March 6, 2016

Dem turnout and voter ID: The dirty little secret
By Thomas Lifson

The numbers tell a story, and you can draw the obvious conclusions. Because the mainstream media certainly won’t. Keep this statistic in mind the next time some progressive tries to claim voter fraud is not a serious problem.

Political Wire quotes the HuffPo:


Huffington Post: “Eight out of the 16 states that have held primaries or caucuses so far have implemented new voter ID or other restrictive voting laws since 2010. Democratic turnout has dropped 37 percent overall in those eight states, but just 13 percent in the states that didn’t enact new voter restrictions. To put it another way, Democratic voter turnout was 285 percent worse in states with new voter ID laws.”

Left unsaid: despite the “burden” of obtaining voter ID, GOP turnout was up.

Clearly this is racist.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The key argument against voter ID laws is that they disproportionately disenfranchise minorities. glad to see you've come around on this one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The key argument against voter ID laws is that they disproportionately disenfranchise minorities. glad to see you've come around on this one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

they disproportionately disenfranchise minorities = CRAP

the argument that someone can't get an ID is for morons

Funny, the huffpo article you cite discusses that but you forgot to post it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And the idea that there is voter fraud is moronic.

And the idea that there is voter fraud is moronic.

that's quite a statement

Funny, the huffpo article you cite discusses that but you forgot to post it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

it's the huffington post...sooo

"Democratic voter turnout was down 50 percent in the Lone Star State from 2008, more than in any other early-voting state so far."


Giddayup!!

The key argument against voter ID laws is that they disproportionately disenfranchise minorities. glad to see you've come around on this one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So tell me, why is it harder for a black person to get a photo id, than it is for a white person? Do we make the non-whites stand in a longer line, preferably outside in the rain?

Please be very specific. I cannot wait for your reply...

if you can register to vote, you can have an ID

there is nothing disproportionate about it

no one is keeping minorities down

Jim is right, this ought to be interesting how it is answered

Jim is right, this ought to be interesting how it is answered

a)white male priviledge

b) The 1%

c) Crony capitalism

d) Sarah Palin

e) all of the above

Even the judge in the voter ID law case said he was wrong. Repubs. do everything they can to make it harder to vote - less early balloting, etc. Pathetic

"But there was Richard A. Posner, one of the most distinguished judges in the land and a member of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, saying he was mistaken in one of the most contentious issues in American politics and jurisprudence: laws that require people to show identification before they can vote.
Proponents of voter identification laws, who tend to be Republican, say the measures are necessary to prevent fraud at the polls. Opponents, who tend to be Democrats, assert that the amount of fraud at polling places is tiny, and that the burdens of the laws are enough to suppress voting, especially among poor and minority Americans.

One of the landmark cases in which such requirements were affirmed, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, was decided at the Seventh Circuit in an opinion written by Judge Posner in 2007 and upheld by the Supreme Court in 2008.

In a new book, “Reflections on Judging,” Judge Posner, a prolific author who also teaches at the University of Chicago Law School, said, “I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion” in the case. He noted that the Indiana law in the Crawford case is “a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.”

Asked whether the court had gotten its ruling wrong, Judge Posner responded: “Yes. Absolutely.” Back in 2007, he said, “there hadn’t been that much activity in the way of voter identification,” and “we weren’t really given strong indications that requiring additional voter identification would actually disenfranchise people entitled to vote.” The member of the three-judge panel who dissented from the majority decision, Terence T. Evans, “was right,” Judge Posner said.

The dissent by Judge Evans, who died in 2011, began, “Let’s not beat around the bush: The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic.”

Repubs. will even admit it is to lower the turnout - pathetic.

A new Florida law that contributed to long voter lines and caused some to abandon voting altogether was intentionally designed by Florida GOP staff and consultants to inhibit Democratic voters, former GOP officials and current GOP consultants have told The Palm Beach Post.
Republican leaders said in proposing the law that it was meant to save money and fight voter fraud. But a former GOP chairman and former Gov. Charlie Crist, both of whom have been ousted from the party, now say that fraud concerns were advanced only as subterfuge for the law’s main purpose: GOP victory.
Former Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer says he attended various meetings, beginning in 2009, at which party staffers and consultants pushed for reductions in early voting days and hours.

“The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early voting is bad for Republican Party candidates,” Greer told The Post. “It’s done for one reason and one reason only. … ‘We’ve got to cut down on early voting because early voting is not good for us,’ ” Greer said he was told by those staffers and consultants.

“They never came in to see me and tell me we had a (voter) fraud issue,” Greer said. “It’s all a marketing ploy.”

Another one who admits the truth.
This weekend, Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai (R-PA) finally admitted what so many have speculated: Voter identification efforts are meant to suppress Democratic votes in this year’s election.

At the Republican State Committee meeting, Turzai took the stage and let slip the truth about why Republicans are so insistent on voter identification efforts — it will win Romney the election, he said:

“We are focused on making sure that we meet our obligations that we’ve talked about for years,” said Turzai in a speech to committee members Saturday. He mentioned the law among a laundry list of accomplishments made by the GOP-run legislature.

“Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it’s done. First pro-life legislation – abortion facility regulations – in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”

The voter ID laws bother me less than the shortening of hours but minortities (a higher % vote Dem.) have less need for ID. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s for the same reason. Driver’s licenses are not the only form of id, but minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID

Even the judge in the voter ID law case said he was wrong. Repubs. do everything they can to make it harder to vote - less early balloting, etc. Pathetic

"But there was Richard A. Posner, one of the most distinguished judges in the land and a member of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, saying he was mistaken in one of the most contentious issues in American politics and jurisprudence: laws that require people to show identification before they can vote.
Proponents of voter identification laws, who tend to be Republican, say the measures are necessary to prevent fraud at the polls. Opponents, who tend to be Democrats, assert that the amount of fraud at polling places is tiny, and that the burdens of the laws are enough to suppress voting, especially among poor and minority Americans.

One of the landmark cases in which such requirements were affirmed, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, was decided at the Seventh Circuit in an opinion written by Judge Posner in 2007 and upheld by the Supreme Court in 2008.

In a new book, “Reflections on Judging,” Judge Posner, a prolific author who also teaches at the University of Chicago Law School, said, “I plead guilty to having written the majority opinion” in the case. He noted that the Indiana law in the Crawford case is “a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.”

Asked whether the court had gotten its ruling wrong, Judge Posner responded: “Yes. Absolutely.” Back in 2007, he said, “there hadn’t been that much activity in the way of voter identification,” and “we weren’t really given strong indications that requiring additional voter identification would actually disenfranchise people entitled to vote.” The member of the three-judge panel who dissented from the majority decision, Terence T. Evans, “was right,” Judge Posner said.

The dissent by Judge Evans, who died in 2011, began, “Let’s not beat around the bush: The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic.”

Repubs. will even admit it is to lower the turnout - pathetic.

A new Florida law that contributed to long voter lines and caused some to abandon voting altogether was intentionally designed by Florida GOP staff and consultants to inhibit Democratic voters, former GOP officials and current GOP consultants have told The Palm Beach Post.
Republican leaders said in proposing the law that it was meant to save money and fight voter fraud. But a former GOP chairman and former Gov. Charlie Crist, both of whom have been ousted from the party, now say that fraud concerns were advanced only as subterfuge for the law’s main purpose: GOP victory.
Former Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer says he attended various meetings, beginning in 2009, at which party staffers and consultants pushed for reductions in early voting days and hours.

