Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Trial Set

[EagleKeeper]

Except that option 2 does not exist. So they just don't get to vote. They are fucked and denied the ability to vote.

There were more examples of people who will be denied the ability to vote on that page than documented in-person voter fraud combined in the last 10 years.

Many more will be denied the vote because they have not attempted over x years to resolve the issue.

Too inconvenient - typical, want everything handed to them on a platter rather than get up to get it.

 

[thraashman]

Except that option 2 does not exist. So they just don't get to vote. They are fucked and denied the ability to vote.

There were more examples of people who will be denied the ability to vote on that page than documented in-person voter fraud combined in the last 10 years.

The funny thing is that the state I live in just significantly increased the requirements to get a valid ID. They made zero effort to inform the public of this. I already have a valid ID that doesn't expire for a few years. Were these laws enacted around the time I last got an ID, I probably wouldn't have been able to get one. Because the government records had my date of birth incorrect and it didn't match with my birth certificate. It took several months to correct when I discovered it.

It's pretty pointless to argue in these threads with conservatives, they WANT voter suppression.

 

[chucky2]

Many more will be denied the vote because they have not attempted over x years to resolve the issue.

To inconvenient - typical, want everything handed to them on a platter rather than get up to get it.

I know right? 80 years old...no birth certificate, no replacement for birth certificate, hasn't considered that a problem until now. Weird...if that were me, I'd be getting the equivalent of it pronto, not waiting 80 years until there's a problem.

Given all these issues, I know for a fact now that Dem's absolutely want National ID. No, they demand National ID. Their own links point to the fact that it's needed!

:biggrin:

Too much funny...

 

[TheVrolok]

I know right? 80 years old...no birth certificate, no replacement for birth certificate, hasn't considered that a problem until now. Weird...if that were me, I'd be getting the equivalent of it pronto, not waiting 80 years until there's a problem.

Given all these issues, I know for a fact now that Dem's absolutely want National ID. No, they demand National ID. Their own links point to the fact that it's needed!

:biggrin:

Too much funny...

Why should an 80 year old, who has had no need of it until now, have gone through all that trouble? To have it just for the fun of having it? If his/her life did not require it, so what?

 

[chucky2]

There are many things that require a birth certificate, especially back in the day before everyone and their mother used social security numbers and had computer lookup. If they're 80 and just getting around to think having a birth certificate or equivalent is important, then I really have little sympathy for them.

I think enacting these laws right before an election is BS, and should be called as such. But to have some large Bleeding Heart sympathy for people who are F'ing lazy, but now are old and po po me....No. These people largely didn't take any personal responsibility it sounds like for decades of their life, now we should shed large crododile tears? Mmmmmm I don't think so. Maybe a 'Damn that's too bad'...that's about it.

 

[Ldir]

Why should an 80 year old, who has had no need of it until now, have gone through all that trouble? To have it just for the fun of having it? If his/her life did not require it, so what?

Because they love waiting in long lines, doing paperwork and wasting money of course. Doesn't everyone?

 

[Ldir]

There are many things that require a birth certificate, especially back in the day before everyone and their mother used social security numbers and had computer lookup. If they're 80 and just getting around to think having a birth certificate or equivalent is important, then I really have little sympathy for them.

I think enacting these laws right before an election is BS, and should be called as such. But to have some large Bleeding Heart sympathy for people who are F'ing lazy, but now are old and po po me....No. These people largely didn't take any personal responsibility it sounds like for decades of their life, now we should shed large crododile tears? Mmmmmm I don't think so. Maybe a 'Damn that's too bad'...that's about it.

So it is fine to disenfranchise them because you don't approve of their different lifestyle? That's pretty republican of you.

 

[TheVrolok]

There are many things that require a birth certificate, especially back in the day before everyone and their mother used social security numbers and had computer lookup. If they're 80 and just getting around to think having a birth certificate or equivalent is important, then I really have little sympathy for them.

These people made it to their 60's, 70's, and 80's without the need, so what?

I think enacting these laws right before an election is BS

This is the heart of the issue and why it's such an overt move of voter suppression.

These people largely didn't take any personal responsibility it sounds like for decades of their life, now we should shed large crododile tears? Mmmmmm I don't think so. Maybe a 'Damn that's too bad'...that's about it.

They didn't take any personal responsibility? It sounds like they worked jobs and raised families? I don't see what leads you to believe they didn't take any personal responsibility.

 

[chucky2]

So it is fine to disenfranchise them because you don't approve of their different lifestyle? That's pretty republican of you.

They're disenfranchising themselves by not taking care of business ahead of time. Don't be mad at me, go ask them why they did what they did (or, in many of these cases, didn't do).

These people made it to their 60's, 70's, and 80's without the need, so what?

