Proof-of-Citizenship Ruling Victory for Honest Vote

[Bowfinger]

So what?

He is entitled to his opinion.

Absolutely, but he is insisting on his own facts. He is not entitled to his own facts. That's the issue with his OP.

 

[ivwshane]

And as usual, you stretch a point in an attempt to dismiss something that goes counter to your own close-held beliefs. Was there any testimony from the case quoted in the judge's ruling? Of course not, because the judge doesn't need to explain his ruling to that degree. This is the same reason Horne's statements don't appear in the ruling.

You have an ongoing habit of deception that is a universal trait of leftist/progressives. When the facts don't match up with your viewpoint, first berate the messenger, next berate the website, next twist events or flat out make things up and lastly, attack the information on semantics. Argue what the definition of "is" is.

You can attack me all you wish. You can try to bully and muscle me around as much as makes you happy. It's water off a duck's back. The only people that have any potential of getting under my skin here are those I have respect for. My level of respect for you is lower than whale shit.

Liberalism is a mental disorder. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt. They think like children but someone, somewhere along the line told them too many times that they were special flowers that were among the best and the brightest.

If I didn't know better I'd say you were a clone account of soniku aka sophitia, your posts are so full of irony and projection that it's almost impossible to believe someone like you really exists.

 

[Texashiker]

Absolutely, but he is insisting on his own facts. He is not entitled to his own facts. That's the issue with his OP.

His opinion does not change the facts of the courts ruling.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Meanwhile...in Ohio....

Sharpton, Dems at Ohio rally welcome poll worker imprisoned for voter fraud

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/03...poll-worker-imprisoned-for-voter-fraud-107810

Melowese “Once is not Enough” Richardson

 

[Bowfinger]

His opinion does not change the facts of the courts ruling.

The ruling does not say what he/his OP claims it says. This has been explained again and again. What part of this is too hard for you?

 

[Bowfinger]

Meanwhile...in Ohio....

Sharpton, Dems at Ohio rally welcome poll worker imprisoned for voter fraud

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/03...poll-worker-imprisoned-for-voter-fraud-107810

Melowese “Once is not Enough” Richardson

1. Sharpton is an idiot and a self-promoting tool

2. Deflect much? That has nothing to do with this thread (or with the photo ID voter suppression laws that would have done nothing to prevent this woman's voting fraud).

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

1. Sharpton is an idiot and a self-promoting tool

2. Deflect much? That has nothing to do with this thread (or with the photo ID voter suppression laws that would have done nothing to prevent this woman's voting fraud).

My comment was related to voter fraud (which is what voter ID is intended to prevent) and I thought it was interesting how some Democrats reacted to her release from prison. I feel it's tangentially relevant to the topic as appears that some Democrats are much more tolerant of voter fraud than Republicans in general.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

My comment was related to voter fraud (which is what voter ID is intended to prevent) and I thought it was interesting how some Democrats reacted to her release from prison. I feel it's tangentially relevant to the topic as appears that some Democrats are much more tolerant of voter fraud than Republicans in general.

So you cite something that voter ID won't prevent? Something that no one who whines about voter fraud seems willing to address?

 

[Bowfinger]

My comment was related to voter fraud (which is what voter ID is intended to prevent) and I thought it was interesting how some Democrats reacted to her release from prison. I feel it's tangentially relevant to the topic as appears that some Democrats are much more tolerant of voter fraud than Republicans in general.

Meh. I think one can point to numerous counter-examples of Republicans who are perfectly fine with election fraud when it's to their advantage. Regardless, both camps are wrong. Democrats who applaud this woman are just as repugnant as Republicans who cheer for voter suppression. The foundation of democracy is fair and accurate elections. Cheating on either side subverts democracy and should be abhorrent to all.

IMO

 

[Texashiker]

The ruling does not say what he/his OP claims it says. This has been explained again and again. What part of this is too hard for you?

Thread should be about judges ruling and not booms opinion.

I hope the justice department gets bitch slapped by the supreme court. States should have the right to make the rules for their elections.

If the federal government can tell the states how to hold elections, why do we even have states.

 

[fskimospy]

Thread should be about judges ruling and not booms opinion.

I hope the justice department gets bitch slapped by the supreme court. States should have the right to make the rules for their elections.

If the federal government can tell the states how to hold elections, why do we even have states.

Yeah, bring back literacy tests and the poll tax!

 

[Texashiker]

Yeah, bring back literacy tests and the poll tax!

I expect better from you.

But then again, maybe not.

 

[fskimospy]

I expect better from you.

But then again, maybe not.

So can the feds tell states how to hold elections or not?

 

[Texashiker]

So can the feds tell states how to hold elections or not?

I think the courts ruling addressed your question.

The constitution details exactly how the states are supposed to hold their elections.

I figure your next question will be about voting rights, and how various states have a history of voter suppression. If the fed can not tell the states how to vote then how can we make sure states are holding fair elections.

