https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/debunking-voter-fraud-myth
Any merits to this?
What are the counter arguments?
I'm in a big FB debate and need help ASAP! 
Debunking the 'debunk', BrennanCanter 'analysis': That heavily linked article uses the liberal logic string I call, "and another thing..." . They tell you one thing flawed and before you can answer on its validity they go to their second point, which isn't a second point because the first point wasn't so, and they keep going with more and more. What do lawyers call that strategy when you overwhelm the other side with paperwork and motions to avoid getting to the real question? It would take weeks to go through all that but look at what they are NOT saying, that "there is no voter fraud', because there is and it cheapens the vote of everyone else, undermines the process and once in awhile in the closest of elections, it changes the result.
Interestingly though, it can only change the result in one direction because they know they win the votes of the felons and illegals. The side that benefits from fraud wants no protection from it. For appearance sake, they should at least pretend to care about the integrity of the process.
Not mentioned in the "rarely", "almost never" argument is this:
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seat-through-voter-fraudThe election that enabled the 60th vote of the Senate in 2008-2009 had more illegal voters than the margin of victory. Oh well. This made Obamacare possible, caused the Dems to lose the House, changed history. 'Nuff said, but there is plenty more. That was just one incident of irregularity in one election that changed the course of the country.
If it was conservatives saying it is harder for minorities and immigrants than whites to show ID, they would be racist!
2.8 million Americans (that we know of) registered to vote in more than one place.
One in eight active registrations is invalid or inaccurate. There are about 1.8 million dead people listed as active voters. 12 million registrations have serious errors. [What could go wrong?]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/us/politics/us-voter-registration-rolls-are-in-disarray-pew-report-finds.html?_r=013% of illegals admit they vote. How many is too many? ONE.
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/How many ineligible residents are we talking about, all targeted by Democratic 'voter registration' and get-out-the-vote drives?
http://www.pewhispanic.org/interactives/unauthorized-immigrants/'Seldom', 'very rarely', 'almost none', 'very few convictions' for a crime we admittedly don't investigate, what kind of criteria are the see-no-evil people looking for? I thought it was, EVERY VOTE MATTERS. If so, every illegal vote matters!
Felons vote mostly Democrat. Illegals vote mostly Democrat. Both sides know it. Your debater on the other side should ask, what if the sides were reversed. But that is not possible in today's politics. Cynically and without exception, those opposing tighter controls want a particular result in the election. One side wants illegals to gain the right to vote and then they won't be illegal, but in the meantime they oppose basic ID requirements and they run voter registration turnout operations aimed at populations known to include ineligible voters, such as Motor Voter. In my state of MN, landlords are required to give tenants voter registration forms without asking or knowing their eligibility status. I won't do it. Meanwhile in their excesses, the vote of Trump plus the Libertarian in 2016 just beat Hillary plus Jill Stein in America's formerly most blue of blue states, the only state that never voted for Reagan.
"May their excesses be their downfall", a wise man once said. )
Marc, where the intent of the other side is to win by any means and keep integrity out of the process, you will not win them over on the merits of the argument, but you will win those in the middle who insist on integrity in the process no matter the outcome.
- Doug
