial.

Fraud is hidden crimes. It is not like a burglary where you see the results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

I hardly think that showing documents is the equivalent of castrating men. I also don't think the harm done is "nonexistent."

And, that data posted is only the fraud that was proven. There are far more cases than go to trial.

Fraud is hidden crimes. It is not like a burglary where you see the results.

So you admit you have no evidence, got it. There is no proof of widespread voter fraud that affects elections, but you just “believe” it in your heart. Sure.

Everyone knows what this is about. We all saw your failed coup in 2021 over the exact same made up crap. No one is falling for it anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

I hardly think that showing documents is the equivalent of castrating men. I also don't think the harm done is "nonexistent."

And, that data posted is only the fraud that was proven. There are far more cases than go to trial.

Fraud is hidden crimes. It is not like a burglary where you see the results.

You’re right— castrated men would still have their constitutional rights.

Could you explain how your SAVE act would help avoid convicted and proven voter fraud such as this: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/georgia-republican-party-official-voted-illegally-nine-judge-rules-rcna145563

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

I hardly think that showing documents is the equivalent of castrating men. I also don't think the harm done is "nonexistent."

And, that data posted is only the fraud that was proven. There are far more cases than go to trial.

Fraud is hidden crimes. It is not like a burglary where you see the results.

And then....not proven in courts, so...not fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

I hardly think that showing documents is the equivalent of castrating men. I also don't think the harm done is "nonexistent."

And, that data posted is only the fraud that was proven. There are far more cases than go to trial.

Fraud is hidden crimes. It is not like a burglary where you see the results.

And then....not proven in courts, so...not fraud.

But, there are enough to show fraud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://electionfraud.heritage.org/

database of election fraud. Never happens?

No one said it never happens. They’re saying that it has never happened at all scale that would affect outcomes of any elections.

That database has 1,680 entries. From 1982 - 2025. That is hundreds of millions of votes. If we assume that all of these happened in one year (2024), that would still only be 0.00109%. In actuality, it is orders of magnitude smaller.

Crime is crime, so it's ok to ignore murderers and rapes as long as it's statisticly small and won't affect most people ? Wow

We don’t ignore murder and rape, but we also don’t systematically castrate all men even though it would prevent 95% of those crimes. The prevention would be worse than the harm, just like stripping massive numbers of U.S. citizens of their voting rights unless they pay extra money would be a disproportionate solution to the nonexistent harm that’s occurred from the illegal voting.

I hardly think that showing documents is the equivalent of castrating men. I also don't think the harm done is "nonexistent."

And, that data posted is only the fraud that was proven. There are far more cases than go to trial.

Fraud is hidden crimes. It is not like a burglary where you see the results.

And then....not proven in courts, so...not fraud.

But, there are enough to show fraud.

And so how does the SAVE act protect us from the proven cases of fraud like the one posted above? He would still have had his IDs when he voted illegally.