GOP admits voter id laws will "allow" Romney to win

[cybrsage]

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if you're good at forgery. It is certainly consistent with your behaviors here.

Thank you for saying I am intelligent. 🙂

But of course, as has been shown over and over and over again, that ID requirement, at least as implemented by the Republicans, disenfranchises millions of eligible voters.

No, it really has not. Putting a link to one old lady who did not request the "We cannot find a birth certificate for you" official form is not millions of eligible voters. Links showing people who do not have ID and refuse to go get one, is also not proof (of anything other than their desire to not get ID).

Try again, this time with actual proof. If you posted it in this thread previously, either link to the post or repost it. The thread is too large for me to hunt for your proof for you.

 

[nehalem256]

Then republicans are idiots. Voting ID should be held to the same standard as other government related stuff. No more, no less. Things like a birth certificate and a Social Security card should be acceptable forms of ID.

Generally government or banks ask for 2 form of ID if there's no picture. It's pretty easy to do in Canada because one of the acceptable cards is your health care card, and everyone was issued one of those for free. Social Insurance cards are issued for free as well, but only the first time. I had to replace one before and that was like pulling teeth; that card is a lot more important that anyone realizes.
I think it should be drilled into the heads of school children that having multiple forms of identification is extremely important because one can be used to replace the others. For example, I can use my social insurance card to get a replacement drivers license. I can use my drivers license to get a replacement social insurance card. I once lost both at the same time. Holy shit. I had to have both of my parents vouch for who I am to get a replacement social insurance card. I can understand how not having ANY form of ID could be disenfranchising - it's hard to prove that you are you. Instead of throwing out the importance of ID, I think we should push in the other direction and spread awareness. Everybody knows things like Stop, Drop, and Roll but how many people can name 4 valid forms of identification that they should have? Drivers license, social security or social insurance, passport,.... can you name a fourth?

Use the same rules for voting as they do for getting a job. Hard to argue that is unreasonable.

Of course in this case a driver's license would actually be insufficient id to vote; you would need a driver's license AND birth certificate.

It seems like the Republicans in some ways are being too lenient.

 

[Bowfinger]

Use the same rules for voting as they do for getting a job. Hard to argue that is unreasonable.

Of course in this case a driver's license would actually be insufficient id to vote; you would need a driver's license AND birth certificate.

It seems like the Republicans in some ways are being too lenient.

More fail. There is no Constitutional right to have a job (and over 100 million American adults do NOT). There is a Constitutional right to vote. Next talking point, please.

 

[cybrsage]

More fail. There is no Constitutional right to have a job (and over 100 million American adults do NOT). There is a Constitutional right to vote. Next talking point, please.

We know there are rules placed on the right to vote. Photo ID simply is a way to verify some of these rules are being followed - it gives those who check the ID the ability to say "you are trying to break the rules, no vote for you". In this way, it is the same as requiring Photo ID to buy alcohol. It gives the seller the ability to say "you are tryign to break the rules, no alcohol for you".

Without requiring photo ID to be checked prior to allowing someone to buy alcohol, you cannot be sure people are not breaking the rules. Same with voting.

 

[nehalem256]

More fail. There is no Constitutional right to have a job (and over 100 million American adults do NOT). There is a Constitutional right to vote. Next talking point, please.

There is also no constitutional right to breathe. Somethings are so obvious you do not need to write them down.

Of course the constitution also does not guarantee a right to vote. Only says you cannot prohibit based on race, gender, or age(>18).

 

[Pens1566]

Thank you for saying I am intelligent. 🙂

He stated no such thing. I thought this kind of shit was against the rules. How are you not banned?

 

[Bowfinger]

Not surprising the RNC apologists immediately jump in to propagate the big lie about "voter fraud". It doesn't matter how many times that lie is disproven. They are determined to to keep parroting it because the alternative is unacceptable. They would not only have to accept that their party has played them (again), using dishonest but quite effective emotional arguments. They would also have to accept that their party leadership are scum, pushing a cynical and highly immoral plot to subvert American democracy by disenfranchising a demographic that tends not to vote their way.

Of course they can't admit they want to suppress votes from the poor, the elderly, blacks, and students. So instead they invent a problem that doesn't exist to any material extent, start screeching to their gullible base about how awful this imaginary problem is, and ram through laws that won't actually address their imaginary problem ... but do disenfranchise left-leaning voters. How very convenient for them, and how utterly shameful for the party-first tools who eagerly embrace the lie.

Cybr256 is now in the phase where it ignores everything already addressed in the thread and just keeps spouting the same lies, like an autistic parrot, until everyone gives up in disgust or boredom. So it seems like a good time to repeat some of those key points. I thought it would help those with short memories or who just stopped by the thread.

 

[Bowfinger]

And the drones keep parroting the same stupid disinformation.