Good for them (if it's true). Now they need one. Times change.

This is the heart of the issue and why it's such an overt move of voter suppression.

1 year or 6 months ahead of time should be plenty of time for them to get it straight. If it isn't, it either is their own fault and/or the governments fault. Those are the two parties you should be talking to about suppression. EDIT: And when I include Gov here, I don't mean because they enacted the law. I mean they should have an efficient means to make this process both be speedy and trustworthy. When you have both, you don't have suppression.

They didn't take any personal responsibility? It sounds like they worked jobs and raised families? I don't see what leads you to believe they didn't take any personal responsibility.

In the respect of having proper ID, and being able to prove it, it sounds like they didn't. Seriously, who doesn't have a birth certificate, or even multiple copies of their birth certificate? I'm 33 and I've got an official one plus 3-4 copies I've made sitting in my top drawer right now...and this is the computer age and I've got a drivers license. You're telling me these folks for the past 60 years or so have just been unable to get one, or, it never crossed their minds to get sh1t straight? Just because they're old doesn't mean they're exempted from their (in)action.

Chuck

 

[techs]

Here's the point that many people are missing completely. American demographics and attitudes are changing. For heaven's sake we elected a black President. The people who are arguing for voter disenfranchisement are going to pay a huge price within 10 years. They are sacrificing any future for their party and their ideals. Payback is going to be a huge bitch. People will remember how Republicans tried to keep them from voting.

While I watch the Fox News guests smirk as they make their b.s. claims all I can think of is little spoiled children who believe they are getting their way. Its like "na na na" "I win".

Sadly that is what the hatred and bile the right wing has indoctrinated its followers with.

Let me say this. It doesn't matter if Romney wins and gets two terms. Because in 8 years the electorate will have changed so much that the political goals of the Republicans and the Neo-Cons and the Tea Party will be completely dead.

 

[Jhhnn]

Apparently you lack the ability to comprehend. No prosecutions for voter fraud is not the same as no voter fraud.

Even if there actually was no fraud, there's still no reason not to require ID. You need ID for just about anything else, there's nothing magical about it, get an ID and vote. It's not hard or expensive.

Really? Work your state of Denial on these cases-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/u...?pagewanted=1&_r=1&nl=us&emc=edit_cn_20120720

 

[Jhhnn]

Ya, how asinine of me to think an organization that was hell bent on getting as many illegal voter registrations as it could would do anything under-handed with them.

How asinine of you to make that claim in the first place.

 

[Jhhnn]

Isn't that funny. However if government were to offer "Free Money" then all you betcha these people would find a way to head down into town and collect. Hell one has to wonder how these people even signed up for the social services they are using.

Nice smear- unsurprising coming from you.

You have no proof that disenfranchised voters are social services recipients, do you? Of course not. But it's highly convenient to believe & to claim that they are, huh?

 

[Jhhnn]

So if you take the argument that it will reduce voter fraud off the table, what possible argument do you have in favor of the law?

The usual- "I got mine! Screw you!"

 

[TheVrolok]

Good for them (if it's true). Now they need one. Times change.

The problem is, many people have tried to get one, and are unable. That's unacceptable.

Seriously, who doesn't have a birth certificate, or even multiple copies of their birth certificate? I'm 33 and I've got an official one plus 3-4 copies I've made sitting in my top drawer right now...and this is the computer age and I've got a drivers license.

Often times poor and uneducated people.

You're telling me these folks for the past 60 years or so have just been unable to get one, or, it never crossed their minds to get sh1t straight? Just because they're old doesn't mean they're exempted from their (in)action.

We've already covered this. For the past 60 years they did not need one, there was no "shit to get straight."

 

[glenn1]

These people made it to their 60's, 70's, and 80's without the need, so what?



This is the heart of the issue and why it's such an overt move of voter suppression.



They didn't take any personal responsibility? It sounds like they worked jobs and raised families? I don't see what leads you to believe they didn't take any personal responsibility.

Again, I ask the same question - if voter fraud is such a non-issue, why aren't progressives supporting the abolition of all voter fraud laws instead of just this small subset of them? If disenfranchising even a single voter due to lack of photo ID is a big deal, they why isn't also disenfranchising them for any other voter fraud law related reason whatsoever?

 

[TheVrolok]

Again, I ask the same question - if voter fraud is such a non-issue, why aren't progressives supporting the abolition of all voter fraud laws instead of just this small subset of them? If disenfranchising even a single voter due to lack of photo ID is a big deal, they why isn't also disenfranchising them for any other voter fraud law related reason whatsoever?

I think the primary issue most people are having is that these laws are being enacted 6 months prior to what may be a very tight election. If they were enacted a month following the election, I don't think you'd see the outrage. Timing here is extremely important.

