Jump to content
lawnchairboy

Voter registration

Recommended Posts

lawnchairboy

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-finds-millions-of-extra-registrants-on-voting-rolls-warns-california-pennsylvania-north-carolina-colorado-virginia-to-clean-up-voting-rolls-or-face-a-fed/

 

 

3-2-1 til' someone tells me "there is no significant voter fraud in the united states".

 

I think there probably is, but there seems to be indications that there is, at the least, widespread inaccuracy in voter registration roles here and there.  (I will put on my shocked face about Fairfax county, VA and just about ALL of SoCal.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

and happy new year...

Share this post


Link to post
poodad
1 hour ago, lawnchairboy said:

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-finds-millions-of-extra-registrants-on-voting-rolls-warns-california-pennsylvania-north-carolina-colorado-virginia-to-clean-up-voting-rolls-or-face-a-fed/

 

 

3-2-1 til' someone tells me "there is no significant voter fraud in the united states".

 

I think there probably is, but there seems to be indications that there is, at the least, widespread inaccuracy in voter registration roles here and there.  (I will put on my shocked face about Fairfax county, VA and just about ALL of SoCal.)

 

 

judicialwatch.org is an extreme right wing propaganda group, and that article is a disingenuous attempt to somehow "prove" voter fraud. My friend Mike recently passed away. His facebook page, linkedin page and who knows what else is still out there. It doesn't mean anyone is using them. That article presents a fact, and allows the non-critical thinking reader to draw an unwarranted conclusion. There's no indication that even a single one of those names have ever attempted to vote.

 

Even Trump's own hand-picked voter fraud commission came up empty-handed.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby

Voter Fraud? I thought this thread was about voter fraud? To commit voter fraud a ballot must be filled out and counted. 

 

This is a perfect example of far right propaganda that is dividing this country. 

 

From the Judicial Watch website homepage:  Judicial Watch   Because no one is above the law!  

Does anyone besides me find that header to be two faced?

 

From the Wikipedia site:

"Judicial Watch (JW) is an American conservative activist group[1] that files Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits to investigate claimed misconduct by government officials.

Founded in 1994, JW has primarily targeted Democrats, in particular the Presidency of Bill Clinton, the Presidency of Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton. The organization has described climate science as "fraud science" and has filed lawsuits against government climate scientists. JW has made numerous false and unsubstantiated claims that have been picked up by right-wing news outlets. Courts have dismissed the vast majority of its lawsuits."

 

Again, a radical right propaganda machine. Maybe they could revisit Benghazi again to get some more stories. Or prove once and for all that O'Bama had a fake birth certificate. I say again because they seem to regurgitate the voter fraud every so often. Talk about Fake News....

 

Voter fraud is a lot less of a problem than Gerrymandering.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Paul De

Lawnchairboy,  You are like a bulldog with a pork chop, you can't get him to let it go.  I'll give you props for persistence though.  Essentially, the same type post from a while back and the results will be the same. Conspiracy theories, "alternate facts" and cherry picked real facts won't make it the truth.  We could go through the all those stubborn real verifiable facts that will again show massive voter fraud does not exist, but I would say just reread that old chain. Wash, rinse, repeat.

 

Besides this article is about registrations that are dormant for several election cycles and by that fact none of the dormant registrations have voted.  There is a big lawsuit in Wisconsin over this because the gerrymandered Assembly and Senate still in control by the Republicans want to rush the purge ahead of this election instead of a validation of obsolescence before removal process favored by the Democratic Governor, Lt Governor, AG and our US re-elected (D)Senator here.  Why the rush? Because Republicans are still in shock that in 2018 they got crushed and swept aside in statewide elections for seats where gerrymandering has no effect and want to do everything to disenfranchise the vote for likely left leaning voters.  The dead registrations in Wisconsin are heavenly populated by the part of the electorate that are low income, young voters, and minorities. These demographic groups tends to move more often, or do not regularly vote, and thus end up on these dormant lists.  They are legitimate voters however because Wisconsin has had voter ID laws in place for the last several election cycles so these registrations have been vetted   The real issue for Republicans  is they know these voters tend to show up in Presidential election years and the Republicans are rightly worried that the 2020 vote here will look like 2018 where the voters were fed up with the Republican issue positions, showed up in larger than average numbers, and decided they had to go.  And go they did! 

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

there have been multiple documented instances which benefit both of our bonehead parties in the country where fradulent voting / shenanigans have taken place.  

