Voter ID

[nehalem256]

I find it interesting that you believe that the elderly without IDs are mentally impaired. What evidence are you basing this on? Please be specific.

I'm also trying to find some legal text that supports the disenfranchisement of those who aren't working and are living with relatives. The best I could find was Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections that explicitly barred property requirements for voting. Strange that you would implicitly endorse such a thing.

Your enduring failure to actually come up with a rationale for these laws outside 'it will make people feel good' is pretty telling as to just how utterly filled with horseshit they really are.

I find it likely that elderly still possessed of their wits will have ID. Because having ID is basically necessary to be a full member of society. If you are really worried about elderly not being able to vote, then add a Medicare card as an acceptable form of ID.

If you are not working and living with relatives AND LACK ID. Then clearly you have no interest in being a member of society and I dont really care if you can vote.

Congratulations on ignoring the people working illegally and under the table and not paying taxes. I guess even you couldnt argue for allowing them to vote.

 

[Bowfinger]

I would say being able to have faith in the Democratic process is pretty important.

And if the demographics who will be disenfranchised are:
-People working under the table (and avoiding taxes)
-People mooching off relatives (because they are too lazy to get ID
-Senile old people
-the deceased.

Yeah, I think the demographics matter a little bit. I have no problem disenfranchising those people, because none of them should be voting.

Rather than continuing to demonstrate complete ignorance of this topic, why don't you take a few minutes to read at least one of the other recent threads about it. There are at least three that I remember, and all of your "questions" have been covered in great detail, often with factual, statistical data objectively demonstrating just how wrong you are. There are many Americans who do not have a current photo ID, yet do not fit into the defamatory buckets you invented. That you cannot imagine how this can be only shows how little diversity there is in your life experiences.

 

[fskimospy]

I find it likely that elderly still possessed of their wits will have ID. Because having ID is basically necessary to be a full member of society. If you are really worried about elderly not being able to vote, then add a Medicare card as an acceptable form of ID.

If you are not working and living with relatives AND LACK ID. Then clearly you have no interest in being a member of society and I dont really care if you can vote.

Congratulations on ignoring the people working illegally and under the table and not paying taxes. I guess even you couldnt argue for allowing them to vote.

Of course I can argue for people working under the table as having a right to vote. You must be convicted of a felony in order to lose your right to vote, and simply engaging in some of that behavior often does not reach the level of a felony, and presumably your fictitious people have not been convicted.

You are continuing just to pull random shit out of thin air and assert it as valid evidence in support of voter suppression. That's not how the real world works. You are also saying that somehow the right to vote is dependent on 'interest in being a member of society', which is preposterous.

 

[thraashman]

One problem at a time. Only libtards think that if you cannot fix EVERY problem at once, you should not fix any of them at all.

And only conservatives think it's ok to fix a small problem while creating a much bigger and more dangerous problem. This is like killing 100 people because you know one of those 100 is a murderer, but the other 99 are just bystanders and you're claiming "it's their own fault if they got killed too".

 

[kage69]

Hard to see how a citizen would not have valid identification.

Especially since ID is required for say, having a job. So if they dont ID are they working illegally (and robbing the govt of tax revenue), or are they engaging in theft/drug trade, or are they dead (which is a common problem for voters in Illinois).

Why did you quote my post if you weren't responding to it?

The desire for this additional security would be just a lil more credible if you guys gave even the tiniest of shits about the far more damaging abuses that occur from within the machine. It's hard to see why repubs want to fix a problem that doesn't exist while they refuse to acknowledge a real one that does. Oh wait...

And as was mentioned in the other thread, the people that are trying to convince everyone the end is neigh over the need for voter IDs would be more believable if the politicians they support weren't closing DMVs and lowering the staffing of the ones that are kept open.

 

[nehalem256]

Of course I can argue for people working under the table as having a right to vote. You must be convicted of a felony in order to lose your right to vote, and simply engaging in some of that behavior often does not reach the level of a felony, and presumably your fictitious people have not been convicted.

You are continuing just to pull random shit out of thin air and assert it as valid evidence in support of voter suppression. That's not how the real world works. You are also saying that somehow the right to vote is dependent on 'interest in being a member of society', which is preposterous.