“The Republican Party, the strategists, the consultants, they firmly believe that early voting is bad for Republican Party candidates,” Greer told The Post. “It’s done for one reason and one reason only. … ‘We’ve got to cut down on early voting because early voting is not good for us,’ ” Greer said he was told by those staffers and consultants.

“They never came in to see me and tell me we had a (voter) fraud issue,” Greer said. “It’s all a marketing ploy.”

Another one who admits the truth.
This weekend, Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai (R-PA) finally admitted what so many have speculated: Voter identification efforts are meant to suppress Democratic votes in this year’s election.

At the Republican State Committee meeting, Turzai took the stage and let slip the truth about why Republicans are so insistent on voter identification efforts — it will win Romney the election, he said:

“We are focused on making sure that we meet our obligations that we’ve talked about for years,” said Turzai in a speech to committee members Saturday. He mentioned the law among a laundry list of accomplishments made by the GOP-run legislature.

“Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it’s done. First pro-life legislation – abortion facility regulations – in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”

Paul, I see a whole lot of theory here, and little detail.

"the Indiana law in the Crawford case is “a type of law now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.”

How? How doe sit suppress votes, particularly nonwhite votes?

if we are talking about generic suppression, well, it makes sense that any rule that makes it burdensome to vote, will suppress voter turnout. Here in CT, I believe you have to register before election day. That will result in fewer voters, sure, but it's not designed to disproportionately suppress nonwhite votes or liberal votes. Nonwhites have the same opportunity to register. if they choose not to, or if they choose not to get a photo id, that's a result of their laziness, it has nothing to do with racism.

"The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic.”

Again, HOW is that aimed at suppressing Democrats more than Republicans? People can say it again and again and again...but they never offer the link, as to why this suppresses Democrat voters more than it suppresses Republican voters.

Paul, are you and Spence saying, simply, the Democrat population is less likely to jump through whatever hoops are mandated, than Republicans? Is that what you are saying? Or are you saying that the actual process of getting an id, is more burdensome to blacks/Democrats?

I'm guessing that's what you are saying, you just don't want to say it out loud.

If you say you need a photo id, and the process for getting a photo id is identical for whites, blacks, republicans, and democrats...how is that racist?

It makes ZERO sense to me.

The voter ID laws bother me less than the shortening of hours but minortities (a higher % vote Dem.) have less need for ID. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s for the same reason. Driver’s licenses are not the only form of id, but minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID



"minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID"

Please explain, exactly, why minorities have less access to government-issued photo id's, than whites. It's not true just because you say it.

if the process for getting a photo id (other than driver's license) is the same for whites and blacks (and I have to believe it is the same), than why do blacks have "less access"? Please support your conclusion that minorities have less access to these ids? Based on what? What, exactly, reduces their access? Are all the places to get those ids, located in gated, white communities? Does the Klan run the offices where they are handed out? Are applicants required to name their favorite Bing Crosby song, or answer questions about fox hunting or falconry?

Driver’s licenses are not the only form of id, but minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID


They don't have as much access to the registry of motor vehicles as anyone else? :huh: You can get an ID there as simple as standing in line with proper form of identification like utility bills , birth certificate etc.

explain this reason of not having as much access to me, I'm at a loss

I bet if they required ID for alcohol or smokes, everybody would have one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here's an idea for you, place photo's on EBT cards, that way, "POOF" all Democrats now have a state issued photo ID card.


Could also assist in EBT fraud prevention. just an idea.....

The voter ID laws bother me less than the shortening of hours but minortities (a higher % vote Dem.) have less need for ID. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s for the same reason. Driver’s licenses are not the only form of id, but minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID

this is incredibly racist

They don't have as much access to the registry of motor vehicles as anyone else? :huh: You can get an ID there as simple as standing in line with proper form of identification like utility bills , birth certificate etc.

explain this reason of not having as much access to me, I'm at a loss

Reread my statement bc that is not what I said.

Here's an idea for you, place photo's on EBT cards, that way, "POOF" all Democrats now have a state issued photo ID card.


Could also assist in EBT fraud prevention. just an idea.....


You mean Democrats all get EBT cards?

this is incredibly racist

Correction - it would be racist, if you or I said it.

Paul, if all that is true, I would think you'd be in favor of restricted-hours voting, because according to you, the Democrats are the ones home all day and can easily get to the polls, while people on my side are at work all day, so it's less convenient for us to vote.

Correction - it would be racist, if you or I said it.



Is that a form of a straw man arguement?

Show me where anyone accused you of being racist here.

Did I say minorities are home all day? Pls. point that out.

Is that a form of a straw man arguement?

Show me where anyone accused you of being racist here.

Did I say minorities are home all day? Pls. point that out.

Sigh.

I asked you, why the ID requirement is more harmful to blacks than to whites. I asked for specific reasons.

What we got from you., was a series of quotes from people who agree it's more harmful to blacks.

That doesn't respond to my question, not even close. I didn't ask you "who else agrees with you"? What I asked for, was a reason why.

You said fewer blacks have driver's licenses than whites. That doesn't answer my question either. Because if there are 100 blacks without a driver's license, and 5 whites, you are saying that the blacks have "less access" to government id's than the whites.

That's what you said - they have less access.

I'd like to know why you think that is? Based on what, exactly? Why i sthe process for getting ids, more cumbersome for blacks than it is for whites?

If you cannot answer that, then why do you believe what you believe? There's not a singke opinion I have, that I can't justify with pertinent supporting logic. All you have here, is a baseless accusation that the process is racist.

If it's a cultural thing, that blacks are just too lazy to go to city hal;l to get the card, that's a function of their cultural failure, it's not a function of racism. Because the fact is (unless you can explain otherwise), they have the exact same access to thise ids that I have. The same exact access.

Either tell me why I am wrong, or admit you can't support your opinion...

Is that a form of a straw man arguement?

Show me where anyone accused you of being racist here.

Did I say minorities are home all day? Pls. point that out.

It was hyperbole and sarcasm, OK?

What you absolutely did say, is that blacks have less access to governemnt id's, than whites. Please justify that statement. Based on what?

Do I have to spell it out? A lower % of minorities and students have licenses bc they have less need for a car bc of living in cities.

Do you agree that there is little fraud in our elections?

Do I have to spell it out? A lower % of minorities and students have licenses bc they have less need for a car bc of living in cities.


They may have less need for these......but their access to Them is exactly the same as everybody else.....they can go to the exact same building, stand in the exact same line, and deal with the exact same cranky DMV employee as the rest of us......if they so CHOOSE.....

Students have student IDs.....correct....there is their form of ID.

Anybody over the age of 18 can get a state ID card.....not a license......not a passport......just a simple ID card. That is what my son has.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Do I have to spell it out? A lower % of minorities and students have licenses bc they have less need for a car bc of living in cities.

Do you agree that there is little fraud in our elections?

Let me try again, because you are not answering the question that is being asked.

