I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors

[Evil Captor]

Originally Posted by Absolute

Aren't you the one who wants to limit campaign spending because you think people are too stupid for democracy to work if it is not?

Yes, I want to limit campaign spending. The rest, strawman. I do think the American people are quite stupid. They disappointed me deeply in 2004. But democracy is not an intelligence test. Nor should political speech be in effect means-tested, which is what Citizens United is about. Which is NOT what this thread is about. This thread is about what complete and total assholes the people who support Republican efforts at restricting others' right to vote are. Please make an effort to stay on track.

[Absolute]

Well, there is probably some overlap between people who are too stupid to use criteria other than "who ran the most TV ads?" to determine who to vote for, and people who are too stupid to figure out how to get an ID so they can vote.

So maybe we can kill two birds with one stone with these laws.

Feel free to substitute "don't have the time to" for "are too stupid to" if you wish.

[elucidator]

Well, that's mighty damned generous of them! They ain't getting a thing for it, but they throw their money around in buckets. C'mon, lets be real here, propaganda works, and stupid has got very little to with it. Propaganda isn't about how people think, its about how they feel. And how they want to feel.

If the Pubbie Pox PACs were to outspend Obama ten to one and he still won, it would be a glorious day for the Republic. Sure, re-electing Obama would be good, but the real snapper would be evidence that the American people are immune to propaganda! Hallelluja and hosanna! I'd have the giggling fits for a week!

[elucidator]

By the way, has anyone come up with a plausible reason for prohibiting Sunday voting? Which had been available, popular amongst black voters, but is now illegal? Surely one of you guys must have some sort of rationale, however tenuous? Not even for its effect on the confidence of the electorate? Is it tough love?

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by The Tao's Revenge

forget it, something about china town

Lotsa illegals there . . .

[Loach]

Originally Posted by Evil Captor

Dude, just because there was a historical problem with voter problem in famously-corrupt Jersey, doesn't mean that it scales up nationally. All the data (see BrainGluttons's post) indicates there is no problem. Which means you are either an idiot or a scalawag, possibly both.

I'm going with scalawag. Makes me feel like a pirate.

[Farmer Jane]

Does anyone know how much of the eligible voters that don't have ID actually vote?

I believe that with the Help America Vote Act, first-time voters are required to show I.D. Is this okay?

Look - I get that these are Republican tactics here - but I'd much rather have a national voting card than have the most vulnerable people in America subjected to things like 'provisional ballots' and such. Citizens here have the right to vote, but the government has the responsibility to ensure that it's fair and accessible.

[Rand Rover]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

Those; also, anybody who purports to demand voter ID for another reason, because they're liars too. There's only one reason they care, and that's vote-suppression.

How did the liberal douches of the Dope get so good at determining the motives of other people? It's simply amazing. Could you share your technique with me?

Also, while you're at it, could you tell me why Luka Magnotta was googling himself in a cafe in Berlin? Did he want to get caught, or was he just stupid as shit?

Also (again), on the other side of the aisle, I suppose you believe that liberals oppose Citizens United for reasons that are pure as the driven snow? And not because they fear that "teh corporations!" will mostly support conservative causes?

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Rand Rover

How did the liberal douches of the Dope get so good at determining the motives of other people? It's simply amazing. Could you share your technique with me?

It follows inexorably from giving you credit for enough intelligence not to actually believe the horseshit you're spewing.

Is that being too generous to you?

[Alessan]

How about this:

1. You require some form of official voter ID.

While at the same time:

2. You make Election Day a national holiday.

3. You allow felons to vote.

Seems like a decent compromise to me.

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Rand Rover

How did the liberal douches of the Dope get so good at determining the motives of other people? It's simply amazing. Could you share your technique with me?

Also (again), on the other side of the aisle, I suppose you believe that liberals oppose Citizens United for reasons that are pure as the driven snow? And not because they fear that "teh corporations!" will mostly support conservative causes?

Sounds like you're already a master of it.

