I'm Sure This is Just a Coincidence

[Cancel 2016.2]

Adding layers to the voting process WILL reduce the # of voters statistically. You can call it whatever you want.

And it is no coincidence that the GOP is consistently the party that wants to add more layers, and opposes measures like motor-voter. They benefit from fewer people voting. If we had 100% turnout in this country, the political landscape would look much different. The Republican party would basically look like it does in NY or MA.

LMAO.... AGAIN.... if you provide everyone with an ID, then the issue is GONE... why don't the Dems just stand up and say 'fine, have the ID requirement provided you Reps pay for the ID's'?

DONE. Discussion over. Yet Dems don't do this. Why?

Also, that is nonsense about the make up of the Rep party. While I agree it would would mute the far right, it would not shift anywhere near the Reps of NY/MA. Probably look more like it does in CO and other Rocky Mountain states with more Libertarian influence than far right.

The fact that the left fights ID for voting as hard as they do makes me question why they don't just solve the problem rather than continually proclaiming that somehow this suppresses votes.

 

[christiefan915]

You sound like you're afraid you can't win without some kind of fraud. That's what is sounds like.

You sound like you're afraid that liberals will will make too much progress unless conservatives can shove a lot of roadblocks in their path.

 

[Alias]

OIC. That old reagan canard about the welfare queen driving a Cadillac to the office.

How about maybe they had nice clothes and tattoos before they had to go on welfare?

How about they have a driver's license and also could afford a photo ID before they went on welfare? You really have no argument. If it's the law then it has to be followed.

 

[Alias]

You sound like you're afraid that liberals will will make too much progress unless conservatives can shove a lot of roadblocks in their path.

Making sure every voter is an American citizen and can legally vote is now a "roadblock"? LOL. That's silly.

Liberals don't make "progress". Look around you........do you call this "progress"? Funny stuff.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I will throw my full support behind your plan to get people government issued IDs. However, until it is 100% successful, no voter ID laws. Deal?

I have no problem with that, provided the Dems actually TRY to pay for it. The election is in November 2012. Anyone who doesn't get one by then it is on them. They have more than enough time to get any documentation they need. That is also plenty of time for Dems to propose paying for it. I have written to both of my Senators on this issue and suggested this many times. Inaction by the Dems to pay for it or at least bring up a bill to pay for it, is on them.

They and their lemmings continue to pretend this is voter suppression.... then SOLVE the problem. Quit bitching about it. Because AGAIN.... these same people need an ID to get a JOB. There is NO reason for 10% of the population to be without an ID.

Until everyone has IDs under you give an ID to everyone program, people should not be barred from voting because they lack one. And you continue to focus on only one aspect of the voter suppression effort.

This is the major issue in most states. If you have other so called suppression issues you wish to discuss, shout them out and we can discuss.

Again.... why do you support suppressing these same people with regards to getting a job?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

The fact that the left fights ID for voting as hard as they do makes me question why they don't just solve the problem rather than continually proclaiming that somehow this suppresses votes.

What "problem"?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

The question was no more silly than all the other so-called Constitutional questions the strict constructionists raise.

It absolutely was silly. Asking why the Constitution didn't specifically mention this particular issue when in fact the Constitution only mentions voting with regards to discrimination is indeed silly.

I got a voter card when I filled out the application, signed it and submitted it. The app called for proof of identity such as a driver's license or SSN. Here's a copy of the form. http://www.votespa.com/portal/server.pt/community/applications_and_forms/13509

So they asked you for an ID to fill out the card, but you have a problem with them asking for an ID when people actually vote?

The process has worked just fine all these years. It's clear repubs are trying to stack the deck in their favor with this crap about a photo ID, along with the gerrymandering and changing the electoral vote system.

Curious... what changes to the electoral voting system are you referring to?

 

[christiefan915]

Making sure every voter is an American citizen and can legally vote is now a "roadblock"? LOL. That's silly.

Liberals don't make "progress". Look around you........do you call this "progress"? Funny stuff.

How is a photo on a card going to prove someone's citizenship?