I concede that a higher % of blacks don't have a driver's livcense, than the corresponding % of whites.

Here is my question...if you don't have a driver's license, you can get another photo id. Why is it harder for blacks to get that id, than it is for whites?

Do blacks have, or do they not have, the same exact access to an alternate form of government id, as whites?

"Do you agree that there is little fraud in our elections"

Here, I will show you how to give a direct answer to a direct question, which you haven't been able to do for me yet. YES, I agree that voter fraud isn't a huge issue. See? I answered the question which you are asking.

I also contend that while it isn't a huge issue, it is a minor issue, and if it can be minimized by asking people to get a photo ide, I fail to see how that violates anyone's rights. What that does, is preserve the integrity of the voting process.

I do not have a strong opinion on requiring phot ids. What I do feel strongly about, is that the idea has no racial implications whatsoever. Every single black person who doesn't have a driver's license but wants to vote, can get his ass to town hall or wherever and get the alternate photo id.

Now, please tell us, why it's harder for blacks to get an alternate form pf photo id (besides a drivers license) compared to whites? I concede yoru point that MORE blacks need such a photo id. But your side says that it's HARDER for blacks to get that id. That's what I dispute.

but their access to Them is exactly the same as everybody else.....

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

BINGO.

You might have added, "try making that wrong". Other than that, it was perfect.

Paul, it doesn't need to be a driver's license. Every state offers a photo id card that's not a driver's license, and many people of all races, get them.

And access to these cards, as well as to driver's licenses, is exactly the same for all of us, regardless of skin color. A photo id requirement has absolutely zero inherent racial bias. It may well turn out that such a requirement suppresses black votes more than it suppresses white votes (I wouldn't bet against that outcome), but that's a choice made by people to not get the id, it's not the inevitable result of institutional racism. Every single black person who doesn't drive, every single one of them, could get that id if they chose. It's no more of a burden for them than it is for white folk who don't drive.

They may have less need for these......but their access to Them is exactly the same as everybody else.....they can go to the exact same building, stand in the exact same line, and deal with the exact same cranky DMV employee as the rest of us......if they so CHOOSE.....

Students have student IDs.....correct....there is their form of ID.

Anybody over the age of 18 can get a state ID card.....not a license......not a passport......just a simple ID card. That is what my son has.

One of the challengers to a voter ID law was a bunch of Nuns (all like 80 -90 years old) who didn't drive and didn't have birth certificates.

As I said earlier, the ID law doesn't bother me as much but why limit the hours people can vote?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where did I say access in reference to drivers licenses? I specifically said passports or other forms of govern. id. (I'm sure snarky Scott will call me racist again;))

So now you have to get a drivers license or go to school to get an ID to vote? Did your son just walked in empty handed and was able to leave with a ID?

Even in a state where they give you free Ids, some people don't have the $ to get a copy of their birth certificate.

Are you kidding me Paul, I quoted you in my post where you specifically said they don't drive so they don't need a license.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

My son walked in with his social security card....how much do those cost?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

.....maybe the Democrats can include a free copy of your birth certificate in with all the other freebies. :hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Even in a state where they give you free Ids, some people don't have the $ to get a copy of their birth certificate.

the horror :eek:



Requesting a birth certificate

There are five ways to obtain a birth certificate:

In person – Most records are printed on demand while you wait at any of our locations (downtown and five suburban courthouses).
Records are $15 for the first copy and $4 for each additional copy of the same record.
Cash, debit cards and credit cards (MasterCard, Visa, American Express & Discover) are accepted. A $1.25 processing fee is charged for debit cards; a $1.75 processing fee for credit cards. Checks are not accepted.

By mail – On average, mail orders are processed in 7-10 business days.
Mail your request to:
Cook County Clerk David Orr
Bureau of Vital Records
P.O. Box 641070
Chicago, IL 60664-1070
Include the following items in your mail order:
a completed Birth Certificate Request Form (be sure to include your phone number)
a photocopy of your photo identification (click here for acceptable forms of ID)
a check or money order payable to “Cook County Clerk” for $15 (additional copies of the same record cost $4 each)
a self-addressed stamped envelope for your document(s) to be mailed to you.

Currency Exchange – Birth records can be ordered at any Currency Exchange.
For hours and locations, call (847) 759-8905 or visit mycurrencyexchange.com.
In addition to the standard record fees, there is a $5 surcharge for records obtained at a Currency Exchange.
Records must be picked up at the store by the customer at a later time.

Online – Order online via VitalChek.
You will need to know the city of birth listed on the birth certificate, the child’s full name, the exact date of birth, and the parents’ first and last names.
In addition to the standard record fees, VitalChek online orders charge $12.45 for processing and standard postage.
Processing time averages 10-14 business days for regular mail (included), 5-7 business days for 2-day air ($17.50), and 3-5 business days for UPS Air ($20).
Credit cards (MasterCard, Visa, American Express & Discover) and checks are accepted.

Phone – Phone orders via VitalChek can be made by calling toll free (866) 252-8974.
You will need to know the city of birth listed on the birth certificate, the child’s full name, the exact date of birth, and the parents’ first and last names.
In addition to the standard record fees, VitalChek online orders charge $12.45 for processing and standard postage.
Processing time averages 10-14 business days for regular mail (included), 5-7 business days for 2-day air ($17.50), and 3-5 business days for UPS Air ($20).
Credit cards (MasterCard, Visa, American Express & Discover) and checks are accepted.

I'm sure Rev. Wright will pony up the buck for the state ID and bus ride to the RMV

poor arguement

Are you kidding me Paul, I quoted you in my post where you specifically said they don't drive so they don't need a license.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And the sentence you quoted did not say they had less "access" to drivers licenses.

So I can just walk in emptyhanded and walk out with a SS card? Didn't know I could do that.

A lawsuit filed against Alabama in early December 2015 cites the example of a high schooler who can’t vote because she lacks a driver’s license. According to the suit, she needs to get a state issued voter ID at the DMV, but the one nearest to her is only open one day per month and there’s no public transportation to another DMV 40 miles away roundtrip.


During closing arguments in a 2012 case over Texas’s voter ID law, a lawyer for the state brushed aside geographical obstacles as the “reality to life of choosing to live in that part of Texas.”

In a now-infamous remark, Mike Turzai, majority leader of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, praised the state’s legislative accomplishments — including passing a voter ID law — at a 2012 Republican State Committee meeting.
“Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done,” he said.



Reverend Wright, EBD cards - this thread is funny.

Where did I say access in reference to drivers licenses? I specifically said passports or other forms of govern. id. (I'm sure snarky Scott will call me racist again;))


Even in a state where they give you free Ids, some people don't have the $ to get a copy of their birth certificate.

You asked me if voter fraud was rampant, and I gave you the honest answer.

Now it's my turn...are you suggesting that a large number of Americans, who will take the time to vote, can't do so because they don't have the $$ to get a copy of their birth certificate?

In all seriousness, how do these people establish their identity for the purposes of getting whatever welfare they must be on? Or to cash those assistance checks?

You asked me if voter fraud was rampant, and I gave you the honest answer.

Now it's my turn...are you suggesting that a large number of Americans, who will take the time to vote, can't do so because they don't have the $$ to get a copy of their birth certificate?I think that has something to do with it plus in places like Texas they are so far from official offices.