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

I don't think that Americans are stupid if they fall victim to advertising and misinformation campaigns. Look at the swiftboaters. They were lies, but they worked.

And a 10 to 1 advantage in money, garnered by one rich billionaire, isn't something that makes society stronger.

Heck, assuming advertising works at all, having a disparity in advertising dollars is bad even if both sides are exactly equal. It would lead to emphasizing one side over the other leading to an imbalance.

That's assuming that advertising works. If it doesn't, why would they do it.

Similarly, if newer, more restrictive laws will not disenfranchise more Democratic voters than Republican, why is one side so gung ho about it?

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Ludovic

Similarly, if newer, more restrictive laws will not disenfranchise more Democratic voters than Republican, why is one side so gung ho about it?

It's because they love America just so much.

[Farmer Jane]

Originally Posted by Alessan

How about this:

1. You require some form of official voter ID.

While at the same time:

2. You make Election Day a national holiday.

3. You allow felons to vote.

Seems like a decent compromise to me.

All of the election days?

[Alessan]

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane

All of the election days?

President, Congress and Senate. A day off every two years isn't too bad; besides, isn't democracy something worth celebrating?

States will, of course, be able to legislate their own holidays for gubernatorial elections if they so please.

[Farmer Jane]

Originally Posted by Alessan

President, Congress and Senate. A day off every two years isn't too bad; besides, isn't democracy something worth celebrating?

States will, of course, be able to legislate their own holidays for gubernatorial elections if they so please.

Also city council, primaries, state, school board, special elections, caucuses?

Many people can take off work to go to the polls (unpaid) per state law.

I think I've voted 4 times over the last year. Mail-in now, of course. It's just too much of a pain otherwise. I have my election ballot sitting in front of me as I type.

[Alessan]

I think we'll just start with the big ones.

[dngnb8]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

A scientific study which the W Admin tried hard to suppress not too long ago. This was the same Admin that spent two terms hunting for voter fraud, fired USAGs who wouldn't play along, and at the end still couldn't come up with a dozen cases nationwide.

As I said, it was a quick search. That being said, (as the article proclaims), the voter registration system is so flawed, any sort of investigation will be very limited.

Nobody will ever be able to tell the extent of the issue because of the flawed process.

[Farmer Jane]

In case anyone was wondering (I'm sure they weren't), I don't have to copy any form of ID and send it in with my ballot. If I did, I could send a utility bill, a Student I.D. card, a Medicare card, a paycheck stub, or a host of other things.

[DrumBum]

This may be a bit off topic but would a compulsory voting law have any impact on the issue of alleged voter fraud ?

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by Ludovic

Similarly, if newer, more restrictive laws will not disenfranchise more Democratic voters than Republican, why is one side so gung ho about it?

Because, confidence.

You thought the confidence fairy only did markets?

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by Ludovic

Similarly, if newer, more restrictive laws will not disenfranchise more Democratic voters than Republican, why is one side so gung ho about it?

If the new laws won't stop illegal aliens and convicted felons from casting their reliably Democratic votes, why is one side so gung ho to stop those laws?

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

A scientific study which the W Admin tried hard to suppress not too long ago. This was the same Admin that spent two terms hunting for voter fraud, fired USAGs who wouldn't play along, and at the end still couldn't come up with a dozen cases nationwide.

What aspects of that make it a "scientific study?"

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by DrumBum

This may be a bit off topic but would a compulsory voting law have any impact on the issue of alleged voter fraud ?

It would compound the problem -- we would have a wave of people who just got the standard "Vote next eday or else" notice in the mail, protesting, "Hey, WTF, this doesn't apply to me, I'm a noncitizen/convicted felon/etc."

The only complete solution would be a national database which keeps track of the vital records, citizenship status, vital status, and current address of every person in the country. Which is not technically impossible, but it would require that you have to give notice to the authorities every time you change your address, and it would be at least a misdemeanor to fail to do so, or to reside at any unregistered address. Which is the case in some countries, but Americans would have a hard time getting it down.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by elucidator

By the way, has anyone come up with a plausible reason for prohibiting Sunday voting? Which had been available, popular amongst black voters, but is now illegal? Surely one of you guys must have some sort of rationale, however tenuous? Not even for its effect on the confidence of the electorate? Is it tough love?

