# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 12, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943 "2012-06-12T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 46
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/901 "2012-07-04T17:47:55Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > We covered this. One more time, then? No, it does not equate exactly to “disenfranchise”, it introduces extra barriers to voting, but does not forbid voting. And smallpox is worse than dysentery, but that does not make dysentery desirable. > > Let me know if you are still having trouble hacking your way through the dense jungle of my verbiage, I’ll try and break it down further. I understand your point. But since others are still saying “disenfranchise,” I am still obligated to debunk them. You may safely assume that every time I debunk the claim of disenfranchisement from now on, I am aware that you, **elucidator** , are not making that claim, and that my debunking is not aimed at you. As to your point: if getting [cowpox](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowpox) means that you won’t ever get smallpox, then we can say that smallpox is worse than cowpox, and getting cowpox _IS_ desirable. If that analogy isn’t clear: even if voter ID makes voting harder for a tiny minority, the benefit we derive in being able to trust election results makes up for it. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/902 "2012-07-04T17:51:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, it sounds like a great law. Because it’s a law that does more than simply “incentivises [sic] more people to not vote.” > > It also creates a framework by which more confidence may be had in the validity of election outcomes. It means that we, the people, can repose more trust in the outcome of elections than we could before. > > So that sounds like a great law. A law worth keeping. A law that people should protect, and be glad exists. God you’re a douchbag. You already admitted that it’s perfectly possible to estimate the amount of voter fraud. Since it has been estimated to be around 0, you know that this confidence bit is a complete sham. You’re willing to hang your hat on it because in terms of integrity you’re a fraud yourself. It serves your purpose of getting Mitt Romney elected. Think about that - you’re willing to trade any appearance of integrity to get Mitt Romney elected. MITT. ROMNEY. Well, sir, we’ve already determined what you are. Now we’re just negotiating a price. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/903 "2012-07-04T18:14:10Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > God you’re a douchbag. You already admitted that it’s perfectly possible to estimate the amount of voter fraud. Since it has been estimated to be around 0, you know that this confidence bit is a complete sham. I realize, **Hentor** , that the only way you can win arguments is to simply announce what your opponents know, what they have conceded, and toss in a couple of insults for good measure, but I as much as I like to help the disadvantaged, I am afraid I can’t let you continue the practice unchallenged. No, I don’t agree that it’s perfectly possible to estimate the amount of voter fraud. That’s YOUR bizarre claim, based on the framework that unless voter fraud is proven by criminal conviction it doesn’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![Skip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@Skip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skip)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/904 "2012-07-04T18:38:16Z")
[Policy Brief on the Truth About “Voter Fraud”](http://www.brennancenter.org/dynamic/subpages/download_file_38347.pdf) frrom the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU: > [@](#): > > **Summary** > [ul] > [li]Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare.[/li][li]Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud.[/li][li]Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct.[/li][li]Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda.[/li][li]Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action.[/li][/ul] Anyway, the idea that individuals voting illegally will be able to sway the result of any election above the level of County Dogcatcher are hilarious. If people were so petrified of voter fraud they should be focused on the actual ways in which one could sway an election: the manufacturers and source code of electronic voting machines (who, like Diebold, tended to have executives who [campaigned for Republican causes](http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/2004-06-08-diebold-donations_x.htm)). Why go through the efforts of convincing thousands of people to risk jailtime voting illegally when you already control how the votes are counted? Standardising on audited, open source voting machines would be much more effective than any Photo ID law in cracking down on fraud. But that wouldn’t stop the poors voting would it? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/905 "2012-07-04T18:43:11Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I understand your point. But since others are still saying “disenfranchise,” I am still obligated to debunk them. You may safely assume that every time I debunk the claim of disenfranchisement from now on, I am aware that you, **elucidator** , are not making that claim, and that my debunking is not aimed at you. > > As to your point: if getting [cowpox](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowpox) means that you won’t ever get smallpox, then we can say that smallpox is worse than cowpox, and getting cowpox _IS_ desirable. > > If that analogy isn’t clear: even if voter ID makes voting harder for a tiny minority, the benefit we derive in being able to trust election results makes up for it. Good evening, I’m Leonard Pinth Garnell, and this is Bad Analogy Theater. Tonight, we have another really bad analogy from that Master of the Form, the Counselor… You don’t “get” cowpox by vaccination, your body responds to the introduction of the cowpox virus by manufacturing antibodies that also work perfectly well against smallpox. And no, ontogeny does not recapitulate phylogeny, so don’t even go there! And so long as we are about it, exactly _who_ is making the claim of disenfranchisement that so urgently requires your rebuttal? From here, it appears you are asserting a truth simply for the novelty of the experience… ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/906 "2012-07-04T19:09:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, it sounds like a great law. Because it’s a law that does more than simply “incentivises [sic] more people to not vote.” As far as I know that’s the correct spelling. You shouldn’t assume something is misspelled because the spell-checker in your browser doesn’t know the word. [incentivises - Wiktionary, the free dictionary](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/incentivises) > [@](#): > > It also creates a framework by which more confidence may be had in the validity of election outcomes. It means that we, the people, can repose more trust in the outcome of elections than we could before. No, it allows stupid and uninformed people (who think that there is a large amount of voter fraud) to feel more confident. If ever there was an example of what a horrible person you are, this is up there. > [@](#): > > So that sounds like a great law. A law worth keeping. A law that people should protect, and be glad exists. Well, since I’ve demonstrated that it isn’t a good law, we are left with only your blind and vapid partisanship to speak for it. I really wish that God did exist, just for the outrage you’d have at being cast into hell. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/907 "2012-07-04T19:09:35Z")
**Skip** , nobody really claims that voter fraud sways elections in favor of the Democrats. Nobody here, at any rate. They will imply it, insinuate it, sidle up next to it, sure, but not actually say it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/908 "2012-07-04T19:41:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I realize, **Hentor** , that the only way you can win arguments is to simply announce what your opponents know, what they have conceded All of which you have done - including conceding that there is no evidence whatever that the alleged problem exists in any significant or even detectable amount, that such evidence either way is unobtainable, that there is no evidence that the \*perception \* of this invented “problem” your party’s mouthpieces invented actually exists, or that your proposed “solution” would address the problem even if it _did_ exist. Yet you stick with your position nonetheless. Remarkable. > [@](#): > > That’s YOUR bizarre claim, based on the framework that unless voter fraud is proven by criminal conviction it doesn’t exist. That is _your_ patented approach to “debate” here - the assertion that \*only \*the law and its results matter. But it’s an improvement to have you acknowledge that it’s “bizarre”; that’s a new and welcome development - unless it was actually just an inadvertent slip, as is more likely. > [@](#): > > It means that we, the people, can repose more trust in the outcome of elections than we could before. Given the above facts and your acknowledgment of them, one can only infer that your definition of “trust in the outcome” is based on what the outcome _is_, not how it was arrived at. One wonders if you’d rather just dispense with elections altogether, but one doesn’t have to wonder much. IOW, you have proven once again what a dishonest partisan hack you are. Just curious, how long did you have to live in this alleged “poverty” before the ARENA version of Odessa bailed you out? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/909 "2012-07-04T20:11:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I realize, **Hentor** , that the only way you can win arguments is to simply announce what your opponents know, what they have conceded, and toss in a couple of insults for good measure, but I as much as I like to help the disadvantaged, I am afraid I can’t let you continue the practice unchallenged. > > No, I don’t agree that it’s perfectly possible to estimate the amount of voter fraud. That’s YOUR bizarre claim, based on the framework that unless voter fraud is proven by criminal conviction it doesn’t exist. You’re the one who keeps dragging convictions into this, bitch. I’ve never said a word about them. So, logical contortions, fallacies, argumentum ad populum, and now outright lying. This thread has been one big embarrasing loser for you. ---
**Author:** ![Skip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@Skip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skip)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/910 "2012-07-04T22:11:47Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > **Skip** , nobody really claims that voter fraud sways elections in favor of the Democrats. Well of course not. That would require evidence of illegal voting actually having a statistically significant effect. Voter ID proponents have their panties in a knot over an average 0.0009% discrepancy in electoral results. Observe [this graphic from the most recent elections in Wisconsin](https://ericcompas.