In all seriousness, how do these people establish their identity for the purposes of getting whatever welfare they must be on? Or to cash those assistance checks?

I think it is bc they don't have $ like you and I have and live paycheck to paycheck. Why use a payday lendor if you have a bank acct.

And the sentence you quoted did not say they had less "access" to drivers licenses.

So I can just walk in emptyhanded and walk out with a SS card? Didn't know I could do that.

A lawsuit filed against Alabama in early December 2015 cites the example of a high schooler who can’t vote because she lacks a driver’s license. According to the suit, she needs to get a state issued voter ID at the DMV, but the one nearest to her is only open one day per month and there’s no public transportation to another DMV 40 miles away roundtrip.


During closing arguments in a 2012 case over Texas’s voter ID law, a lawyer for the state brushed aside geographical obstacles as the “reality to life of choosing to live in that part of Texas.”

In a now-infamous remark, Mike Turzai, majority leader of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, praised the state’s legislative accomplishments — including passing a voter ID law — at a 2012 Republican State Committee meeting.
“Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done,” he said.



Reverend Wright, EBD cards - this thread is funny.

"one nearest to her is only open one day per month and there’s no public transportation to another DMV 40 miles away roundtrip"

THAT'S NOT RACIST! Because if a white person lives next door, they are in the same exact boat. That burden is not a function of race, it has nohting to do with race. Those people need to address that with their state.

"a lawyer for the state brushed aside geographical obstacles "

We need to address that. Again, it has exactly nothing to do with race. Race doesn't determine who lives out in the woods...

Paul, you want to argue that it's less convenient for some folks than others to get that ID card, I concede that. But the addiitonal burdens are not a function of one's race.

And if one chooses to live far away from society, that person is absolutely agreeing to accept the consequences of that choice, and not all of the consequences are necessarily pleasant.

"Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done,” he said."

Again, you are quoting someone who is merely stating he agrees with you. Many times, I asked for the "why", not the "who agrees with you".

You got creamed here. You can't begin to justify the argument that race dictates how convenient/burdensome it is for one to get a photo id.

I'm getting a headache and a sore thumb....

You need to actually reread what you posted.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think it is bc they don't have $ like you and I have and live paycheck to paycheck. Why use a payday lendor if you have a bank acct.

I don't know what a payday lendor is. A place to cash a check? Don't you need some kind of id to do that?

So I can just walk in emptyhanded and walk out with a SS card? Didn't know I could do that.



That is NOT what I said....I said he walked IN with his social security card and walked OUT with his ID


pretty much everybody that is eligible to vote....should have a valid SSN, correct

That is NOT what I said....I said he walked IN with his social security card and walked OUT with his ID


pretty much everybody that is eligible to vote....should have a valid SSN, correct

YOu said "My son walked in with his social security card....how much do those cost?"

And I replied "So I can just walk in emptyhanded and walk out with a SS card? Didn't know I could do that."

So I didn't change or misinterpret anything. I was asking a question. Did your son walk in emptyhanded to the SS office or did he go in with a birth certificate?

I think some people don't have SS #s. Don't know how they get by but that is what I have heard.

I don't know what a payday lendor is. A place to cash a check? Don't you need some kind of id to do that?

Just as you don't know, I don't know what they requre. The point is people live off the grid or live differently from you and I. A lot of people don't have bank accts., make so little $ they might not file taxes, etc.

If they live off the grid...then why should they vote?

And living off the grid has nothing to do with being a minority

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

YOu said "My son walked in with his social security card....how much do those cost?"

And I replied "So I can just walk in emptyhanded and walk out with a SS card? Didn't know I could do that."

So I didn't change or misinterpret anything. I was asking a question. Did your son walk in emptyhanded or did he go in with a birth certificate?

We did the responsible thing.....we got it for him when he was born
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If they live off the grid...then why should they vote?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess we can change the Constituion to prevent them from voting. Right?

Just as you don't know, I don't know what they requre. The point is people live off the grid or live differently from you and I. A lot of people don't have bank accts., make so little $ they might not file taxes, etc.

" A lot of people don't have bank accts"

Then in order to cash checks, they need an id. Never heard of a place that cashes checks without an id.

"The point is people live off the grid "

True. And here in CT, every single one of those people (at least until recently, maybe it changed?), has to get to their town hall to register to vote. If they can do that, maybe they can get an id.

Paul, what if those people show up to vote, to find out that someone else voted in their name? Are they better served that way? It's designed to protect the integrity of the process. At least in theory. If, in practice, people of one demographic are more turned off by voting requirements that apply to us all - that's their choice.

And you keep quoting that guy who said that voter ids woul dgive PA to Romney? Well, Romney didn't win PA in 2012. So maybe that guy isn't as credible as a source on these things, as you think he is.

I guess we can change the Constituion to prevent them from voting. Right?

There are hoops that we all have to jump through, in order to vote. The hoops are not based on race, despite your claims to the contrary. Nothiing you have said, substantiates your claim that it's harder for blacks to get a photo id (other than a driver's license). It will be harder for people who live far away...that's not based on race, that's based on where one chooses to live.

I guess we can change the Constituion to prevent them from voting. Right?

Maybe they should provide proof that they are covered by the constitution?

How could they do that? Hmmmm
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You can't begin to justify the argument that race dictates how convenient/burdensome it is for one to get a photo id.

Pls. point out where I said it was racist? It affects minorities more (who vote Democratic more). I think Tysdad was the person who mentioned racism 1st and then Cool Beans made an assinine comment (but he hasn't come back to follow up so I'm a little unsure what he meant).

It is nothing more than an attempt to lower voting by groups that vote more for Dems. There is no fraud so there is no reason to do it.

Why disenfranchise so many voters if as you agree there is so little fraud?

There are hoops that we all have to jump through, in order to vote. The hoops are not based on race, despite your claims to the contrary. Nothiing you have said, substantiates your claim that it's harder for blacks to get a photo id (other than a driver's license). It will be harder for people who live far away...that's not based on race, that's based on where one chooses to live.

Exactly...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pls. point out where I said it was racist? It affects minorities more (who vote Democratic more).
?

You never said it was racist.....but you most certainly through the minority card around.

Jims point is that the minority thing has nothing to do with it...which it doesn't....

But it sure does seem like people like to throw the minority card around lately

The voter ID laws bother me less than the shortening of hours but minortities (a higher % vote Dem.) have less need for ID. The most common voter ID is a driver’s license, and minorities are less likely to drive. Minorities are less likely to have driver’s licenses because they are more likely to be poor and to live in urban areas. If you can’t afford a car, or if you don’t need one because you take the bus or subway, you are less likely to have a driver’s license. Students are less likely to have driver’s for the same reason. Driver’s licenses are not the only form of id, but minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You never said it was racist.....but you most certainly through the minority card around.


and how many times was it stated that people say it was racist? Tysdad's only post said it was racist. Scott claimed it didn't disproportionately disenfranchise minorities and said that was "CRAP"
Jims point is that the minority thing has nothing to do with it...which it doesn't....

But it sure does seem like people like to throw the minority card around lately


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And it looks like the straw man racist card gets thrown around a lot here and quickly.

