Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: > > "What's been debunked?" > > You're playing dumb now. > >
I very well may be playing with the dumb ... Look, I didn't say there is zero voter fraud, I said it is statistically insignificant. I will wager it's smaller than the error that exists in counting the votes in the first place. Thus if it's accuracy you're after, there's WAY more low hanging fruit than this ridiculous made-up "ID problem". Verifying that you are the person the state already knows about should be acceptable via a wide variety of methods and if you're saying it's can't be then we're in BIG trouble. Further, if you're saying the solution to identity verification is an "ID" and that it will eliminate all identification problems, then you're just plain ignorant. There isn't a magic bullet to stopping election inaccuracy, and probably the very last of the accuracy issues we need to worry about is ID. You're like the guy who complains about luke-warm airplane food when an engine just failed. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:339419 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
