Quote:

---

All persons included in a voter registration database are not 1:1 included in voter rolls. That simply isn't true, they are not the same thing.

---

Then what is the point of even being registered to vote in any location? Why require it?

Part of the problems with ERIC is they also include EBUs in reports to the states but also sell that information to third parties.

Do you lose citizenship when you die?

Are you still a resident of the state if your address is -6 Cemetery Place?

How dare they attempt to silence the dead. Zombies should get a vote, too. Since they eat brains, they have more than most voters.

NorthSideCloseKnit said:

---

I appreciate the skepticism and I'm also weary of fact checking sites that claim to be infallible. My previous link kicked things off with "Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news." And I appreciated that it cited it's sources and linked them throughout it's analysis. I thought it added some fair nuance to the discussion while still pointing out the problems with MN's current system. I'm sure there is likely additional info out there and I appreciated other's insight as well in this thread.

---

Look, nothing against you and I appreciate you doing your research, but these people cannot be trusted. They aren't doing any of this for "security". They are doing it to continue committing wide-scale voter fraud and have a multi-billion dollar machine not only to enable them, but that must protect at all costs or else their house of cards will fall.

Democrats vote against anything that would ensure election integrity and they have been for over a decade now. It's not that hard to understand. Republicans are in the same boat, except they pretend that they don't understand and simply don't bring the issue to a vote to get what the VAST majority of people WANT.

This is one of the rare "both sides" issue. Both sides SUCK when it comes to election integrity, but the Democrats are more entrenched in it because their platform is so ridiculous and unpopular with most normal Americans that it requires election rigging to ensure they are elected.

BOTH sides have spent hundreds of millions of dollars in consulting fees, poll farms, focus groups, etc to figure out what they can do to get an edge or win at any cost within our current system. Any change or challenge to that system, in their eyes, upsets the apple cart and that's why they either dont want it or slow play any type of change, even if it is morally right and what a majority of the American people want.

The Dead serve the same role as illegals: a name on the roster to generate a mail in ballot with and then send it out into the wild to be collected by mules and then filled in with straight ticket Dem votes in the name of ERIC identified non-voters and held in reserve until the rural red votes are counted and they know how many Dem votes they need to "find" over the 2 week extension period after election date that they give themselves.

And they'll hide behind "there's no proof dead people are voting!"

No **** dead people aren't voting. It'd live people using the registrations of dead people, which should be immediately invalidated after death. This is just another loophole they can use to exploit our elections.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

And they'll hide behind "there's no proof dead people are voting!"

No **** dead people aren't voting. It'd live people using the registrations of dead people, which should be immediately invalidated after death. This is just another loophole they can use to exploit our elections.

---

Yes.

I kept reading about people who had not lived in Georgia for nearly ten years receiving ballots in the mail, in the states in which they now lived. Sometimes, multiple ballots.

I mention that because Fulton County contracted with Runbeck to handle all of their mail in ballots...based off of the voter rolls that GA provided. Here's the kicker. according to Runbeck' website, how they handle that is with a bar code on the outside envelope that is to be returned. That bar code is specific to individual voters. Each one of them. So Runbeck has that database. They and only they know how many ballots they sent out AND to which individual voters.

Being deceased is the ultimate disability. Why do Republicans want to keep disabled people from voting?

/dems

aggiehawg said:

---

Doesn't get more obvious than this. Need phantom voters on those rolls to win elections.

🚨 Democrats voted UNANIMOUSLY to not require the removal of dead people from Minnesota’s voter rolls last night.

This is insane.

Why would anyone oppose this? pic.twitter.com/LYRn4HHiN3

— Dustin Grage (@GrageDustin) May 7, 2026

---

FWIW this bill appears to be much more than cleaning the voter role, regardless of what the guy in the video says. It includes changes to absentee voting, ballot processing, timelines and a few other things.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong to vote against it. Dems are wrong about most things, and I don't know enough about it. But two things are clear:

1. There could potentially be other things in this bill that Dems are voting against.

2. The speaker in the video and the poster of the video on X both seem to be knowingly hiding that fact in order to manipulate perception.

Quote:

---

I'm not saying it's right or wrong to vote against it. Dems are wrong about most things, and I don't know enough about it. But two things are clear:

1. There could potentially be other things in this bill that Dems are voting against.

---

I think you are being overly generous or just naive.

https://media.tenor.com/Ur46ONZEGV8AAAAM/hat-tip-hats-off.gif

So split them up and vote for each individually.