Scotts not wrong.....and tysdad was just being a wise ass
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pls. point out where I said it was racist? It affects minorities more (who vote Democratic more). I think Tysdad was the person who mentioned racism 1st and then Cool Beans made an assinine comment (but he hasn't come back to follow up so I'm a little unsure what he meant).

It is nothing more than an attempt to lower voting by groups that vote more for Dems. There is no fraud so there is no reason to do it.

Why disenfranchise so many voters if as you agree there is so little fraud?

"Pls. point out where I said it was racist?"

Are you serious? You posted this..."minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID"

Your were saying that Republicans favor voter id laws, because that will suppress black turnout, because of the reduced acceess you claim (falsely, and without even trying to support it) minorities have to these ids.

If you lose an argument, better to admit that you lost it, than to deny you made it in the first place.

"It affects minorities more (who vote Democratic more)."

That's a choice on their part, a choice not to bear the burden placed on all voters. It's not because of institutional bias.

"There is no fraud "

None? How many examples would you like us to post of voter fraud? It's not rampant, but of course it exists.

"Why disenfranchise so many voters if as you agree there is so little fraud"

(1) What fraud? Didn't you say in your previous sentence, "there is no fraud"? And now all of a sudden, there is a little fraud? Which is it? (2) To answer your question, we do this because we can reduce the fraud even more. Less fraud is good, isn't it? It will only disenfranchise people if they choose to let it disenfranchise them. It doesn't prevent anyone from voting.

Wow.

soft bigotry of low expectations.....

"Pls. point out where I said it was racist?"

Are you serious? You posted this..."minorities don't have as much access to other legally forms such as Passports, military IDs or other government-issued photo ID"And I told you why. Minorities and students don't drive as much and live in cities so they don't have as much need or in many cases can't afford a car. If you don't want to believe that, that is your problem. Pointing that out, doesn't make me racist. If it was I could call you racist almost every day when you bring blacks into your discussions. - Right?

Your were saying that Republicans favor voter id laws, because that will suppress black Don't think I ever mentioned blacks - did I? So you bring up blacks out of the blue and call me racist when I never mentioned blacks? Hmm turnout, because of the reduced acceess you claim (falsely, and without even trying to support it) minorities have to these ids.See what I have said a few times here and have repeated it in the 1st paragraph bc for some reason you don't seem to understand it.

If you lose an argument, better to admit that you lost it, than to deny you made it in the first place.

"It affects minorities more (who vote Democratic more)."

That's a choice on their part, a choice not to bear the burden placed on all voters. It's not because of institutional bias.So it isn't a true statement? - I'll save you the trouble, it is a true statement.

"There is no fraud "

None? How many examples would you like us to post of voter fraud? It's not rampant, but of course it exists.

"Why disenfranchise so many voters if as you agree there is so little fraud"

(1) What fraud? Didn't you say in your previous sentence, "there is no fraud"? And now all of a sudden, there is a little fraud? Which is it? (2) To answer your question, we do this because we can reduce the fraud even more. Less fraud is good, isn't it? It will only disenfranchise people if they choose to let it disenfranchise them. It doesn't prevent anyone from voting.

Of course there is fraud - it is so small to be meaningless. If you want to base your whole arguement on the little/no fraud statement go ahead. You'll just look petty. And of course less fraud is good but when 0,000s of 0,000s of people don't get to vote bc you are trying to reduce the minimal (almost non existent) fraud, the costs outway the benefits.


The fact is Repubs. will do anything they can to prevent people from voting whether by Id laws, shortening polling times, refusing to allow people to automatically be registered to vote when they get drivers licenses (and you can comment on that if you want) or any other innovative way to vote. And that is Pathetic.

You can't make that wrong.

Paul, I agree that a higher % of blacks don't have driver's licenses than whites. I get that, I do. That's not remotely the issue here, because YOU DON'T NEED A DRIVER'S LICENSE TO VOTE. You can get an alternate photo id. So what I don't get, and what you haven't explained, is this - why is it harder for blacks (who don't have driver's licenses) to get an alternate photo id, than it is for whites (who don't have driver's licenses) to get that alternate photo id? The process of getting that id is the same for everybody, so why is it more problematic for blacks?

If you have 100 blacks, and 100 whites, none of whom have driver's licenses...and you have voter id laws...why is it harder for the blacks to get the alternate photo id, than it is for whites?

"Don't think I ever mentioned blacks - did I?"

You said "minorities". Are blacks a minority, or no? This is exhausting, I posed the only pertinent question above, if you cannot answer it, we all know what that means.

"0,000s of 0,000s of people don't get to vote"

Correction - they choose not to vote. It's a free country. If they can't be bothered to get to town hall to get a photo id like the rest of us, that's on them. Maybe they need a history lesson on the price we have paid to safeguard their right to vote every November. if you don't know what I mean, look at the photos of Arlington National Cemetary.

And the idea that there is voter fraud is moronic.






Of course there is fraud - it is so small to be meaningless.



too funny....what's next?..."of course there's lots of fraud and in fact...it justified!"

seems to me that same folks that want anyone to be able to vote without any identification shown are the same people that are always remarking about how stupid the average voter is....interesting

too funny....what's next?..."of course there's lots of fraud and in fact...it justified!"

As I said, "it is so small to be meaningless". Is it a wonder I think you're snarky?

As I said, "it is so small to be meaningless". Is it a wonder I think you're snarky?

snarky but I still love you :kewl:

As I said, "it is so small to be meaningless".

that's just an opinion by the way

The fact is Repubs. will do anything they can to prevent people from voting whether by Id laws, shortening polling times, refusing to allow people to automatically be registered to vote when they get drivers licenses (and you can comment on that if you want) or any other innovative way to vote. And that is Pathetic.

You can't make that wrong.

Shortening polling times? That helps Republicans? According to your stereotypes of why blacks can't get ids, I would think that shortening poling times helps blacks (and therefore Dems), because they are mor elikely to be hoe all day, and thus can go vote. While the white conservative sare at work all day, making it harder for them to vote.

Can't have it both ways.

"refusing to allow people to automatically be registered to vote when they get drivers licenses (and you can comment on that if you want)"

Fine. Here in CT, you are saying that the GOP is preventing automatic registration? How is that, when the GOP doesn't control anything?

I would suppor that, by th eway, that automatic registration. I reject th enotion that the GOP is blocking it, at least here in CT, because the Dems have conteolled the legislature as long as I have been alive.

Paul, I agree that a higher % of blacks don't have driver's licenses than whites. I get that, I do. That's not remotely the issue here, because YOU DON'T NEED A DRIVER'S LICENSE TO VOTE. You can get an alternate photo id. So what I don't get, and what you haven't explained, is this - why is it harder for blacks (who don't have driver's licenses) to get an alternate photo id, than it is for whites (who don't have driver's licenses) to get that alternate photo id? The process of getting that id is the same for everybody, so why is it more problematic for blacks?It is harder for any poor person. I don't know all the reasons but there is a % of minorities (and yes blacks) who find it hard get the appropriate ID. Whether it is they don't make enough $, are old and don't have a birth certificate, I don't know. One of the challenges to a Texas law was some old nuns who all didn't have birth certificates, or drivers licenses.