 

I guess where the rubber meets the road is what you personally decide is "significant".  Citizens and non-citizens have been documented to have run afoul of election laws in multiple places.   

 

A 2014 electoral studies journal article entitled "Do non-citizens vote in US elections?" concluded "We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections.  Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress."  Richman, Chattha & Earnest 2014

 

State laws vary on non-citizens voting, it is my understanding that running afoul of this in Va is a felony, if instances are prosecuted and my understanding is that they rarely are.  Our current AG won his election by around 1000 votes if I am not mistaken.  

 

I will hang onto my bone thanks. 

 

but yeah, no meaningful voter shenanigans.  

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby

Before you bank on Richman, Chattha & Ernest, take a look at this article: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-noncitizen-voters/

 


And this article where Richman states a question about the validity of the report and its interpretation:  https://fs.wp.odu.edu/jrichman/2016/10/19/some-thoughts-on-non-citizen-voting/

 

This would be an opposing view to those convinced voter fraud sways every election:  https://cces.gov.harvard.edu/news/perils-cherry-picking-low-frequency-events-large-sample-surveys

 

I have NO doubt some local elections have been swayed by voter fraud. Winning by a handful of votes leaves that open. I worked in Logan County, WV in the 90's. There WAS voter fraud there as they got caught using dead citizens names..... Bottom line is these are secluded and remote cases. Not a feather in the wind to a national election. Now election fraud could add up. Like Gerrymandering and the "decision" to not count certain votes or hanging chads......

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

Thanks for the link.  As I read his own comments, lots of stuff can influence, non-citizens being one factor, and rarely that makes a critical difference.

Share this post


Link to post
RightSpin

Last month we vacationed a week on the Caribbean island nation of Dominica (not to be confused with the Dominican Republic).  As luck would have it, we happened to be there during their "rescheduled national elections.  It seems there is a perpetual state of political discord on the island which boils over every time an election is called with the party in power exercising "creative" measures to ensure re-election, and the opposition rabble rousing for change to make the elections fairer.

 

In the case of this election, the entrenched leader (now in power 20+ years) used the well worn tactic of flying in thousands of ex pats to support his regime at the polls.  Civil disobedience ensued, things got nasty, roads were blocked, things were set on fire, people got shot, airport was briefly shut down, and then the election happened which resulted in the perpetuation of the current political caste.  A scene which seems to play out time and again in banana republics all over the world.

 

The interesting part we played in all of this is that we got to see this unfold from the perspective of the oppressed.  While staying at a private home in the middle of the island, we were able to spend time with some of the locals.  It was a juxtaposition of our own political climate here in the US.  The irony was that the party out of power wanted only two things to change:  First, they wanted a national Voter ID requirement to help combat rampant election fraud.  And, second, they wanted existing voter registration lists to be reviewed and updated to accurately reflect the current population (something which evidently hasn't happened there for decades).  It was an interesting thing to watch.

 

Fortunately, in spite of the violence on the island, we were never in danger.  Our local friends helped us avoid the hot spots and we were able to enjoy a truly beautiful island.  Flying out from their tiny airport was a bit of a challenge since we had to navigate through the throngs of imported voters who were leaving at the same time.  I couldn't help but reflect on our own election challenges here in the US.  Anyone who doesn't think voter fraud happens should spend some time in Dominica when they have their next national election.

Share this post


Link to post
Rinkydink

For the life of me I don’t understand why requiring a picture ID to vote is thought to repress votes or to be racist. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
szurszewski
47 minutes ago, Rinkydink said:

For the life of me I don’t understand why requiring a picture ID to vote is thought to repress votes or to be racist. 

I’m not disagreeing with you, but you might be surprised to find how many adults in the USA do not have picture ID.

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy
7 minutes ago, szurszewski said:

I’m not disagreeing with you, but you might be surprised to find how many adults in the USA do not have picture ID.

I am surprised that any person who is functioning in the economy and interacting with government in any legitimate legal fashion can accomplish anything without picture ID.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

Someone calls me a racist in 3...2...1

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Warren Dean
1 hour ago, lawnchairboy said:

Someone calls me a racist in 3...2...1

 

RACIST!!!!  There you go.  :4322:

Share this post


Link to post
Warren Dean
1 hour ago, lawnchairboy said:

I am surprised that any person who is functioning in the economy and interacting with government in any legitimate legal fashion can accomplish anything without picture ID.