 

[Bonestorm]

I have no problem with that, provided the Dems actually TRY to pay for it. The election is in November 2012. Anyone who doesn't get one by then it is on them. They have more than enough time to get any documentation they need. That is also plenty of time for Dems to propose paying for it. I have written to both of my Senators on this issue and suggested this many times. Inaction by the Dems to pay for it or at least bring up a bill to pay for it, is on them.

They and their lemmings continue to pretend this is voter suppression.... then SOLVE the problem. Quit bitching about it. Because AGAIN.... these same people need an ID to get a JOB. There is NO reason for 10% of the population to be without an ID.

That's hilarious. So you want the federal government to spend money so that people can get state-issued identification because Republican passed stupid laws. And here I thought you were a small-government type. What's more, you want the funding to come from some other existing government program of a new tax to pay for it and you want it implemented immediately. And if the Democrats don't pass it, it is on them. You're a riot.

The problem is the voter ID laws. You're trying to solve a problem created by the Voter ID laws. If you just get rid of the Voter ID laws, there is no problem.

This is the major issue in most states. If you have other so called suppression issues you wish to discuss, shout them out and we can discuss.

They are all discussed at length in the report linked at the OP. That you are unaware of them is not surprising. It may explain why you can't see the obvious: Republicans are engaged in a coordinated voter suppression campaign.

Again.... why do you support suppressing these same people with regards to getting a job?

That makes a lot of sense, SF. You should keep repeating that over and over. It's an argument with tremendous merit.

 

[Alias]

How is a photo on a card going to prove someone's citizenship?

They're gonna have to prove who they are to get the photo ID.

Are you in favor of allowing illegal aliens to vote?

 

[Alias]

That's hilarious. So you want the federal government to spend money so that people can get state-issued identification because Republican passed stupid laws. And here I thought you were a small-government type. What's more, you want the funding to come from some other existing government program of a new tax to pay for it and you want it implemented immediately. And if the Democrats don't pass it, it is on them. You're a riot.

The problem is the voter ID laws. You're trying to solve a problem created by the Voter ID laws. If you just get rid of the Voter ID laws, there is no problem.




They are all discussed at length in the report linked at the OP. That you are unaware of them is not surprising. It may explain why you can't see the obvious: Republicans are engaged in a coordinated voter suppression campaign.




That makes a lot of sense, SF. You should keep repeating that over and over. It's an argument with tremendous merit.

Are you in favor of allowing illegal aliens to vote?

 

[Crashk]

Voter fraud at the polls is minimal and unlikely to change election outcomes.

In Securing the Vote: An Analysis of Election Fraud (2003) Barnard College Professor Lori Minnite, found that voter fraud is rare, that safeguards to prevent fraud are already in place, and that individual voter fraud rarely sways election results. [1]
Implementation of restrictive polling place ID requirements creates added burdens for already harried poll workers, for miniscule gain. Data from the U.S. Department of Justice shows that while 196,139,871 votes have been cast in federal elections since October 2002, only 52 individuals have been convicted of federal voter fraud. Most of these convictions were for vote buying or for voter registration fraud, neither of which would be prevented by restrictive ID requirements at the polls. [2]
The Coalition on Homelessness & Housing in Ohio and the League of Women Voters Coalition found that, while more than 9,078,728 votes were cast in Ohio during the 2002 and 2004 elections, there were only four instances of ineligible people voting or attempting to vote in the state--approximately 0.00000044 percent of the total number of votes cast. [3]

http://archive.demos.org/page574.cfm

There's much more concrete evidence on this site to disprove the Teabagger allegations of voter fraud.

This is a non-issue and a another example of the racism and hatred of democracy that always comes from the radical right.

 

[christiefan915]

It absolutely was silly. Asking why the Constitution didn't specifically mention this particular issue when in fact the Constitution only mentions voting with regards to discrimination is indeed silly.

I'll remember this the next time some repub says Affordable Health Care isn't in the Constitution.

So they asked you for an ID to fill out the card, but you have a problem with them asking for an ID when people actually vote?