Voting is work. God doesn't like us to work on Sunday. Or was that Saturday? Or Friday?

This can be very confusing, so maybe we should stop early voting on all 3 days, just to cover our bases.

[gravitycrash]

Originally Posted by Loach

This is the most infuriating subject I can think of. I have no idea what kind of utopia you all live in but to say that voter fraud does not exist or isn't a problem is ridiculous. I grew up hearing stories of Boss Frank Hague running the state from his throne in Jersey City. The election night mantra was "Hudson County has not been heard from" as he held back the results to wait to see how many corpses needed to get to the polls to sway the statewide or national elections. Things have improved slightly since. I welcome anything that cuts down on the fraud and corruption that is absolutely happening every fucking election. I mentioned it jokingly earlier but fuck it. Getting an ID is not an onerous task. The only people I run into that don't currently have an form of ID are illegal immigrants. Even they have ID, but usually from their home country. Its nearly impossible to live in this state without a government ID. It certainly makes things difficult. To say that having to present an ID that nearly 100% of the adults already have is an insurmountable obstacle is so far out of the realm of reality it makes my head spin. Its as if some people want to vilify a simple ID check to promote their own agenda. I hope that they are just misguided and not in favor of voter fraud.

Yeah but people who find getting an ID a challenge have been held back by the man their entire life so this is just unfair and probably racist.

Actually fuck that, I would think that it would be more of a challenge functioning in modern society without an ID.

How do you even qualify for food stamps and other government assistance without proof of who the hell you are anyway? How do you enroll your kid in school? How do you get a checking/debit account? How do you get a library card?

I have no idea, which probably makes them smarter than me, in which case getting an ID should be child's play.

Oops there I go picking on the disadvantaged/disenfranchised again. I'm so mean.

One good thing about this topic is that if you're new to this message board and were curious as to the political leanings of some of the members posting in it, the hard core lefties are easy to pick out.

They are the ones where personal responsibility is an unknown concept.

[Algher]

Originally Posted by Alessan

How about this:

1. You require some form of official voter ID.

While at the same time:

2. You make Election Day a national holiday.

3. You allow felons to vote.

Seems like a decent compromise to me.

Careful, there are some around here that get really testy if you imply that felons are a dependable voting bloc for the Democrats.

[Bryan Ekers]

Out of curiosity, would Americans see it as horribly intrusive and privacy-shattering and oppressive if the identification information they put on their tax returns was passed onto a national election database, thus registering them every year?

What if it was optional?

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Algher

Careful, there are some around here that get really testy if you imply that felons are a dependable voting bloc for the Democrats.

On a side note, I've never understood why felons lose their right to vote. Are they afraid they'll all vote to make bank robbery legal or something?

[Alessan]

I agree. You do your time, they clean the slate.

Frankly, I don't see how it's constitutional.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers

Out of curiosity, would Americans see it as horribly intrusive and privacy-shattering and oppressive if the identification information they put on their tax returns was passed onto a national election database, thus registering them every year?

What if it was optional?

Many people don't file tax returns.

[Steve MB]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

Yes, but the point is that the specific polling place you're assigned to is in a location that's geographically quite close to your residence.

That is why it's easier for many people to get to the polls on Election Day than to get to the DMV for an identity card beforehand. Frankly, I'm quite surprised that anybody needs this spelled out for them.

Well, with all those thousands of polling places all around, it's impossible to keep an eye on all of them to prevent any hanky-panky. Best to consolidate them. Fortunately, some communities that already have gates and guardposts; putting the polls there would enhance security at relatively low cost....

[Bryan Ekers]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Many people don't file tax returns.

Really? Not even simple cursory ones? The poor should be encouraged to do so, I suggest, since even if they have a minimal income there are tax credits and such they could explore. Or at least I assume there are - I'm not familiar with American income-tax forms.

