Actually, after thinking about it for a moment, I say fuck having to prove who you are to vote. Everyone should be allowed to vote everywhere as often as they feel like it.
When 4chan bands together and votes in DEEZ NUTS as the next leader of the free world I’m gonna laugh my fucking ass off!!!
Oh lord, not another self-styled “libertarian”, the gingerbread man of the political spectrum. “Run, run, fast as you can, can’t catch me, I’m a Libertarian!” Will no one rid me of these turbulent pests?
I have no idea. I could speculate, but it would be just me imagining possible concerns.
I can only argue my own positions here, though. I support voter ID laws, as a general rules, and I support the Oregon registration law. If Republicans in Oregon don’t, then I guess my view differs from theirs.
I also oppose the death penalty, in contrast to most Republicans.
A pity they couldn’t see some way to see to protecting their legitimate interests while still advancing the cause of democratic participation. Of course, I don’t know what those “legitimate interests” might have been. And outside of the rather flimsy rationale I quoted upthread, they don’t seem to have offered any. But they were firmly opposed, no question about that! They definitely stood on principle, though what principle that might have been seems to have eluded them.
Do you feel that those whom the thought crossed their minds are correct? In other words, do you think that NOT having automatic voter registration offers a partisan advantage to Republicans?
Just like those lovers of democracy, the Massachusetts legislature, whose democrats en masse voted to allow the governor to appoint a replacement senator, then to not allow it, then to allow it, then to not allow it.
Each time mapped to whether the governor was a Republican or a Democrat, so that the actual functional rule in Massachusetts is: Democratic governors may appoint a replacement Senator; Republican governors may not.
Yes, they stood on principle too. And that principle was…
I’m trying hard not to speak rudely to you. It’s difficult: it means I can hardly respond to you all. Too bad since if you’d just get a frontal lobotomy you might be a pleasant intelligent guy.
How so, since voting is regulated by laws, which themselves are limited by constitutional amendments. In this regard, voting is quite a lot like speech and gun ownership.
But if we’re still speculating, what negative results do you envision if the voting process becomes much easier, i.e. if voting can be done from home with as much effort as shopping at Amazon?
Why would you say automatic registration offers a partisan advantage to Democrats?
My view is, at least with regards to registration, is that EVERYBODY should be OFFERED the chance to vote, with as little onus as possible on the individual. I’m actually on the fence about IDs to cast a ballot, but simply registering should be as easy as possible.
My guess is that Republicans would be against it, because in their eyes, it would enable people who are too poor, too stupid, or too lazy to make an effort to vote, to vote. And they would tend to vote for Democrats.