Stop the pork fat.

In fact, let's sanction capital punishment for anyone trying to tie unrelated bills together.

"Free meals for school children, but only if oil is banned."
Who would vote against feeding children?

JamesE4 said:

---

The brother is gay, and there is no evidence they consummated the fraud marriage.

---

WGAS? Fraud is fraud. Brother-f***er or not, she should be expelled from Congress and win a one way ticket back to Somalia.

TexasRebel said:

---

So split them up and vote for each individually.

Stop the pork fat.

In fact, let's sanction capital punishment for anyone trying to tie unrelated bills together.

"Free meals for school children, but only if oil is banned."
Who would vote against feeding children?

---

This. Need single item bills or line item veto.

Slicer97 said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

So split them up and vote for each individually.

Stop the pork fat.

In fact, let's sanction capital punishment for anyone trying to tie unrelated bills together.

"Free meals for school children, but only if oil is banned."
Who would vote against feeding children?

---

This. Need single item bills or line item veto.

---

Works for me.

Line item veto isn't enough

We need anyone who considers anything besides single item bills out of politics.

Welcome to F16, you should stick around. I appreciate the rigor in your argument, but I dont know how purging dead people from eligible voter rolls could ever be a losing position within reason, try as you might.

You could gather a group of K-5 kids and explain this to them and they would immediately be able to tell you why this doesn't make sense and is unfair to the process, simply because they know what dead people are and how they shouldnt be considered in the "what are we going to have for snack" conversation. You would struggle to have that same conversation with the ******s in Congress who voted down this common-sense legislative measure.

You are clearly intelligent and well-reasoned, though, so keep coming back. We encourage discourse here.

Prosperdick said:

---

I dare any CM or lib to defend this, please give your reasoning. Maybe they'll use deadist bias instead of ageist.

---

dude what do you expect. especially if illegals are beijg deported. votes don't just materialize out of then air. these people are lifelong democrats and who are you to say that in their death they can't still vote democrat?

what are you an anti-deceased-ite

Hubert J. Farnsworth said:

---

Come on libs. Lets here the reasoning for this.

---

I bet the excuse will be to eliminate the chance a person still alive will be removed by evil Republicans to cheat.
The Democratic Party leadership has no honor, ethics, nor morals.

Maroon Dawn said:

---

The Dead serve the same role as illegals: a name on the roster to generate a mail in ballot with and then send it out into the wild to be collected by mules and then filled in with straight ticket Dem votes in the name of ERIC identified non-voters and held in reserve until the rural red votes are counted and they know how many Dem votes they need to "find" over the 2 week extension period after election date that they give themselves.

---

ERIC also identifies EBUs. Eligible (voters) But Unregistered. Not hard to take that info and file for registration, then a ballot request. Change the address and that EBU would never know that they were registered and voted.

G Martin 87 said:

---

NorthSideCloseKnit said:

---

Glad to see people are continuing to call out the need for election integrity and security. Apparently the Dems defend it as it makes voter rolls auditable. The state checks voters against the active voter roll. If somebody tries to commit voter fraud by voting for a deceased person, then the state can check the active voter roll. If the deceased voters are deleted entirely from the system, then how could it be audited? Seems like removing deceased people entirely would create a bigger security gap.

The following link lays out the arguments from the Dems and the GOP. Patriot Fetch - Minnesota Democrats Block Efforts To Remove Deceased Voters From Rolls

I don't know how credible that site is, but it's the most helpful info I found without a knee jerk reaction in either direction.

As quoted in the article: "Despite the provocative rhetoric, the voting records tell a more detailed story. Democrats... argue that while deceased voters are marked in the databases, retaining these records is essential. This practice helps prevent identity fraud by keeping a historical account that can signal any efforts to impersonate someone who has passed away....
..."Deceased voters are marked as deceased and removed from the list of active voters upon notification from the Minnesota Department of Health or Social Security Administration. Voter records marked as 'deceased' are not active and therefore not included on any voting roster or public information list.""

---

The argument makes sense from a data governance perspective. The purpose of having voter rolls is historical as well as a control mechanism. Deleting a voter roll record when the voter dies isn't necessarily a good idea. The really important thing is to ensure that voter rolls are kept up-to-date so that ballots from dead voters are invalidated immediately and the person casting an invalid ballot faces consequences for doing so.

---

That makes zero sense. If a person tries to use a name of a dead person it will be rejected immediately.

Keeping dead people on the rolls allows more somalis to vote.