 

I would be interested to know how anyone can function in today's world without a picture ID. Hard to believe.  :5146:

Share this post


Link to post
szurszewski
1 hour ago, lawnchairboy said:

I am surprised that any person who is functioning in the economy and interacting with government in any legitimate legal fashion can accomplish anything without picture ID.

 

20 minutes ago, Warren Dean said:

 

I would be interested to know how anyone can function in today's world without a picture ID. Hard to believe.  :5146:

 

One of the things that I learned when I moved to rural Alaska is that there is more than one "today's world" - and it's not just up there. Rural communities all over the US and very urban but often very poor communities as well operate in a lot of different ways that what "we"* think of as typical. I imagine, though I have only my personal experiences and no empirical evidence to back this up, that your likelihood to have photo ID is correlated to your family net-worth/income pretty directly. 

 

 

*"we" being the type of folks who can and choose to spend money on motorcycles and time on the internet talking about them

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
1 hour ago, lawnchairboy said:

I am surprised that any person who is functioning in the economy and interacting with government in any legitimate legal fashion can accomplish anything without picture ID.

 

In my wallet, I have retired military ID, current contractor CAC, VA ID, driver's license and TWIC.  I also have my passport.  Along with that, I have my work issued picture ID badge. 

 

If'n I wanted to, I can go up to NCDMV and just get a picture ID for a whole $13 (oh wait, many will say some can't afford $13, and if you can't afford $13, you better not have anything beyond food, clothing (non brand name) and shelter, otherwise, you can afford $13)

 

Also, there's stipulations for a no-fee ID, one being "homeless",.....you get the ID at no cost to you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

*"we" being the type of folks who can and choose to spend money on motorcycles and time on the internet talking about them

 

 

making no apologies.  And you are correct. I don't think IDs are unobtanium for most.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
szurszewski

I don’t think it’s the dollar cost usually - there are ways around that as suggested - but more that it’s not something that was obtained for other reasons. Maybe your parents are a bit paranoid about the government, maybe they (or you) lost your birth certificate or other necessary paperwork. 
 

I’m not trying to argue the issue either way, just sharing my experience in learning about the issue. I also used to own a driving school and was amazed by the percentage of folks out there driving without a valid - or any - license, but that’s another topic. I guess I add that as evidence that there are just a lot of things I - and I assume others - don’t realize are “normal” to others in our world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou

NC, birth certificate replacement is $24, bringing the total to $37 and again, anything above food, clothing and shelter means that you can afford $37.   I think a micro-mini set of America's population will not be able to afford/obtain a picture ID, and likely, I'd venture to SWAG that an even smaller amount of those folks would actually vote.  I've got no evidence of this, just a guess simply because if you don't care enough to identify yourself, why would you care who your elected officials are,.....again, no evidence of no proof, just a guess.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby

I really don't care if they want a photo ID of me when I vote. But I understand why there is debate about it. The Right Wing looks at demographics and has proof that there is a large number of qualified voters that do NOT have a photo ID card. These happen to be in a group of society that typically isn't likely to vote Republican. 

 

So efforts to force photo ID are NOT about preventing fraud, there just isn't enough fraud to make a difference in national elections. It is ALL about voter suppression. The Right Wing cannot stand thinking about all those voters that helped but Barack O'Bama in office and what they may do in the next election. These people should not be allowed to vote in .....their world. 

 

The article below has a lot to say about the Right Wing position on this:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/us/Voting-republicans-trump.html

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Joe Frickin' Friday
2 hours ago, szurszewski said:

*"we" being the type of folks who can and choose to spend money on motorcycles and time on the internet talking about them

 

Generally speaking, we here on BMWST are white, middle/upper-middle class, able-bodied, physically/mentally healthy middle-aged males with better-than-average smarts and enough disposable income to buy (and farkle) some very expensive motorcycles.  It's sometimes helpful to think about how narrow the life experience of this group is as a whole, and remember that people outside of this group can and do lead very different lives. Few are more privileged than we, and a great many are far less privileged.  Our privilege isn't any thing to be ashamed of or apologize for (unless you've achieved it through deceit and chicanery), but any time someone in this group says "I don't understand how X can be true," I hope they actually mean "I don't understand but I want to" and not "I don't understand and therefore it can't be true."

 

5 hours ago, Rinkydink said:

For the life of me I don’t understand why requiring a picture ID to vote is thought to repress votes or to be racist. 