Besides, if you link taxation to registration, you can suppress the votes of stereotypical right-wing nuts who think taxation and registration are massively intrusive abuses of an illegitimate government, like being told to fill out census forms and whatnot. Thus, it'll balance.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

Originally Posted by Chefguy

I've always had to show some sort of ID. Usually, it was the voter registration card, which was then checked against the register. I then had to sign the register. This was in Alaska, but are there really places where you can just walk in off the street and not be checked for registration against some sort of ID?

Here in exurban Massachusetts, I don't have to show ID. I just drive to/walk into the local YMCA where they've set up the rows of voting machines (one row per ward) in the big gym and give my name and address to one of the nice grayhaired volunteer ladies at the table flanking my ward's row. She looks me up in one of the big printout books full of registered voters' names and addresses. She checks me off, we smile, she gives me a ballot, and I move down the row to a vacant machine; ink in my choice of little ovals; and move on, completed ballot in hand, to the table at the other end of the row. There I give my name and address to another nice grayhaired lady; she checks me off in her book; we smile; and I move on to the final station, the ballot-inhaler machine (please insert face-down), usually overseen by a nice grayhaired gentleman.

[Farmer Jane]

Well, non citizens also pay taxes. But they can get Drivers Licenses in some states as well. It depends how you want to look at it.

I still think a voter ID card with photo is the best way to go. Make them available at all county registering locations.

Then if you lose your voter reg card, you show ID. If you can't do that, well hell, don't be so damned irresponsible. (:

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by Bricker

If the new laws won't stop illegal aliens and convicted felons from casting their reliably Democratic votes, why is one side so gung ho to stop those laws?

I'll tell you the flat out truth, here, Bricker. I was actually surprised to see you spew such low rent Freeper crap. Thought better of you. Well, live and learn.

[Chefguy]

Originally Posted by EddyTeddyFreddy

Here in exurban Massachusetts, I don't have to show ID. I just drive to/walk into the local YMCA where they've set up the rows of voting machines (one row per ward) in the big gym and give my name and address to one of the nice grayhaired volunteer ladies at the table flanking my ward's row. She looks me up in one of the big printout books full of registered voters' names and addresses. She checks me off, we smile, she gives me a ballot, and I move down the row to a vacant machine; ink in my choice of little ovals; and move on, completed ballot in hand, to the table at the other end of the row. There I give my name and address to another nice grayhaired lady; she checks me off in her book; we smile; and I move on to the final station, the ballot-inhaler machine (please insert face-down), usually overseen by a nice grayhaired gentleman.

So they're actually bouncing who you say you are against some sort of registration. Is there anyplace that doesn't do that? I'm pretty sure that if you're not registered, you can't get a ballot, right?

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by elucidator

I'll tell you the flat out truth, here, Bricker. I was actually surprised to see you spew such low rent Freeper crap. Thought better of you. Well, live and learn.

Friend Bricker has a veneer of civility, but underneath... well you don't want to look directly at it.

[CalMeacham]

Originally Posted by EddyTeddyFreddy

Here in exurban Massachusetts, I don't have to show ID. I just drive to/walk into the local YMCA where they've set up the rows of voting machines (one row per ward) in the big gym and give my name and address to one of the nice grayhaired volunteer ladies at the table flanking my ward's row. She looks me up in one of the big printout books full of registered voters' names and addresses. She checks me off, we smile, she gives me a ballot, and I move down the row to a vacant machine; ink in my choice of little ovals; and move on, completed ballot in hand, to the table at the other end of the row. There I give my name and address to another nice grayhaired lady; she checks me off in her book; we smile; and I move on to the final station, the ballot-inhaler machine (please insert face-down), usually overseen by a nice grayhaired gentleman.

Same here in suburban Massachusetts. Since the name gets ticked off twice, it'd be hard to believe someone voting again at that site. And I've never heard of a case where someone came in and voted in someone else's place.