No I am saying there is no part of the constitution that say "the right to vote, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED". Like it does for the right to bear arms. The right to vote CAN be infringed. And requiring ID is an incredibly minor infringement.

And yet you are required to show ID to purchased a firearm. And so I see no reason it is unreasonable to require ID to vote.

And there you have it. Liberals have no problem with people who are avoiding their legal obligations to pay taxes to be able to vote. It is basically the opposite of the "No taxation, without representation", "No representation, without taxation".

 

[HomerJS]

One problem at a time. Only libtards think that if you cannot fix EVERY problem at once, you should not fix any of them at all.

Like ending oil subsidies, right??

 

[cybrsage]

So what's the bigger problem, dead people voting or how ballots are handled/counted?

Fix the easily fixed problems first, then the hard ones. That way the easily fixed items do not languish behind the harder ones.

Much in the same way that you should pay off your lower amount credit cards prior to paying off the higher ones. Fix the easily fixed problems, then tackle the harder ones.

 

[Bowfinger]

One problem at a time. Only libtards think that if you cannot fix EVERY problem at once, you should not fix any of them at all.

You are also exceptionally good at arguing straw men. The issue is not and has never been, "it doesn't solve all voter fraud, so don't do it." The issue is a simple cost/benefit analysis. The benefit of photo voter ID is virtually nonexistent; there is an immaterial level of in-person voter fraud today, and what in-person fraud exists will simply move to absentee ballots when such laws are enacted.

On the other hand, the cost is quite significant. Not only are there the monetary costs, but photo voter ID laws disenfranchise a significant number of eligible American voters, voters who disproportionately lean Democratic -- the elderly, minorities, and students. (This is, of course, the real reason Republicans have suddenly become so obsessed with voter IDs.)

To offer an analogy, very few Americans have anti-meteorite shields over their houses. Using the Republican "logic" they should, even though there are virtually no occurrences of meteorites hitting houses. "Pffft! Who cares about cost? We must do everything possible to guard against the extremely improbable." In contrast, rational people with even a minimal understanding of risk vs. cost, would decline to add such anti-meteorite shields. Indeed, they would view those demanding such shields as either idiots or as liars with ulterior motives.

 

[nehalem256]

Fix the easily fixed problems first, then the hard ones. That way the easily fixed items do not languish behind the harder ones.

Much in the same way that you should pay off your lower amount credit cards prior to paying off the higher ones. Fix the easily fixed problems, then tackle the harder ones.

I think that if Democrats were proposing improved methods of handling/counting ballots that mos reasonable (reasonable would likely exclude elected Republcians) people would be behind it.

 

[nehalem256]

On the other hand, the cost is quite significant. Not only are there the monetary costs, but photo voter ID laws disenfranchise a significant number of eligible American voters, voters who disproportionately lean Democratic -- the elderly, minorities, and students. (This is, of course, the real reason Republicans have suddenly become so obsessed with voter IDs.)

And why dont minorities have ID? Dont they need jobs like us white folks?

 

[corwin]

On the other hand, the cost is quite significant. Not only are there the monetary costs, but photo voter ID laws disenfranchise a significant number of eligible American voters, voters who disproportionately lean Democratic -- the elderly, minorities, and students. (This is, of course, the real reason Republicans have suddenly become so obsessed with voter IDs.)

Think that should really read dementia patients, illegal aliens, and the young and dumb😛

 

[nehalem256]

Think that should really read dementia patients, illegal aliens, and the young and dumb😛

And criminals. You dont need ID to be a drug dealer.

 

[Bowfinger]

And why dont minorities have ID? Dont they need jobs like us white folks?

Have you read one of the other threads yet? If not, you're wasting electrons. You need to recognize that your insular, white bread existence does not represent -- AT ALL -- the broad cross section of Americans. In short, get over yourself. You are not the center of the universe. You are not even the center of America.

 

[thraashman]

And why dont minorities have ID? Dont they need jobs like us white folks?

Come on now, you already have over 60 very competetive entries into the "stupidest post of the year" contest. You can stop entering now.

 

[nehalem256]

Come on now, you already have over 60 very competetive entries into the "stupidest post of the year" contest. You can stop entering now.