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/recount_perc1.png?w=640) showing percentage incorrectly counted votes by county. In some counties up to 0.76% of votes were incorrectly counted! That’s nearly 850X more significant than illegal voting. I’m sure the politicians who are vigorously campaigning for Voter ID laws will quickly move to this much more (850 time more) pressing concern? Right? But wait! According to a [landmark study in 2001 by those know nothings at MIT/Caltech](http://e-voto.di.fc.ul.pt/docs/A%20Preliminary%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Reliability%20of.pdf) > [@](#): > > Punch cards and electronic machines register residual voting rates for president of approximately 3 percent of all ballots cast. Paper ballots, lever machines, and optically scanned ballots produce residual voting rates of approximately 2 percent of all ballots cast, a statistically significant difference of fully one percent. Or to put the matter different, the residual voting rate of punch card methods and electronic devices is 50 percent higher than the residual voting rate of manually counted paper ballots, lever machines, and optically scanned ballots. This pattern implies that simply changing voting equipment, without any additional improvements, could lower the incidence of under and over voting substantially. That’s right by merely choosing the correct type of vote tabulation method one can effect the results by a full 1%! That’s over 1100X more significant than our sinister horde of illegal voters! Someone get Hans Van Spakovsky on the phone stat! ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/911 "2012-07-04T22:36:28Z")
Oooh! I’m just imagining all that confidence! ---
**Author:** ![AlienVessels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba8739/32.png) [@AlienVessels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AlienVessels)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/912 "2012-07-04T22:52:35Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Ya think? No one is denying this. For some people it will be very difficult to get an ID. For some it may potentially not be possible at all. Are you going to allow just anyone to rock up to the voting booth and cast a vote because they claim is was too difficult to get an ID? > > You don’t know why they don’t have an ID. You assume it is because of some hardship reason. Similar numbers of people claim that the weather caused them not to vote. Is that the real reason that they didn’t vote? Or is that just what they are telling you rather than the real reason which may be they couldn’t be bothered? > > “I couldn’t vote because I don’t have an ID.” The question is why not? Because you can’t get one, or you can’t be bothered to get one? Because you believe the Men In Black will track you if you have one? Because it is against your crackpot religion? Because you’d have to talk to your parents to get your birth certificate and don’t want to? All sorts of reasons and excuses as to why not. > > A whole bunch of people claim they can’t vote because they were ‘busy’. You buy that excuse? Some small minority probably are. Most aren’t. If this applies or you are out of the country during the actual vote, they give you the opportunity to pre-vote. If you can’t make that then guess what? You’re shit out of luck, Sunshine. Vote next time. > > It isn’t up to the government to ‘fix’ all your problems. As a matter of fact, for most of the 30 years I’ve been voting, all I had to do was walk up and sign under my printed name to vote. And most of the time the people manning the polls recognized me because the polls are “right around the corner”. Registration should be just as easy. They could even offer registration at the polls. The issue here isn’t about voting, it’s about making registering to vote harder than the act of voting. It is not up to government to put barriers in the way of voting. It’s ironic in the extreme that it’s the “small government” people that are in favor of government getting in the way of voting. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/913 "2012-07-04T23:02:54Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > We covered this. One more time, then? No, it does not equate exactly to “disenfranchise”, it introduces extra barriers to voting, but does not forbid voting. Canada has similar laws with higher rates of voter participation. Plus our elections run for a month and are usually not predictable as to when they occur. We don’t have a 4 year lead time to sort out our ID. Oddly enough every country that has voter ID has higher levels of voter participation. Coincidence? Probably, but who knows. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2012, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/914 "2012-07-04T23:12:41Z")
> [@AlienVessels](#): > > It is not up to government to put barriers in the way of voting. It’s ironic in the extreme that it’s the “small government” people that are in favor of government getting in the way of voting. For 90% of people this isn’t a barrier. They just show up and flash their ID. They then vote. For the majority of the remaining 10% this isn’t a barrier, they can get an ID. So, for the last 1% (probably a hell of a lot smaller actually) what are you doing for them to help resolve their problem? Not just to resolve their issue with voting, but their issue with not being able to prove who they are so they can apply for government services and all the other benefits that ID can bring you? Frankly, voting is the least of THEIR worries. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2012, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/915 "2012-07-05T02:01:21Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And so long as we are about it, exactly _who_ is making the claim of disenfranchisement that so urgently requires your rebuttal? From here, it appears you are asserting a truth simply for the novelty of the experience… Here are some instances: > [@gamerunknown](#): > > Because dog fraud has influenced the outcome of elections and disenfranchisement hasn’t? > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > However, I have a counterproposal. How about, instead of voter ID, we mandate DNA testing of every individual who comes to the polls via taking blood. This would not disenfranchise anyone, and would completely eliminated _any_ threat of fraud, as you cannot fake your own genetic signature. > [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Then you plug those numbers into this formula: > > X \* 0.1 \* A – 0.000004 \* Y \* A \* Z ≥ 0 > > A is the population of the USA. So basically what we have here is the percentage of people who simply cannot get voter ID (X \* 0.1; 0.1 is the ratio of people who don’t have photo ID) times the total population, minus the rate of voter fraud times the total population times the margin for error, times the degree of importance of voter fraud compared to voter disenfranchisement. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2012, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/916 "2012-07-05T02:09:03Z")
> [@Skip](#): > > Anyway, the idea that individuals voting illegally will be able to sway the result of any election above the level of County Dogcatcher are hilarious. Why? How many votes would it take to sway a gubernatorial election? ---
**Author:** ![AlienVessels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba8739/32.png) [@AlienVessels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AlienVessels)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2012, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/917 "2012-07-05T02:23:02Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > For 90% of people this isn’t a barrier. They just show up and flash their ID. They then vote. > For the majority of the remaining 10% this isn’t a barrier, they can get an ID. So, for the last 1% (probably a hell of a lot smaller actually) what are you doing for them to help resolve their problem? Not just to resolve their issue with voting, but their issue with not being able to prove who they are so they can apply for government services and all the other benefits that ID can bring you? Frankly, voting is the least of THEIR worries. So to add insult to injury, you deny them their vote? On the off chance a handful of them commit voter fraud (rather than voter registration fraud), you decide hundreds of thousands of people need to jump a special hoop? The fricking vote is the foundation of a democracy. It should be the easiest thing in the country to do. This is like those “public safety” roadblocks they sometimes erect in the south on election day. No sir, everyone coming out of that black neighborhood, black or white, is going to be stopped. We’re not being selective. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2012, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/918 "2012-07-05T03:13:15Z")
**Budgie?**** Gamey **? Sorry, but you each lose 50 internet points for semantic imprecision.** Bricker **wins the internet, adding another to an unbroken string of 10,314.** Shodan** will be reading the message on his answering machine or voicemail… ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2012, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/919 "2012-07-05T03:16:46Z")
> [@AlienVessels](#): > > The fricking vote is the foundation of a democracy. It should be the easiest thing in the country to do. Certainly. The next time I’m in the US during an election, I’ll just wander down to the polling station and cast my vote. Okay with you? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2012, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/920 "2012-07-05T03:58:02Z")
> [@AlienVessels](#): > > So to add insult to injury, you deny them their vote? On the off chance a handful of them commit voter fraud (rather than voter registration fraud), you decide hundreds of thousands of people need to jump a special hoop? > > The fricking vote is the foundation of a democracy. It should be the easiest thing in the country to do. > > This is like those “public safety” roadblocks they sometimes erect in the south on election day. No sir, everyone coming out of that black neighborhood, black or white, is going to be stopped. We’re not being selective. Bull. Who writes stupid crap like this? The vote isn’t easy. You have to go to a polling station and stand in line. Easy would be voting by Internet or at the corner store. Shut up, ok? You have no idea what kind of idiocy you’re spewing. Grown ups are making the rules, not starry-eyed idealists. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=45) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=47)