Absentee Ballots
​

"Dead" people can vote forever using absentee ballots, no photo ID required. The solution to this problem is cleaning up voter registration, NOT voter photo IDs. Why is it so hard for some of you to grasp this very simple concept?

ibid

 

[Bowfinger]

Sure, that's the easy dodge. Oh no, we're not preventing them from voting. They are still free to vote ... if they get a government photo ID, and if they have the money, and if they can produce a birth certificate, and if they're mobile or can at least find someone to haul them around. The fact of the matter is a significant percentage of them will not do that. They may not be prevented from voting, but they are absolutely discouraged from voting.

Sorry, but in my opinion, the burden of proof lies on those who will disenfranchise a great many voters. They must prove that voter photo ID laws will not only actually reduce fraud -- a tough sell given that they're doing nothing to stop the largely imaginary fraudsters from using absentee ballots -- but will actually reduce fraud more than the number of legitimate voters they disenfranchise. It's called a cost-benefits analysis, and voter photo ID laws are a giant loser ... unless one's real agenda is suppressing votes. Then it becomes a big win.

ibid

 

[Bowfinger]

\

Actually when you register to vote you provide a signature. Many precincts in different states use that as the main verification of identity of the voter. You sign somewhere to vote. Mail in Ballots require a signature somewhere on either the envelope or the actual ballot. Now maybe that form of ID is insufficient to you, ok that's something that can be debated.

However, it's hard enough to get people to vote. Most of the time the majority of eligible voters won't be bothered except for those odd elections where the voting turnout is high.... even then it's not a vast majority. How is a person going to credibly argue that voter fraud is committed by enough people to be a serious problem when you already have problems getting people to care enough to vote? Especially considering that voter fraud is a felony.




Very few people have been found to have commit voter fraud. However it was a focus of the Bush administration and some federal prosecutors were fired by President Bush, some of those prosecutors had received very favorable appraisals a few years before.

Supposedly, disagreements by those attorneys with the administration over voter fraud was a factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy



Election fraud involves shenanigans not committed by the voter. Election officials throwing out or shredding ballots would be a crude example.

Consider the questionable security of the electronic voting machines however....

Their programming is proprietary. And they are designed by corporations.

I'm sorry but if a machine is going to be used to count votes in addition to a paper printout on durable paper with very durable inks the software of that machine should be open source so that security experts can verify the security of the software.

consider this story.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/240781/argonne_researchers_easily_hack_electronic_voting_machine.html



Why the hell should we trust a company that designs such flawed machines with our elections? Paper is good enough for countries why not us?

Sure it's easy to make a wisecrack for laughs but the issue is serious.... unless of course, I suppose, the current state of affairs favors the party that you're rooting for.

ibid

 

[Bowfinger]

Magnificent trollery based on a strawman. No ID required to vote? A blatant and knowing lie. When people register to vote, their identity & residency are confirmed by the registrar. When they vote, they generally need to have some form of ID, and their signature must match that which is on file.

You resort to the standard tactic of all conspiracy theorists, attempting to transfer the burden of proof from your own preposterous claims onto those who point out the absurdity of what you offer. When you make allegations yet have no proof, you shamelessly demand that other prove you're wrong.

If the concept of voter fraud is unproveable, as you admit, then action to combat it is unnecessary and counter productive, unless there is some other reason for that action in the first place.

ibid

 

[Bowfinger]

No real point in making this argument. I've tried. I've used facts, numbers, studies, a half dozen different sources ... none of it works. But I'll try again.

Someone posted a link earlier, 21 million adults without ID. A link I found showed that in 2008 there were 169 million registered voters out of 212 million of voting age citizens. So 79.7 percent who are old enough are registered. So that leaves us 16.7 million registered voters estimated that would be affected by voter id laws, or 10% of the voting population. Now that would mean that voting fraud would have to occur at a rate of 10% to just break even. However studies that estimate voter fraud place the rate of occurrence between 0.0002 and 0.00004. If we use the higher estimate rate of 0.0002, then we have a rate of 1 fraudulent vote stopped for every 50,000 people we disenfranchise. Now lets make the case that somehow 90% of the people affected by voter id laws got an id on time for the election (a rate that is virtually impossible to expect to occur), then we'd have a rate of 1 fraudulent vote stopped for every 5000 people we disenfranchise.

None of this takes into account that the rates of voter fraud include absentee ballot fraud. And that voter id laws can't stop that, so the rate at which these voter id laws stop fraud is much lower. It should also be pointed out that absentee ballots are used much more heavily by Republican voters and that absentee ballot fraud favors the GOP.

Now, despite all those numbers, the talking heads in here will still make claims that can be mathematically proven to be bullshit. This may be why conservatives want to defund public education and ruin science classes, learning and education work against them.

ibid

 

[Bowfinger]

Desperately need to create a distraction, huh? Nothing like a little off-topic smearage to rally the troops, I suppose.

That person was just an example of a much broader problem- 11% of adult citizens lack current govt issued photo ID, and 1 in 5 over the age of 65 lack current govt issued photo ID.

Gave up on voting of her own accord? Yeh, as if it wasn't because of the barriers deliberately placed in her way. Current Repub efforts are apparently designed to create even more for more people in support of their true ideology-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw

It's not that they really want democracy- they just want to maintain the appearance of it. In the realm of Right-think, perception is reality, as you've offered before.

ibid