As with anything else the federal government can enforce guidelines. Whether it is freedom of speech, freedom of religion, right to own a firearm, the federal government can place restrictions and limitations on rights.

Holding elections is a state right granted by the constitution. As such the state as the right to place guidelines on the elections as long as those guidelines do place an undue burden on the people.

Requiring a government ID is not an undue burden.

 

[Fayd]

Can you provide the exact quotes that say that illegal people voted and in large enough numbers to sway elections? I see mentions of registration, but that isn't voting.

Additionally, can you provide any information about what percentage of these votes would have been prevented by the measures sought, in person voter id in particular?

So what would it take to convince you?

because registration signifies intent to vote.

 

[First]

Those articles say nothing close to that. Perhaps you should be reading them slower, or have someone read them to you, before you take such a superior attitude towards others.

lulz, exactly what I was thinking.

It's funny when boomer froth gets all foamy over supposed reading comprehension slights, when the old fogy can't be bothered to read himself.

 

[fskimospy]

So what would it take to convince you?

because registration signifies intent to vote.

Uhmm, voting. You know that a good bit of research has been done into this and has found that this happens incredibly rarely, right? Even when it does happen, it is almost always done with absentee ballots for obvious reasons (you won't be there to be arrested if caught). Voter ID laws of course only apply to in-person voting.

Guess why.

There are lots of cases where people check the wrong box/fill out the wrong part at the DMV and inadvertently are registered to vote, btw.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I think we should conspicuously post the various penalties for voter fraud at the polls and be done with it. It's not rampant as some want to believe...but people do need to be aware that the penalties are quite severe and that engaging in voter fraud is not to be taken lightly.

 

[Texashiker]

Uhmm, voting. You know that a good bit of research has been done into this and has found that this happens incredibly rarely, right? Even when it does happen, it is almost always done with absentee ballots for obvious reasons (you won't be there to be arrested if caught). Voter ID laws of course only apply to in-person voting.

None of that matters.

What matters is the states have the right to regulate their own elections without excessive federal oversight or undue burden.

Rights do not require justification. Nor do they require approval.

 

[HomerJS]

What has a bigger effect on the integrity of the vote?

A. In person voter fraud?

B. Mishandling of ballots in precincts.


I already know the answer its overwhelmingly B.

If Republicans are so concerned about the integrity of the vote how much effort have they expended to fix B??

 

[Fayd]

Uhmm, voting. You know that a good bit of research has been done into this and has found that this happens incredibly rarely, right? Even when it does happen, it is almost always done with absentee ballots for obvious reasons (you won't be there to be arrested if caught). Voter ID laws of course only apply to in-person voting.

Guess why.

There are lots of cases where people check the wrong box/fill out the wrong part at the DMV and inadvertently are registered to vote, btw.

I doubt there has been any studies that actually properly estimate the number of people voting in person illegally. without voter ID, there's no way to know.

I see lack of voter ID as a gaping security hole that needs to be filled. You see it as enabling poor people (who can easily get the voter ID cards..) to vote who otherwise would be disenfranchised from voting. Frankly, I don't see your argument as having merit. Getting an ID is easy.

 

[Bowfinger]

I doubt there has been any studies that actually properly estimate the number of people voting in person illegally. without voter ID, there's no way to know.

Incorrect. One can estimate the incidence of such fraud by counting collisions, i.e., the frequency of two people voting under the same name. Such studies have been done and have confirmed that the rate is negligible.

I see lack of voter ID as a gaping security hole that needs to be filled. You see it as enabling poor people (who can easily get the voter ID cards..) to vote who otherwise would be disenfranchised from voting. Frankly, I don't see your argument as having merit. Getting an ID is easy.

You think it's easy to get the required current, state-issued, photo IDs because you cannot see beyond your own circumstances (presumably relatively young, middle class, healthy, and mobile). Millions of Americans live in different situations, however, raising substantial obstacles to obtaining such IDs and the documentation required, e.g., certified birth certificate. This has been discussed at great length in a dozen previous threads. Perhaps you might want to read some of them before assuming you understand the issue.

 

[Vic]

I repeat: Small government means not having to have a government ID.

 

[Texashiker]

You think it's easy to get the required current, state-issued, photo IDs because you cannot see beyond your own circumstances (presumably relatively young, middle class, healthy, and mobile). Millions of Americans live in different situations, however, raising substantial obstacles to obtaining such IDs and the documentation required, e.g., certified birth certificate.

Part of functioning in society is living within accepted societal norms. Having a government ID is part of that expected norm.

If you have a job, receive a pay check, get a check from the government, apply for a job, use a credit / debt card, go to the doctor, buy a firearm, apply for a loan, take a air plane, enter a public building,,,, to only name a few, you are expected to have a form of government ID.

Requiring someone to have a government issued photo ID is not an excessive burden.

 

[Zaap]

I repeat: Small government means not having to have a government ID.

LOL. No it doesn't. But by all means keep spewing a meaningless braindead slogan if it makes you feel better.