 

The legal principle is "disparate impact".  This is the term that is used when a law/regulation tends to result in a disadvantage toward a protected class.  Obtaining an ID can be considerably more challenging for poor folks, who may have a harder time getting transportation to city hall, affording the various fees required, or taking time off from an hourly-wage job (with no paid leave) when they're already struggling to make ends meet.  Poor folks aren't a protected class - but certain minorities, most notably African-Americans, are overrepresented in the poor demographic, and so voter ID laws do have a disparate impact on them.  

 

So what to do?  If voter fraud really is a legit concern, then a sensible approach is to implement changes that fight it while also implementing measures that mitigate disparate impact on minorities.  There's this piece published by Jimmy Carter and James Baker, worth reading:

 

Quote

In 2005, we led a bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform and concluded that both parties' concerns were legitimate — a free and fair election requires both ballot security and full access to voting. We offered a proposal to bridge the partisan divide by suggesting a uniform voter photo ID, based on the federal Real ID Act of 2005, to be phased in over five years. To help with the transition, states would provide free voter photo ID cards for eligible citizens; mobile units would be sent out to provide the IDs and register voters. (Of the 21 members of the commission, only three dissented on the requirement for an ID.)

 

No state has yet accepted our proposal. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Rougarou said:

...if you don't care enough to identify yourself, why would you care who your elected officials are,..

 

If you're a homeless opioid addict trying to find your way back to a normal life, you don't need to know the names of your elected officials; you just need to know that one party generally favors public policies that might help you on your journey, and the other party generally doesn't.  Also, in addition to candidates, ballots often include referendums on how public funds get allocated, e.g. whether the city should provide more/less funding for local homeless shelters.   Everyone's got their own reasons for wanting to vote.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
taylor1

I think few can argue that the N.Y. Times is a very liberal biased  paper.

That aside ,  I really don't know why anyone that wanted to get out and vote , no matter WHO they cast their ballet for , would have a problem with getting a photo I.D.

Seems like a small thing to have your voice heard.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby

Republican "principles" used to tend toward LESS rules, regulations, interference from government. 

 

Voter ID is exactly what they should be against. 

 

Yes, the N.Y. Times is considered a Liberal news source. Yet this article seems to have a lot of verifiable facts. One must remember that ANY news source might just be reporting the truth. Not everything that you don't want to believe is Fake News. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
chrisolson
52 minutes ago, taylor1 said:

I really don't know why anyone that wanted to get out and vote , no matter WHO they cast their ballet for , would have a problem with getting a photo I.D.

 

If you don't have a drivers license, its not as simple as it may sound. 

 

Please note: I'm not presenting an argument that we should not have ID ... just the reverse .... Arizona requires ID to vote and I'm good with that.

 

All I'm saying is the reality is .... for some ...  coming up with the required other id can be tough.... not impossible, but requires research and time and money.

 

The following is what is needed for an Arizona ID card/ with photo (which is ultimately and ironically processed  through the DMV).  Note that if the "primary" id  doesn't have a pic, you also need two "secondary" forms. 

 

1872847564_ScreenShot2020-05-19at1_04_40PM.thumb.png.b010395b541b49fec8a8c9ef28b2698e.png

 

A lot of the primary documents are not something that most people have (unless you've been in the military) .  And you need 2 of the secondary as well ... SS card, actual card, maybe...bank accounts or credit cards....again maybe 

 

 Example: birth certificate ... may seem simple to acquire but  not if your parents didn't get one for you ...For Arizona the following is required.  Just getting the application could be a problem without transportation, then you need to have it notarized which in itself is a problem because how do you do provide ID for the notary ( ? )  and after all that pay a fee.

 

1298750861_ScreenShot2020-05-19at1_11_13PM.thumb.png.e59ab63329cef05775e1c598b3824240.png

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

Mitch:

 

If it is challenging for some folks to get ID,  how then would the Baker-Carter proposal ever be able to establish "eligibility".  That is the rub I think, at least for me.  If persons do not have basic documents or lack the means to obtain them, the op-ed you linked didn't have anything in the way of specifics, unless I missed them.   

 

Real ID requirements are just another monkey wrench in the whole system.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
taylor1

Being biased does not mean that it is fake news representing false statements. 
True journalism should represent both sides, without dissuading from one side or the other.