If you have 100 blacks, and 100 whites, none of whom have driver's licenses...and you have voter id laws...why is it harder for the blacks to get the alternate photo id, than it is for whites?

"Don't think I ever mentioned blacks - did I?"

You said "minorities". Are blacks a minority, or no? This is exhausting, I posed the only pertinent question above, if you cannot answer it, we all know what that means.Certainly blacks are a minority. But I never mentioned blacks and yet the racist term has been thrown around a few times, hasn't it?

"0,000s of 0,000s of people don't get to vote"

Correction - they choose not to vote. It's a free country. If they can't be bothered to get to town hall to get a photo id like the rest of us, that's on them. Maybe they need a history lesson on the price we have paid to safeguard their right to vote every November. if you don't know what I mean, look at the photos of Arlington National Cemetary.

I've been to Arlington - thanks.

I'm still confused why the discussion went from minorities to blacks and why the discussion isn't on why Repubs seem to want to do anything they can to keep the vote count down.

Shortening polling times? That helps Republicans? According to your stereotypes of why blacks can't get ids, I would think that shortening poling times helps blacks (and therefore Dems), because they are mor elikely to be hoe all day, and thus can go vote. While the white conservative sare at work all day, making it harder for them to vote.Wow.

No, minorities (but you can use black since that seems to be your focus) work more in non traditional, non 9-5 jobs. They work 2 part time jobs. Allowing voting to be done over a few days or longer hours allows those minorities (or I guess blacks to you) to vote.

Can't have it both ways.

"refusing to allow people to automatically be registered to vote when they get drivers licenses (and you can comment on that if you want)"

Fine. Here in CT, you are saying that the GOP is preventing automatic registration? How is that, when the GOP doesn't control anything?Not in Conn. But other states. In fact, I believe that someone just proposed that in Conn.

I would suppor that, by th eway, that automatic registration. I reject th enotion that the GOP is blocking it, at least here in CT, because the Dems have conteolled the legislature as long as I have been alive.

no, not in Conn.

I've been to Arlington - thanks.

I'm still confused why the discussion went from minorities to blacks and why the discussion isn't on why Repubs seem to want to do anything they can to keep the vote count down.

"I don't know all the reasons but there is a % of minorities (and yes blacks) who find it hard get the appropriate ID."

You're smart. if you don't know the reasons, they can't be wide-spread reasons.

Hard. Not impossible. It's "hard" for me to get up an hour earlier to go vote before work. But since I don't work near where I live, I can only vote before work. It sucks getting up early, but I choose to do it. Others don't care enough. I'm not inclined to allow people to vote on-line just to make it easier for them.

You said it - hard. Those people can choose to do what is hard, or they can choose not to do what is hard. All that matters is this - it's their choice to make. The GOP isn't making that choice for them.

"I'm still confused why the discussion went from minorities to blacks "

Fine - minorities.

"Repubs seem to want to do anything they can to keep the vote count down"

The GOP can't keep the vote down. If the vote is down, it's because people freely choose not to vote.

no, not in Conn.

What time are most polls open? 12 hours? if you want to extend it, I guess I have no problem with that. But only one day. We all vote on the same day, that's the way it works.

Funny, Here in CT, in the last 2 gubernatorial elections, the Dems did just that - they extended voting hours! In 2010, it turns out there weren't enough ballots in the city of Hartford (I mean, who knew you needed enough ballots on election day?), so they kept the polls open later, just in Hartford, long enough for everyone to vote. I wonder which candidate that helped?

Then, in 2014, something happened in Bridgeport, and guess what? The Dems forced the polls to stay open longer, just in the city of Bridgeport. Again, I wonder who that helped?

I think I heard that the polls are already open in New Haven, for the 2018 gubernatorial election.

Whatever it takes.

Both sides use repugnant tactics. We all deserve better, you are correct there. And I'm not do dishinest that I'd deny that the GOP has an agenda when it proposes these laws. But the fact is, it only has the efefct desired by the GOP, if people choose to act the way that the GOP is banking on.

I often wonder what this "straw man" with no I.D. does all day...

Can't drive a car
Can't rent an apartment (most require background and credit checks on top of ID)
Can't go fishing
Can't go hunting
Can't cash a check
Can't open a bank account
Can't get a credit card
Can't check out a book at the library
Can't purchase a firearm
Can't apply for Food stamps or welfare

There is not a lot in life you can do without some form of I.D.

I cannot believe there is more than a small fraction of 1 percent of the population that doesn't have some form of I.D.

This whole story is just B.S. to stir up the uninformed...... and to stir up racial issues.

This whole story is just B.S. to stir up the uninformed...... and to stir up racial issues.

Largely this on both sides of the aisle... Fraud vs. no I.D.

If photo ID suppresses the vote, and we are concerned about the affect on "minorities" versus "whites" (which is obviously a racial comparison--so saying that one is talking about "minorities" not race is BS), and owning a car, thereby of necessity having a valid photo ID, makes it easier to get a photo ID, then, by raw number, more whites would be affected by requiring a photo ID to vote. A 2006 study by Univ. of Cal. Berkeley showed that white households were 40.6% of those without a car. Blacks were 30.5%, Hispanic were 22%, and other were 5.7%. So, though a greater percentage of whites may have owned cars than the percentage owned by other races, the actual raw number of whites not owning cars was much higher than the numbers of any of the other races.

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus


Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

it was ok then but now it's not

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus


Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

it was ok then but now it's not

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

"why have the laws been changed?"

We changed laws recently on gay marriage. We learn, things change, laws change.

"what party is driving the voter ID "

The GOP, no doubt. But voter id requirements only serve to suppress Democrat turnout, if Democrats are less likely than Republicans to go get an id. You cannot make that wrong. Maybe if the Democrat motto wasn't "gimme gimme gimme", then registered Democrats would be just as likely to get the id as Republicans.

Do yoy deny that it's no harder for a Democrat to get an id, than it is for a Republican?

"VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE"

How do voter id laws infringe upon that right? I could argue that they safeguard that right, rather than infringe it, because if we have voter id laws, then no one can claim to be me and steal my vote.

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus


Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

it was ok then but now it's not

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

I don't believe a Constitutional Right to Vote exists (not an enumerated fundamental right)

The "right to vote" is not explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution except in the above referenced amendments(equal protection), and only in reference to the fact that the franchise cannot be denied or abridged based solely on the aforementioned qualifications. In other words, the "right to vote" is perhaps better understood, in layman's terms, as only prohibiting certain forms of legal discrimination in establishing qualifications for suffrage. States may deny the "right to vote" for other reasons. For example, many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote. More controversial restrictions include those laws that prohibit convicted felons from voting, even those who have served their sentences.

( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?)

pretty good article explaining the model

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/04/where-theres-smoke-theres-fire-100000-stolen-votes-in-chicago

pretty good article explaining the model

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/04/where-theres-smoke-theres-fire-100000-stolen-votes-in-chicago

One event in 1982 = a model

Keep rubbing.

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus

Back in the day, women couldn't vote, blacks couldn't vote, males under the age of 21 couldn't vote . . . and a whole lot of restrictions and requirements were imposed on those (basically free, white, male, and 21) who were allowed to vote. Hey, as Jim in Ct said, laws change. And I thought you were big on the necessity of the Constitution to change to suit the times--the living breathing thing.