So basically you have to resort to personal attacks because you cant explain why either:

1.) Minorities dont need jobs

2.) Minorities can get jobs without ID.

 

[cybrsage]

You are also exceptionally good at arguing straw men. The issue is not and has never been, "it doesn't solve all voter fraud, so don't do it." The issue is a simple cost/benefit analysis. The benefit of photo voter ID is virtually nonexistent; there is an immaterial level of in-person voter fraud today, and what in-person fraud exists will simply move to absentee ballots when such laws are enacted.

The benefit is the integrity of the voting system. How much is that worth to you?

Since we have to show photo ID to buy liquor, we know the exact cost of such a system of verification. It is small.

So, back to you saying we should not do it because it is less important to verify the indentity of those who vote than it is to verify the age of those who buy liquor.

 

[corwin]

So, back to you saying we should not do it because it is less important to verify the indentity of those who vote than it is to verify the age of those who buy liquor.

I would say that liquor is more important than voting...unless it's voting for more liquor😎

 

[lotus503]

I am much more concerned about lobby money than voter fraud.

No one wants to do anything about that though. as long as they feel their side is the one getting the big bucks.

our election cycle is funded by %.05 of our population.

 

[fskimospy]

No I am saying there is no part of the constitution that say "the right to vote, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED". Like it does for the right to bear arms. The right to vote CAN be infringed. And requiring ID is an incredibly minor infringement.

And yet you are required to show ID to purchased a firearm. And so I see no reason it is unreasonable to require ID to vote.

And there you have it. Liberals have no problem with people who are avoiding their legal obligations to pay taxes to be able to vote. It is basically the opposite of the "No taxation, without representation", "No representation, without taxation".

You realize that the right to bear arms can also be infringed, right? I am also unaware that certain enumerated rights in the constitution gained extra constitutional protection by saying 'shall not be infringed' or the like. Can you show me the court cases you are basing this on?

I can't believe I need to explain why standards for firearms and voting could be different. It's because ballots aren't guns. The means by which the government may restrict every Constitutional right is different, because every right is different. Why would you try to apply the same ID standards? Should you need an ID to exercise the 4th amendment? Should you need to fill out permits to plead the 5th? It's an absurdity, because the rights encompass different activities.

Finally, taxation and voting have nothing to do with one another as explicitly mandated by the Constitution. Why are you trying to violate the Constitution?

 

[corwin]

It's because ballots aren't guns.

I would hazard to say ballots are more powerful than guns...

 

[nehalem256]

You realize that the right to bear arms can also be infringed, right? I am also unaware that certain enumerated rights in the constitution gained extra constitutional protection by saying 'shall not be infringed' or the like. Can you show me the court cases you are basing this on?

I can't believe I need to explain why standards for firearms and voting could be different. It's because ballots aren't guns. The means by which the government may restrict every Constitutional right is different, because every right is different. Why would you try to apply the same ID standards? Should you need an ID to exercise the 4th amendment? Should you need to fill out permits to plead the 5th? It's an absurdity, because the rights encompass different activities.

Finally, taxation and voting have nothing to do with one another as explicitly mandated by the Constitution. Why are you trying to violate the Constitution?

So infringing on a right, by requiring photo ID, of a right that specifically says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is not a violation of the constitution?

And the Constitution no where explicitly say that people have the right to vote. It merely outlines cases where you cannot infringe on it (Age, Sex, Race). No where does it mention anything about ID.

And your 5th Amendment thing kinda falls apart, because it applies when testifying in court about a crime the commited. I kinda hope we verify people's identity before we charge them with a crime.

 

[cybrsage]

Like ending oil subsidies, right??

Voting man, the topic is voting. Please at least try to follow along.

 

[cybrsage]

So infringing on a right, by requiring photo ID, of a right that specifically says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is not a violation of the constitution?

No right infringement found. The courts, whose job it is to look for such things, says you are wrong.

 

[corwin]

So infringing on a right, by requiring photo ID, of a right that specifically says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is not a violation of the constitution?

It's a requirement to be a citizen to have the second amendment apply to you, therefore you show ID to purchase a gun, it's a requirement to be a citizen to vote...