Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Think?
We are discussing the right to vote. All other reasons why one needs a state issued ID pale in comparison.
A core part of the discussion is state issued ID. Should access to state issued IDs be made easier? If so, why aren't those against the use of IDs in elections proponents of plans for state issued IDs given their necessities for all other services?
Strawman. Nobody is a "proponent of plans for state issued ID's". They are a fact of life. We need to be able to identify ourselves if we want to participate in this society and this economy.
Nobody is suggesting that voters do not need to identify themselves. What we are saying is that what is accepted as voter identification needs to be free to obtain and must not be IN ANY WAY DIFFICULT TO OBTAN FOR EVEN A SINGLE VOTER.
I have fully addressed the reason why these laws are facing opposition few posts up. No further discussion is needed.
The far right now is in favor of mandatory fed and state ID cards for everything?
Times have changed.
The far right now is in favor of mandatory fed and state ID cards for everything?
Times have changed.
You wanna do this with "non-fed" convictions? Okay, I'm game. And I'll still only use the link "you" provided.So you're saying convictions by the feds are the only ones that count, REALLY?
So the state of Indiana spent all this time and money trying to prevent something that hadn't occurred in their elections.In 2008, the [U.S. Supreme] court recognized the threat posed by voter fraud and ruled that Indiana's photo ID requirement was a legitimate, non-discriminatory means of protecting the integrity of elections. The Supreme Court upheld Indiana's law despite no concrete evidence of fraud in Indiana's elections.
"Skewed numbers?"I just pulled an easy reference for my state to prove how skewed your numbers were.
Out of the "50" claimed convictions, only 26 were actual convictions. And of that 26, only 2 were convicted of "voter impersonation".
That doesn't sound like an epidemic.
How does someone voting as someone else, cancel a vote?You may not think the problem is that bad, I say if even one legitimate vote is canceled by fraud the problem is that bad and it should be stopped. But then I've never been one to coddle criminals like the left.
Okay, I see your point.If you can't see how a fraudulent vote cancels a legitimate vote there is no reason to continue this discussion.
How do you improve something, that prevents something, that never occurred?By the way, a state doesn't need a reason to improve their election integrity, just improving the system is reason enough.
Okay, I see your point.If you can't see how a fraudulent vote cancels a legitimate vote there is no reason to continue this discussion.
Now let me ask you this, "If someone told you that drinking one beer will kill off a few brain cells, do you consider the loss of those few brain cells, a big enough deal, to never drink a beer for the rest of your life and launch into a campaign to warn others of the danger?"
Is saving those few brain cells you lose, from that one beer, worth all that time and energy?
How do you improve something, that prevents something, that never occurred?By the way, a state doesn't need a reason to improve their election integrity, just improving the system is reason enough.
The status quo remains, before and after your so-called improvement.
Let's cut the crap and fuck this verbal foreplay! You and I both know this is about voter suppression, not voter fraud!
A third of voters in the state without photo ID are African-American.
Since there is no way to ever get the majority of these targeted people to vote Republican...they must do what they can to deny them the right to vote at all...
Voter ID blankets the old South - CBS News
The far right now is in favor of mandatory fed and state ID cards for everything?
Times have changed.
Who said anything about federal ID cards?
Oh, yeah -- nobody.
Okay, I see your point.If you can't see how a fraudulent vote cancels a legitimate vote there is no reason to continue this discussion.
Now let me ask you this, "If someone told you that drinking one beer will kill off a few brain cells, do you consider the loss of those few brain cells, a big enough deal, to never drink a beer for the rest of your life and launch into a campaign to warn others of the danger?"
Is saving those few brain cells you lose, from that one beer, worth all that time and energy?
How do you improve something, that prevents something, that never occurred?By the way, a state doesn't need a reason to improve their election integrity, just improving the system is reason enough.
The status quo remains, before and after your so-called improvement.
Let's cut the crap and fuck this verbal foreplay! You and I both know this is about voter suppression, not voter fraud!
No the left wants to make this about voter suppression and we both provided proof that it does occur, so taking steps to eliminate it are appropriate. You folks want to only look at this in the light of federal level elections, there are thousands of small towns in this country where elections are determined by a hand full of votes, fruad could have a mojor impact on those towns and often does.
Okay, I see your point.
Now let me ask you this, "If someone told you that drinking one beer will kill off a few brain cells, do you consider the loss of those few brain cells, a big enough deal, to never drink a beer for the rest of your life and launch into a campaign to warn others of the danger?"
Is saving those few brain cells you lose, from that one beer, worth all that time and energy?
How do you improve something, that prevents something, that never occurred?
The status quo remains, before and after your so-called improvement.
Let's cut the crap and fuck this verbal foreplay! You and I both know this is about voter suppression, not voter fraud!
No the left wants to make this about voter suppression and we both provided proof that it does occur, so taking steps to eliminate it are appropriate. You folks want to only look at this in the light of federal level elections, there are thousands of small towns in this country where elections are determined by a hand full of votes, fruad could have a mojor impact on those towns and often does.
Fraud "could" but you have not proved an insurmountable obstacle to voting fraud that can only be avoided by photo ID.
(1) Voter ID is something I approve of, as long as (2) the former attempts to make it suppressive in terms of fees and obstacles are eliminated as required by the courts.
Pennsylvania is old south?
No the left wants to make this about voter suppression and we both provided proof that it does occur, so taking steps to eliminate it are appropriate. You folks want to only look at this in the light of federal level elections, there are thousands of small towns in this country where elections are determined by a hand full of votes, fruad could have a mojor impact on those towns and often does.
Fraud "could" but you have not proved an insurmountable obstacle to voting fraud that can only be avoided by photo ID.
(1) Voter ID is something I approve of, as long as (2) the former attempts to make it suppressive in terms of fees and obstacles are eliminated as required by the courts.
Guess you didn't read the post where a councilman in TX was convicted of recruiting foreign nationals to vote in an election decided by 19 votes..
Let's cut the crap and fuck this verbal foreplay! You and I both know this is about voter suppression, not voter fraud!