And both parties drove the restrictions and requirements bus, including voter ID bus, at various times.

And voter fraud does exist. And it is not insignificant.

Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

Drivers licenses did not include a photo ID back then either. Most pocket ID's back then had only verbal descriptions. Technology made it easier to place photos on the ID's in the mid to late 1960's and 1970's.

it was ok then but now it's not

Progress has made it more feasible to include a photo on pocket ID's. Which makes them a better identification than what "was ok then". I know you are a firm believer in progress. Hey, maybe you could consider ID's as living and breathing things.

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

Gun ownership is specifically made a fundamental, unabridgeable right in the Constitution. Voting, as scottw pointed out, is not. States cannot deny voting because of race or sex but the prohibition of those specific restrictions implies that other restrictions can be imposed.

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

Absolutely not so. As Spence would say, apples and oranges.

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

Different fish smell and swim in different ways. The gun owning fish are not the same as the fish who vote. It may seem very fishy to you, but that's the way it is.

seems like a disproportionate number of democrats not only struggle to obtain something as simple as an id...a disproportionate number of democrats struggle to obtain a copy of the US Constitution for reference as well :hee: ..neither is a very high bar

not surprising that the no borders, citizens of the world, undocumented democrats crowd fight tooth and nail to ensure that everyone dead or alive, legal or illegal, registered or unregistered have the ability to cast a ballot

the slump in democrat turnout is likely a result of years of democrats registering anyone and everyone that they can shake out of the bushes, probably multiple times in multiple districts in order to swell the voter rolls......many of these folks may have found their way to the polls in recent years having been promised lots of free stuff and better lives in exchange for doing so......

this year I'm guessing they are realizing that despite dutifully electing and reelecting the givers of great things to the downtrodden....they've gotten nothing....their lives are no better....

and now they will be asked to go through the trouble of voting for one of the Democrat Walking Dead options of old white lunatics....

:rotflmao:

..

and now they will be asked to go through the trouble of voting for one of the Democrat Walking Dead options of old white lunatics....

:rotflmao:

Oh that's poetry, thanks!

I'm not sure because it was a while ago, but do you need to show ID when you register to vote? If you have to show it when you register.....why is it all of a sudden a burden to show it when you show up on Election Day
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well I looked up the answer to my own question.....pretty much every state requires your drivers license or SSN to register, which serves as your voter ID number. If you do not have one of those they will issue you a unique voter ID number.

Maybe if you go that route, the state sends you a card with your voter ID number on it and you bring it to the polls when you vote.

Nobody gets to vote without a unique voter ID number anyways so this wouldn't be singling anybody out...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nobody gets to vote without a unique voter ID number anyways so this wouldn't be singling anybody out...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Racist! Hate crime! Intolerant!

Listen here ya Crazy Cracka!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well I looked up the answer to my own question.....pretty much every state requires your drivers license or SSN to register, which serves as your voter ID number. If you do not have one of those they will issue you a unique voter ID number.

Maybe if you go that route, the state sends you a card with your voter ID number on it and you bring it to the polls when you vote.

Nobody gets to vote without a unique voter ID number anyways so this wouldn't be singling anybody out...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Problem is that if there isn't a photo ID to go along with the ID number, then someone other than you can use your number. Using other people's (even dead ones) registration is one of the types of voter fraud.

I know it doesn't cure all the ills, but if you show up with a card, that has a voter ID number on it......at least your not just throwing out a name and using it to vote.

.....and maybe they should start putting your picture on your voting ID card when you register......it's still not singling people out when they register.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

.....and maybe they should start putting your picture on your voting ID card when you register......it's still not singling people out when they register.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sounds like a plan.

Problem is that if there isn't a photo ID to go along with the ID number, then someone other than you can use your number. Using other people's (even dead ones) registration is one of the types of voter fraud.


I didn't think you would fall into the Voter fraud is real camp ? you seem well informed on most topics


Exaggerated or unfounded allegations of fraud by dead voters include the following:
• In Georgia in 2000, 5,412 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters over the past 20
years.91 The allegations were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up
report clarified that only one instance had been substantiated, and this single instance was later
found to have been an error: the example above, in which Alan J. Mandel was confused with Alan
J. Mandell.92 No other evidence of fraudulent votes was reported.
• In Michigan in 2005, 132 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters.93 The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up investigation
by the Secretary of State revealed that these alleged dead voters were actually absentee ballots
mailed to voters who died before Election Day; 97 of these ballots were never voted, and 27
15
were voted before the voter passed away.94 Even if the remaining eight cases all revealed substantiated
fraud, that would amount to a rate of at most 0.0027%.95
• In New Jersey in 2004, 4,755 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot. The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. No follow-up investigation publicly
documented any substantiated cases of fraud of which we are aware, and there were no reports
that any of these allegedly deceased voters voted in 2005.96
• In New York in 2002 and 2004, 2,600 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot, again
based on a match of voter rolls to death lists. Journalists following up on seven cases found clerical
errors and mistakes but no fraud, and no other evidence of fraud was reported.97

So statistically you have a better chance of getting struck by lighting than Voter fraud ... if and when it happens

Just 23 people died as a direct result from lightning strikes in 2013, according to figures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). or voted fraudulently out of 316.5 million not all of voting age statistically speaking

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/upshot/vote-fraud-is-rare-but-myth-is-widespread.html

I didn't think you would fall into the Voter fraud is real camp ? you seem well informed on most topics
It's great isn't it? Voter fraud is an existential threat to our way of life but racism and climate change are non issues.

It's great isn't it? Voter fraud is an existential threat to our way of life but racism and climate change are non issues.

Maybe if people could actually stick to the definition of racism instead of throwing it out willy nilly we might be able to do something about.

I don't think voter fraud is a big deal....but I also don't think it's a big deal to show some ID either. It really can't be seen both ways?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I didn't think you would fall into the Voter fraud is real camp ? you seem well informed on most topics


Exaggerated or unfounded allegations of fraud by dead voters include the following:
• In Georgia in 2000, 5,412 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters over the past 20
years.91 The allegations were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up
report clarified that only one instance had been substantiated, and this single instance was later
found to have been an error: the example above, in which Alan J. Mandel was confused with Alan
J. Mandell.92 No other evidence of fraudulent votes was reported.
• In Michigan in 2005, 132 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters.93 The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up investigation
by the Secretary of State revealed that these alleged dead voters were actually absentee ballots
mailed to voters who died before Election Day; 97 of these ballots were never voted, and 27
15
were voted before the voter passed away.94 Even if the remaining eight cases all revealed substantiated
fraud, that would amount to a rate of at most 0.0027%.95
• In New Jersey in 2004, 4,755 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot. The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. No follow-up investigation publicly
documented any substantiated cases of fraud of which we are aware, and there were no reports
that any of these allegedly deceased voters voted in 2005.96
• In New York in 2002 and 2004, 2,600 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot, again
based on a match of voter rolls to death lists. Journalists following up on seven cases found clerical
errors and mistakes but no fraud, and no other evidence of fraud was reported.97

So statistically you have a better chance of getting struck by lighting than Voter fraud ... if and when it happens

Just 23 people died as a direct result from lightning strikes in 2013, according to figures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). or voted fraudulently out of 316.5 million not all of voting age statistically speaking

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/upshot/vote-fraud-is-rare-but-myth-is-widespread.html

Arguments on both sides can be found on the net. If you choose to believe one over the other, so be it. You can find other statistics if you choose to. But even that would be argumentative. Their are many problems in trying to discover and prove what is before your eyes. One problem is relying only on what is "reported." And related to that problem is what the Justice Dept. wishes to investigate and prosecute. Ignoring a problem is one way of saying it doesn't exist. Politics plays a role on both sides. Voter registration mischief exists by Republicans as well as Democrats. And saying that it is "rare" does not make it insignificant. Murder is rare when considering how many murders occur in relation to the number of people in our country. There is something called the butterfly effect. The idea that the flapping of a butterfly's wings can create the motion that can eventually evolve into a hurricane. Small, "rare" things can lead to large events. Ignoring small problems can invite the problems to grow.