It's really hard to imagine someone doing this as part of some election-throwing strategy. You'd have to line up hordes of willing scofflaws who can convincingly present themselves as the real voters, right down to giving the correct information to the nice greyhaired people (who often know the people). And if more than one person tried to do this, they'd know something was up.

[elucidator]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Voting is work. God doesn't like us to work on Sunday. Or was that Saturday? Or Friday?

This can be very confusing, so maybe we should stop early voting on all 3 days, just to cover our bases.

Looks like that's as much of an answer as I'm gonna get. Thought at least they'd try, but I reckon they ain't that stupid.

Because there isn't anything, is there? These people voted on Sunday before, nobody had any problem. Early voting is not that unusual. I don't know but gotta wonder: did the people who wrote this law offer any explanation? Any rationale at all? Bet that boosts the living heck out of voter confidence of black people, they now have lots of confidence that the Republicans don't want them to vote. If they didn't already know.

But hey, just ignore it! Maybe it'll go away, its only black people anyway.

Though I'll probably bring it up again. I can be kind of a dick, that way, sometimes. Often.

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by John Mace

Voting is work. God doesn't like us to work on Sunday. Or was that Saturday? Or Friday?

This can be very confusing, so maybe we should stop early voting on all 3 days, just to cover our bases.

Or we could make election day a two-day period, always on the weekend. Nobody observes Sabbath both days.

[John Mace]

Originally Posted by elucidator

Looks like that's as much of an answer as I'm gonna get. Thought at least they'd try, but I reckon they ain't that stupid.

Because there isn't anything, is there? These people voted on Sunday before, nobody had any problem. Early voting is not that unusual. I don't know but gotta wonder: did the people who wrote this law offer any explanation? Any rationale at all? Bet that boosts the living heck out of voter confidence of black people, they now have lots of confidence that the Republicans don't want them to vote. If they didn't already know.

But hey, just ignore it! Maybe it'll go away, its only black people anyway.

Though I'll probably bring it up again. I can be kind of a dick, that way, sometimes. Often.

I don't know much about it, but the only "honest" reason I can think of is to save money. But that could be an excuse rather than a reason.

Personally, I think everyone should do what CA does and offer the option to vote by mail. I know that some states (OR, for example) have instituted that as the only method. But if you at least offer the option, then you get weeks in advance to vote, and you can do it in the comfort of your home (or wherever). I've been doing it that way for over a decade.

[Chefguy]

Originally Posted by CalMeacham

Same here in suburban Massachusetts. Since the name gets ticked off twice, it'd be hard to believe someone voting again at that site. And I've never heard of a case where someone came in and voted in someone else's place.


It's really hard to imagine someone doing this as part of some election-throwing strategy. You'd have to line up hordes of willing scofflaws who can convincingly present themselves as the real voters, right down to giving the correct information to the nice greyhaired people (who often know the people). And if more than one person tried to do this, they'd know something was up.

It's probably already been mentioned in this thread, but I would think that instead of demanding an ID card for voters, the focus should be on preventing election fraud at a much higher level. Generally speaking, a few (or a few thousand) illegal votes makes little difference in an election. Somebody spiking the ballot boxes or "losing" ballots or suppressing voting in any number of ways is much more likely to affect outcome.

[Clothahump]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

If the problem existed, you could prove it, but you can't.

Please tell me how you're going to implement your solution without expanding the size and cost of government.

And hampering someone's ability to vote when they have a legitimate right to do so certainly is an intrusion.

You appear not to to know what Big Government is. You appear to have no ethic either, but that's no surprise. Just be straight about what you want and what the costs will be.

And understand that, as Bricker has acknowledged, the big government, costly solution will not actually solve the problem. The problem that doesn't exist anyway.

Are you for fucking real?

This is not a "Big Government" solution. It never has been, it never will be. It's a matter of going to your LOCAL driver's license office and getting a DL or alternate state issued ID. In Texas, it costs $25 and is good for six years; that is in no way an economic hardship.

Our next federal election comes up in November. It's now June. Somehow, I have the feeling that if I didn't have a DL and I wanted to vote, I could find a way to get my butt out to the DPS office in the next 4 months.

