DC Tom Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 And since I've moved, I have trouble finding the folder I keep my passport, social security card and birth certificate. Does that mean I don't exist and thusly shouldn't vote? I'm pretty sure you still exist...but if you can't find your photo ID that verifies who you say you are, you don't vote. If you have a problem with that, it's not my problem. I'm not the one that lost the folder with your ID. Deal with it yourself.
B-Man Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 And since I've moved, I have trouble finding the folder I keep my passport, social security card and birth certificate. Does that mean I don't exist and thusly shouldn't vote? The one woman who was interviewed had identification, just not the right identification--probably the case for others who stand to be affected by this. But thats not a fault of the system, but the individual (in your example...you) Don't make it easier to commit voter fraud by simplifying the process so that a few individuals, don't fulfill some basic responsibilities to maintain their privilige of voting. Its your fault you lost your folder. .
WorldTraveller Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) So let me get this straight, if someone purports to be a registered voter, yet doesn't have proof that he is indeed that particular voter, we should still allow that person to vote under the alleged registered voters name, and that it still should be accepted simply because the person verbally alleges to be the registered voter? Edited July 25, 2012 by WorldTraveller
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 But thats not a fault of the system, but the individual (in your example...you) Don't make it easier to commit voter fraud by simplifying the process so that a few individuals, don't fulfill some basic responsibilities to maintain their privilige of voting. Its your fault you lost your folder. . Then let me ask you this question: say tomorrow the US Supreme Court decides all these state-to-state voter ID laws are invalid and in some way unconstitutional (I don't know why they would, I'm not saying they should, just bear with me): What happens then? What's the worst that could happen? Do you question every election? Is every election that has already taken place invalid in your eyes?' We know what could happen under the laws, please tell me what would happen without these laws. And please provide corroborating evidence. Also: since I know at least one idiot will jump on the opportunity, PLEASE LEAVE VOTER REGISTRATION OUT OF THIS, AND FOCUS ON THE FRAUD OF ACTUAL BALLOTS CAST.
IDBillzFan Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'm pretty sure you still exist...but if you can't find your photo ID that verifies who you say you are, you don't vote. If you have a problem with that, it's not my problem. I'm not the one that lost the folder with your ID. Deal with it yourself. He didn't lose it on his own. Someone lost it for him. On a road. Or bridge. Or something. But let's leave personal accountability out of this, shall we?
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 He didn't lose it on his own. Someone lost it for him. On a road. Or bridge. Or something. But let's leave personal accountability out of this, shall we? Exactly what are you implying?
B-Man Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) We know what could happen under the laws, please tell me what would happen without these laws. And please provide corroborating evidence. I'm sorry, I am not able to provide corroborating evidence for a supposition. Its very simple. There are plenty of political operatives out there who wish to effect election outcomes. They do this by increasing votes. If its easier to falsely cast votes with fake identities, they will do so. It would be an obligation to ALL citizens to maintain the integrity of elections by having those casting their ballots, identify themselves, with an ID card. . Edited July 25, 2012 by B-Man
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I'm sorry, I am not able to provide corroborating evidence for a supposition. Its very simple. There are plenty of political operatives out there who wish to effect election outcomes. They do this by increasing votes. If its easier to falsely cast votes with fake identities, they will do so. It would be an obligation to ALL citizens to maintain the integrity of elections by having those casting their ballots, identify themselves, with an ID card. . Agreed on the bolded. But your supposition is at the heart of what I've been getting at this whole time: In the process of eliminating perceived nefarious activity (a potential wrong) we're causing another wrong by suppressing voters. Yes, I'm dealing this with this as an absolute because people WILL NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE because of these laws, we can do laps around this issue all day long, but it's worthless because I don't disagree with holding people to personal accountability, but that doesn't change the fact that hundreds of thousands of LEGITIMATE voters will not get the chance to vote all because we're trying to ward off a very very small number of "political operatives."
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Agreed on the bolded. But your supposition is at the heart of what I've been getting at this whole time: In the process of eliminating perceived nefarious activity (a potential wrong) we're causing another wrong by suppressing voters. Yes, I'm dealing this with this as an absolute because people WILL NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE because of these laws, we can do laps around this issue all day long, but it's worthless because I don't disagree with holding people to personal accountability, but that doesn't change the fact that hundreds of thousands of LEGITIMATE voters will not get the chance to vote all because we're trying to ward off a very very small number of "political operatives." And around we go. Why exactly can't these hundreds of thousands of people obtain a photo ID? Are you in the incompetence camp or taking the side of laziness?
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 And around we go. Why exactly can't these hundreds of thousands of people obtain a photo ID? Are you in the incompetence camp or taking the side of laziness? I didn't conduct the goddamn research, I didn't come up with the numbers. Why is your method for refuting the data to question me?
