In response to:

When 1,099 Felons Vote In A Race Won By 312 Ballots

TelePrompterLess Wrote: Aug 14, 2012 10:27 AM
Let's take your argument to be true, just for the sake of argument. Now let's assume that your employer makes an "honest mistake" on your paycheck...say he shorts you .005% each pay period. That can't be a heck of a lot of money, so why not just forget it? Unless your employer had, for example, 200 employees, and short changed each one .005% of their pay each week. Why, that employer would be getting one employee free. But since voter fraud doesn't matter, surely you would not object to employer fraud, would you?
John5840 Wrote: Aug 14, 2012 10:47 AM
Let's take your argument at face value. Given the relative numbers, you would want to employer to close that gap ..... but do so by firing 20 of the 200 employees.
In the eyes of the Obama administration, most Democratic lawmakers and left-leaning editorial pages across the country, voter fraud is a problem that doesn't exist. Allegations of fraud, they say, are little more than pretexts conjured up by Republicans to justify voter ID laws designed to suppress Democratic turnout.

That argument becomes much harder to make after reading a discussion of the 2008 Minnesota Senate race in "Who's Counting?", a new book by conservative journalist John Fund and former Bush Justice Department official Hans von Spakovsky. Although the authors cover the whole range of voter fraud issues, their chapter on Minnesota...