 

[actuarial]

Again, I ask the same question - if voter fraud is such a non-issue, why aren't progressives supporting the abolition of all voter fraud laws instead of just this small subset of them? If disenfranchising even a single voter due to lack of photo ID is a big deal, they why isn't also disenfranchising them for any other voter fraud law related reason whatsoever?

For the same reason that those in favor of tougher ID laws aren't suggesting that voters need to undergo fingerprinting, retina scan and DNA test to prove without a doubt who they are.

Just because you don't think tougher laws are necessary - because the current laws have not been shown to be inadequate - doesn't mean you have to support the opposite extreme of NO LAWS!!!111one!!11!

 

[berzerker60]

Can you imagine how crazy the Republican base would go if Obama was proposing a mandatory ID card for every citizen, or else he'd steal away their very right to vote? There would be marches of entitled Baby Boomers in every city in the country.

Instead, it's endorsed by the leaders of Team Red, so let's just ignore every principle we say we stand for in order to get a win on Team Blue.

 

[SparkyJJO]

It's pretty pointless to argue in these threads with conservatives, they WANT voter suppression.

🙄

The only voter suppression we want is suppression of ILLEGAL votes.

Why you and so man others can't seem to get that through your head I have no idea.

Or maybe, deep down inside, you know this. You just don't want the illegal votes being suppressed either.

Can you imagine how crazy the Republican base would go if Obama was proposing a mandatory ID card for every citizen, or else he'd steal away their very right to vote? There would be marches of entitled Baby Boomers in every city in the country.

Instead, it's endorsed by the leaders of Team Red, so let's just ignore every principle we say we stand for in order to get a win on Team Blue.

If Obama said he was in favor of requiring a state ID to vote, I'd be shocked, but in full support of it. You're just spewing theoretical garbage.

 

[TheVrolok]

If Obama said he was in favor of requiring a state ID to vote, I'd be shocked, but in full support of it. You're just spewing theoretical garbage.

Bullshit. If it was somehow theorized that state ID would give Obama the possibility of an advantage, the Republicans would be screaming about "big brother" and government getting involved where it doesn't belong. To think otherwise is to be disingenuous.

 

[TheVrolok]

For the same reason that those in favor of tougher ID laws aren't suggesting that voters need to undergo fingerprinting, retina scan and DNA test to prove without a doubt who they are.

Just because you don't think tougher laws are necessary - because the current laws have not been shown to be inadequate - doesn't mean you have to support the opposite extreme of NO LAWS!!!111one!!11!

People love using that fallacy. Gets used during wartime; "What? You don't support the Iraq war? I can't believe you support those terrorists! This is America, you can get out!" If you don't support something, apparently that means you automatically support it's extreme opposite.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

What this all boils down to in my opinion is the following:

Do we or do we not have a problem with voter fraud in our elections?

Based on numerous studies the answer is a resounding NO. So you have to question the motives of the Republicans behind these initiatives. It does not take a very intelligent man to see that the net effect of these laws is to prohibit minorities from voting. These are the very people that vote Democratic in droves. It's that fucking simple.

Please stop trying to defend this Republicans. You're not smart, and you're certainly not smarter than the liberals on this board who see right through this shit.

 

[SparkyJJO]

Minorities are not being prevented from getting an ID in any way, shape or form.

Unless they are illegal.

I have no ill will toward anyone who votes either way, as long as they are citizens of this country. I resent you slandering me by suggesting otherwise But golly, requiring an ID to get cigarettes, or to buy beer, or heck to even buy a freaking tube of glue at the store isn't too much to ask, yet asking to show ID before you vote - obviously way more important than beer or glue - is asking too much? Really?

Please stop trying to defend this Democrats. You're not smart, and you're certainly not smarter than the conservatives on this board who see right through this. To steal your wording 😀

 

[shira]

I have a modest proposal for the any state with voter ID law:

Anyone who is a registered Republican, regardless of whether they currently have a state-issued ID or not, must appear at a state voter-registration office and present a certified American birth certificate or certified American naturalization papers to establish that they really, really are an American citizen. Existing drivers licenses, passports, and voter ID cards will NOT be accepted, because they might be fake. When this new verification process has been completed, they will be issued a NEW, state-certified "I really, really am eligible to vote" ID card.

Clearly, any Republican motivated to vote will not allow such a law to stand in the way of their obtaining the new, improved ID card. Anyone who doesn't make the effort to obtain the new, improved ID card is clearly lazy and shouldn't be able to vote.

There's no evidence that fake ID cards for Republicans have been a problem in the past. There's no evidence that fake ID cards for Republicans will be a problem in the future. And it's abundantly clear that such a law would significantly reduce the number of Republicans voting in the 2012 general election. Still, one can't be too careful . . . .