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I didn't conduct the goddamn research, I didn't come up with the numbers. Why is your method for refuting the data to question me? No, you simply used the numbers to draw some poor conclusions with sweeping implications on the mental capacity and/or sheer apathy of "hundreds of thousands" of Americans. I don't need numbers to pick apart your absurd conclusions and rather offensive insinuations.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 No, you simply used the numbers to draw some poor conclusions with sweeping implications on the mental capacity and/or sheer apathy of "hundreds of thousands" of Americans. I don't need numbers to pick apart your absurd conclusions and rather offensive insinuations. I see. So it's absurd to think a portion of 750,000 ID-less voters in one state will not obtain (for whatever reason) the proper identification to be able to vote. But it's not absurd to think that not if but WHEN this happens, it'll be the proper course to deter the ZERO counts of voter fraud on the state's record.
Rob's House Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Can liberals just be honest and admit the only reason you give a **** about this is because 90% of people who are too trifling, lazy, and pathetic to have an ID are going to vote Democrat?
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Can liberals just be honest and admit the only reason you give a **** about this is because 90% of people who are too trifling, lazy, and pathetic to have an ID are going to vote Democrat? I'm not by any means a fiscal liberal, but I'm very proudly a social liberal, and I've already said many times that this is clearly a ploy to rob the Dems of votes, and that's the most despicable aspect of this--BY FAR. If we're okay with the political maneuvering, with it being politics as usual, fine. But I've been quite transparent about my disdain for the GOP's methods of winning votes by negation.
3rdnlng Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 No, you simply used the numbers to draw some poor conclusions with sweeping implications on the mental capacity and/or sheer apathy of "hundreds of thousands" of Americans. I don't need numbers to pick apart your absurd conclusions and rather offensive insinuations. I think if voter I.D. eliminates hundreds of thousands of votes by apathetic or mentally challenged people that it is a good thing.
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 I think if voter I.D. eliminates hundreds of thousands of votes by apathetic or mentally challenged people that it is a good thing. That's fine, but what other restrictions should be placed on voting aptitude then? Should there be a civics exam? A name-all-your-legislators test? A series of short answer essays to affirm your grasp of the issues? Who gets to decide whether you're good enough to vote or not?
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 (edited) I see. So it's absurd to think a portion of 750,000 ID-less voters in one state will not obtain (for whatever reason) the proper identification to be able to vote. But it's not absurd to think that not if but WHEN this happens, it'll be the proper course to deter the ZERO counts of voter fraud on the state's record. Thats not absurd. Sadly, thats a lock. But theres nothing stopping these people from obtaining a photo ID. So it follows that the "portion" of the 750,000 that fail to make the minimum effort in obtaining a photo ID are choosing not to vote. Why are you outraged by eligible voters choosing not to exercise their right to vote, and how exactly is voters choosing not to vote racism fueled Republican treachery? So are you for the minorities are incompetent camp or are you in the minorities are lazy camp? Is requiring someone to register to vote a discriminatory practice? Is requiring someone to go to a polling station to cast a vote disenfranchising voters? Where do you draw the line? Edited July 25, 2012 by Jauronimo
The Big Cat Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Thats not absurd. Sadly, thats a lock. But theres nothing stopping these people from obtaining a photo ID. So it follows that the "portion" of the 750,000 that fail to make the minimum effort in obtaining a photo ID are choosing not to vote. Why are you outraged by eligible voters choosing not to exercise their right to vote, and how exactly is voters choosing not to vote racism fueled Republican treachery? So are you for the minorities are incompetent camp or are you in the minorities are lazy camp? Firstly, I never ONCE said anything about racism, not tied this issue to race in anyway shape or form. And how is it a choice for the 500,000 Americans without vehicles who live at least 10 miles from an ID station that's only open 2 days a week, and only during business hours? You make it sound like all they have to do is head on down to the local ID-shop whenever they please, using all the free time their personal and professional lives most surely offer...
Jauronimo Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Firstly, I never ONCE said anything about racism, not tied this issue to race in anyway shape or form. And how is it a choice for the 500,000 Americans without vehicles who live at least 10 miles from an ID station that's only open 2 days a week, and only during business hours? You make it sound like all they have to do is head on down to the local ID-shop whenever they please, using all the free time their personal and professional lives most surely offer... Is it any harder for them than it is for everyone else? Somehow hundreds of millions have managed this feat. How do those 500,000 Americans feed themselves? Subsistence farming? How do they have no say in where they live? Can they be held accountable for anything?
3rdnlng Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 That's fine, but what other restrictions should be placed on voting aptitude then? Should there be a civics exam? A name-all-your-legislators test? A series of short answer essays to affirm your grasp of the issues? Who gets to decide whether you're good enough to vote or not? Why would there be a need to have further restrictions? Why even introduce that to the conversation?
Recommended Posts