The point is that I didn't pay for registering to vote. The application was checked out and accepted and then I was put on the voter roll in my district.

Curious... what changes to the electoral voting system are you referring to?

"On September 12, Governor Corbett endorsed changing our system and instead awarding one electoral vote to a presidential candidate for each congressional district they win. It is important to be clear. This is an obscene, transparent, blatantly partisan change in the rules, designed for one purpose only; to help Republican Presidential candidates. Republican leaders are distressed that their candidates have lost Pennsylvania in the past five elections, and they wish to correct this problem, not by fielding better candidates or making more compelling arguments, but by stacking the deck to ensure their nominees receive the majority of Pennsylvania's electoral votes, regardless of how the people of our state actually vote."

 

[NOVA]

My voter registration card was free.

Government-issued photo IDs aren't.

People will have to pay for a photo ID in order to vote.

Where is any of that in the Constitution?

Amendment 15 - Race No Bar to Vote. Ratified 2/3/1870. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

[Alias]

I'll remember this the next time some repub says Affordable Health Care isn't in the Constitution.



The point is that I didn't pay for registering to vote. The application was checked out and accepted and then I was put on the voter roll in my district.



"On September 12, Governor Corbett endorsed changing our system and instead awarding one electoral vote to a presidential candidate for each congressional district they win. It is important to be clear. This is an obscene, transparent, blatantly partisan change in the rules, designed for one purpose only; to help Republican Presidential candidates. Republican leaders are distressed that their candidates have lost Pennsylvania in the past five elections, and they wish to correct this problem, not by fielding better candidates or making more compelling arguments, but by stacking the deck to ensure their nominees receive the majority of Pennsylvania's electoral votes, regardless of how the people of our state actually vote."

Are you in favor of allowing illegal aliens to vote?

 

[Alias]

Voter fraud at the polls is minimal and unlikely to change election outcomes.

In Securing the Vote: An Analysis of Election Fraud (2003) Barnard College Professor Lori Minnite, found that voter fraud is rare, that safeguards to prevent fraud are already in place, and that individual voter fraud rarely sways election results. [1]
Implementation of restrictive polling place ID requirements creates added burdens for already harried poll workers, for miniscule gain. Data from the U.S. Department of Justice shows that while 196,139,871 votes have been cast in federal elections since October 2002, only 52 individuals have been convicted of federal voter fraud. Most of these convictions were for vote buying or for voter registration fraud, neither of which would be prevented by restrictive ID requirements at the polls. [2]
The Coalition on Homelessness & Housing in Ohio and the League of Women Voters Coalition found that, while more than 9,078,728 votes were cast in Ohio during the 2002 and 2004 elections, there were only four instances of ineligible people voting or attempting to vote in the state--approximately 0.00000044 percent of the total number of votes cast. [3]

http://archive.demos.org/page574.cfm

There's much more concrete evidence on this site to disprove the Teabagger allegations of voter fraud.

This is a non-issue and a another example of the racism and hatred of democracy that always comes from the radical right.

Are you in favor of allowing illegal aliens to vote?

 

[christiefan915]

They're gonna have to prove who they are to get the photo ID.

And that proof would be?

Are you in favor of allowing illegal aliens to vote?

No, but how is this relevant? Surely you're not suggesting that people who are doing their best to stay under the radar are suddenly going get openly involved in the electoral process? I'd like to see hard numbers on how many illegals were actually caught voting.

 

[Alias]

And that proof would be?



No, but how is this relevant? Surely you're not suggesting that people who are doing their best to stay under the radar are suddenly going get openly involved in the electoral process? I'd like to see hard numbers on how many illegals were actually caught voting.

Good. We agree. People should prove who they are and that they can legally vote. Thanks.

 

[NOVA]

You sound like you're afraid that liberals will will make too much progress unless conservatives can shove a lot of roadblocks in their path.

Thats true.....fraud is hard to uncover and by the time it is, its too late to change....

 

[christiefan915]

Amendment 15 - Race No Bar to Vote. Ratified 2/3/1870. History
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

It's the equivalent of a poll tax, which was outlawed by SCOTUS.