# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1)

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943>\
**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:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3822

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\
**Post date:** [November 7, 2013, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3822 "2013-11-07T16:25:56Z")

</div>

> [@CannyDan](#):
>
> Qualifications for registration as a voter (including but not limited to citizenship) **are not addressed by these voter ID laws** , which only address the non-existent problem of in-person voter substitution fraud.

That’s an absolute lie.

I have already provided the refutation of it – but of course you keep bringing it back.

Voter ID laws address the problems of people like [Ramon Cue of Miami,](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16508227&postcount=35) who is registered to vote:

> [@What effect did voter-ID laws have in the 2012 election?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-effect-did-voter-id-laws-have-in-the-2012-election/664243/35):
>
> The study identifies known instances of voter fraud, and in each cases announces, “None of these cases would have been affected by the use of photo ID.”
> 
> But that’s not correct. The presence of a Photo ID requirement means that a legally sufficient case for fraudulent voting can be made. You may remember I linked, as an example, to the case of Ramon Cue in Miami. Mr. Cue is not eligible to vote. Yet records show he repeatedly voted.
> 
> But because he denied it, and there was no requirement for Photo ID, there’s no real way to convict him – and his case does not show up on the list of confirmed voter frauds.

That’s not “in-person voter substitution fraud.” Cue is not a legal voter. But Cue voted. Records show he voted. Yet he denies voting, and he cannot be convicted, because the prosecutor has no legally sufficient way to prove he voted.

Forget that aspect of things, didja?

Or did you “forget” in order to shore up an otherwise unwinnable argument?

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943)._