I like this more "thoughtful" rather than "statistical" analysis:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/12/voter_fraud_for_the_complete_idiot.html

I found many articles on the net which differ than yours. But

It's great isn't it? Voter fraud is an existential threat to our way of life but racism and climate change are non issues.


Because the last 2 haven't affected not affected GOP voters or the party in America

but losing elections have .. it's as Basic as that

Arguments on both sides can be found on the net. If you choose to believe one over the other, so be it. You can find other statistics if you choose to. But even that would be argumentative. Their are many problems in trying to discover and prove what is before your eyes. One problem is relying only on what is "reported." And related to that problem is what the Justice Dept. wishes to investigate and prosecute. Ignoring a problem is one way of saying it doesn't exist. Politics plays a role on both sides. Voter registration mischief exists by Republicans as well as Democrats. And saying that it is "rare" does not make it insignificant. Murder is rare when considering how many murders occur in relation to the number of people in our country. There is something called the butterfly effect. The idea that the flapping of a butterfly's wings can create the motion that can eventually evolve into a hurricane. Small, "rare" things can lead to large events. Ignoring small problems can invite the problems to grow.

I like this more "thoughtful" rather than "statistical" analysis:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/12/voter_fraud_for_the_complete_idiot.html

I found many articles on the net which differ than yours. But

Yours studys come from Articles & Blog Posts Jon N. Hall is a programmer/analyst from Kansas City.


Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook



My studys : The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School is a nonpartisan, left-leaning law and public policy institute kinda like 300



Detbuch: I see I was wrong to expect Sparta's commitment to at least match our own.
wdmso: Doesn't it?
[points to Arcadian soldier behind Daxos]
wdmso: You there, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I am a blogger ... sir.
wdmso: [points to another soldier] And you, Arcadian, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I write articles , sir.
wdmso: writer.


wdmso: [turns back shouting] Brennan center for Justice What is YOUR profession?
Lawers: HA-OOH! HA-OOH! HA-OOH!
wdmso: [turning to Detbuch] You see, old friend? I brought more lawyers and facts than you did!

Yet again 2a Supports state we need to enforce the gun laws we have now not enact new ones making it harder for law abiding people to buy a Gun .... But have no issues making more laws to address an issues to restrict law abiding people to vote .??. seems some think fraud has effected a recent election I cant make this stuff up

http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2012/11/11/obama_likely_won_reelection_through_election_fraud/page/full

Yours studys come from Articles & Blog Posts Jon N. Hall is a programmer/analyst from Kansas City.

Are you saying bloggers can't do "studys"? That programmer/analysts can't do studies? Isn't the objective of a liberal education to learn how to think for yourself? How to study? How not to be left in the helpless position of having to depend on others, especially so-called "experts" to tell you how to think?

My studys : The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School is a nonpartisan, left-leaning law and public policy institute kinda like 300

Oh good, a "left leaning" nonpartisan institute. Isn't "nonpartisan left leaning" an oxymoron?

Detbuch: I see I was wrong to expect Sparta's commitment to at least match our own.
wdmso: Doesn't it?
[points to Arcadian soldier behind Daxos]
wdmso: You there, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I am a blogger ... sir.
wdmso: [points to another soldier] And you, Arcadian, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I write articles , sir.
wdmso: writer.

Nice, the really rational "might makes right" argument. The Persians won that battle, because they had the far greater numbers, but as a "statistical" aside, the Greeks killed a much higher number of Persians than vice versa. The Greeks put up a heroic, magnificent fight, and are remembered with favor and affection, as the more valorous, and victors in the war of being most admired. And, anyway, even though the Persians won that battle by the "statistic" of killing all but one of the Greeks, while, statistically, the Persians had many warriors remaining, the Greeks eventually won the war.

wdmso: [turns back shouting] Brennan center for Justice What is YOUR profession?
Lawers: HA-OOH! HA-OOH! HA-OOH!
wdmso: [turning to Detbuch] You see, old friend? I brought more lawyers and facts than you did!

Yes, let us put our faith in lawyers, not on those who can think for themselves. And FACTS? What facts? A left leaning group selected a set of variables out of a larger landscape of variables and from that compiled some statistics? Rather than arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, let me try to get at what I think is the heart of the matter. If those who argue that requiring a type of ID to vote is undemocratic also argue against and deny the majority's desire and strike down the majority's vote to require that ID, is that Democratic? Is it Democratic when the majority's vote to define marriage as between a man and a woman is struck down in favor of a minority's choice of definition?

Do those who insist that requiring a type of ID to vote suppresses the right to vote also believe that requiring such ID to drive suppresses the right to drive? Isn't it rational to require the ID if it is mandatory to have a license to drive? And isn't it rational to require that those who wish to drive learn how and what the rules are? Who is suppressed from driving when such requirements are made. Apply that as an analogy to the right to vote.

We have become a society which requires, more and more, the need for education and qualification to do "important" things in order to "suppress" participation of those who we deem not prepared to do those things. Yet, those on the left who demand stricter qualifications and more education in order to participate in so many of those "important" things, they, on the other hand, believe that even those who are most ignorant of our constitutional system, of what the civic responsibility is to protect and defend our system of government and how it is supposed to work, and for what purpose it was conceived . . . they, on the other hand, feel that even the most ignorant of all of that should be allowed to cast their vote (which is more powerful and potentially harmful than shooting a gun) to impose laws and obligations on the rest of society. And even that we should make it easier for them to do so.

Yet again 2a Supports state we need to enforce the gun laws we have now not enact new ones making it harder for law abiding people to buy a Gun .... But have no issues making more laws to address an issues to restrict law abiding people to vote .??. seems some think fraud has effected a recent election I cant make this stuff up

http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2012/11/11/obama_likely_won_reelection_through_election_fraud/page/full

Again, you skirt the issue of the second amendment being an unalienable right not to be abridged, but voting is not. But, OK, let's use your non-constitutional argument. Let's make as a requirement to vote all the same kinds of laws we have now re owning a gun. You know, needing the proper ID, background checks, etc., etc. Then all will be equal and we won't have to impose any more restrictions on either gun ownership or voting. Would that be OK with you?