And I'm sorry to bust your utopian bubble, but the problem does exist. A lot of it could be cleared up by the states' purging dead people off the voter roles, but ghods forbid that should happen. The federal government is currently suing Florida to prevent them from taking dead folks off the list, and is refusing them access to necessary databases to validate others who are suspected illegals on the list. One has to ask why our current administration is so damn desperate to keep dead people on the roles, and why liberals in general so desperately support them in doing so.

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by elucidator

I'll tell you the flat out truth, here, Bricker. I was actually surprised to see you spew such low rent Freeper crap. Thought better of you. Well, live and learn.

Really?

Here is what I said:

Originally Posted by Bricker

If the new laws won't stop illegal aliens and convicted felons from casting their reliably Democratic votes, why is one side so gung ho to stop those laws?

And here is what I was responding to:

Originally Posted by Ludovic

Similarly, if newer, more restrictive laws will not disenfranchise more Democratic voters than Republican, why is one side so gung ho about it?

Why is it that only my statement is so low rent and unworthy?

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by Clothahump

This is not a "Big Government" solution. It never has been, it never will be. It's a matter of going to your LOCAL driver's license office and getting a DL or alternate state issued ID.

Government-issued identity documents required by law for voting in federal and state elections ARE a "Big Government" thing, pretty much by definition.

It's rather silly to argue that it somehow ceases to have any "Big Government" impact just because you obtain the document itself at a local office.

Shoot, by that "logic", federal income tax isn't a "Big Government" thing either, because I get the tax forms at my local post office or library. See folks, all very small-town and self-sufficient! No Big Government here, no sirree!

Originally Posted by Clothahump

And I'm sorry to bust your utopian bubble, but the problem does exist.

If it does, then you should be able to show some evidence of it. Nobody so far has offered a shred of factual evidence supporting the claim that American elections are affected by any discernible level of voter fraud: i.e., violations that would be prevented by requiring individual voters to exhibit a state-approved identity document when voting in person.

Note, since there seem to be a number of posters here confused about what actually constitutes voter fraud, that the above statement does not deny the existence or documentation of various other kinds of electoral fraud, such as electoral officials mishandling ballots or tampering with voter rolls.

But those kinds of frauds will not be checked in any way by the proposed voter-ID laws. So please get rid of the mistaken notion that news stories about instances of those kinds of frauds constitute evidence that voter-ID laws would be a good thing.

[Rhythmdvl]

ETA: Simulpost confusion--this post responds to bricker.

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

The "I'm not touching you!" defense.

Given that you can tell the glaring difference in the post/response, there's little left but to write you off as wholly disingenuous. I'd held on to a scrap, but you pretty much killed it.

[Leaper]

Originally Posted by Clothahump

A lot of it could be cleared up by the states' purging dead people off the voter roles, but ghods forbid that should happen. The federal government is currently suing Florida to prevent them from taking dead folks off the list, and is refusing them access to necessary databases to validate others who are suspected illegals on the list. One has to ask why our current administration is so damn desperate to keep dead people on the roles, and why liberals in general so desperately support them in doing so.

How many mistakes, if any, do you think have been made in this process in Florida so far? To your knowledge, is the "federal government" the only entity expressing concern or moving to stop the purges? If not, who else?

[elucidator]

Say, Bricker, as long as you're here, want to take a crack at explaining why those "sunday voting" restrictions are such a good thing, and how, no , really, they are not about making things tougher for black voters, but really about something just totally good and wholesome!

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Alessan

I agree. You do your time, they clean the slate.

Frankly, I don't see how it's constitutional.

Because there is no right vote in the Bill of Rights. Although the 15th, 19th and 26th Amendments refer to the "right" to vote as something that may not be denied or abridged for specified reasons (race/creed/color, sex, and age-if-over-18 respectively), nothing else in the Constitution expressly declares that voting is a constitutional right, as distinct from a privilege afforded under qualifications set by State law.

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. wants to change that, but his proposed voting-rights amendment hasn't gotten any traction yet.