Unfortunately ,  I think the powers that own the media outlets have forgotten that ,  and believe their point of view is the only right one.

I also understand that it could be a bit of a hardship for some folks to get their I.D , but at the risk of being sarcastic , I wonder how hard it would be if they just won a new car in a contest and had to have it in order to pick up their prize.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
szurszewski

Motivation is definitely a factor, and I think that’s one reason some argue against requiring ID to vote. It seems those arguing against requiring ID are also advocating for increased voter turnout, and they realize many non voters are non voters largely because they aren’t that motivated to vote...so unlikely to put in effort and money to get an ID just for that purpose. 
 

Again, I’m not advocating for either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
1 hour ago, Joe Frickin' Friday said:

 

If you're a homeless opioid addict trying to find your way back to a normal life, you don't need to know the names of your elected officials; you just need to know that one party generally favors public policies that might help you on your journey, and the other party generally doesn't.  Also, in addition to candidates, ballots often include referendums on how public funds get allocated, e.g. whether the city should provide more/less funding for local homeless shelters.   Everyone's got their own reasons for wanting to vote.

 

 

In NC, and I'd bet other states, homelessness is not an excuse not to be able to get a no-cost ID.   If you're a "homeless opioid addict", you may just want to have ID anyway so when you OD, the coroner knows which next of kin to notify (if they have one).

 

Freedom ain't free, if I have to show an ID to purchase a weapon, which is a Constitutional right, I see no reason, absolutely none that a person(which should be a citizen that has not lost the right to vote for various reasons) should not show ID to elect the people that are "in charge".

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Warren Dean
11 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

 

In NC, and I'd bet other states, homelessness is not an excuse not to be able to get a no-cost ID.   If you're a "homeless opioid addict", you may just want to have ID anyway so when you OD, the coroner knows which next of kin to notify (if they have one).

 

Freedom ain't free, if I have to show an ID to purchase a weapon, which is a Constitutional right, I see no reason, absolutely none that a person(which should be a citizen that has not lost the right to vote for various reasons) should not show ID to elect the people that are "in charge".

 

 

That's right.

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby
15 hours ago, Rougarou said:

 

Freedom ain't free, if I have to show an ID to purchase a weapon, which is a Constitutional right, I see no reason, absolutely none that a person(which should be a citizen that has not lost the right to vote for various reasons) should not show ID to elect the people that are "in charge".

 

 I really do NOT have a problem with having an ID card presented when I vote. But I do have a problem with the ideologue being used to make that a law. Again, I see it as pure voter suppression. So we sort of agree, but not for the same reason. 

 

So, let's take this to the next logical step. If you require citizens to have photo ID to vote let us just go right to the to Federal requirement to vote. And I mean get your ass to the Polls or send in your vote by mail where allowed/appropriate. Otherwise there is a fine and possible jail time. I am all for this. Don't think it fair? What about requirements to register for the Draft, fill out and send your Census, do a tax return? I think voting is as important as any of these. 

 

So, since we think voter ID will change the world and keep those pesky minorities ( race, income, locations like US territories...) from voting, lets just force them to vote and see how that works out. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
1 hour ago, realshelby said:

 I really do NOT have a problem with having an ID card presented when I vote. But I do have a problem with the ideologue being used to make that a law. Again, I see it as pure voter suppression. So we sort of agree, but not for the same reason. 

 

So, let's take this to the next logical step. If you require citizens to have photo ID to vote let us just go right to the to Federal requirement to vote. And I mean get your ass to the Polls or send in your vote by mail where allowed/appropriate. Otherwise there is a fine and possible jail time. I am all for this. Don't think it fair? What about requirements to register for the Draft, fill out and send your Census, do a tax return? I think voting is as important as any of these. 

 

So, since we think voter ID will change the world and keep those pesky minorities ( race, income, locations like US territories...) from voting, lets just force them to vote and see how that works out. 

 

 

Nope, no one forces me to own a weapon, it's a choice, no one should force you to vote, it's a choice.  Currently, selective service is law and is a "force" for males, and I believe legislation is being brought forth to add females (about time), census is not a requirement, it's a government want.  Don't do a tax return that's between you and the IRS but the government has the right to levy taxes, hence law.

 

Voting is important, but not a requirement, but if you're gonna participate in government activities, you should at least be a verified citizen, no matter what background you come from.

 

 O'Brother, Where Art Thou? - Let's Get Critical,you shouldn't get to play in our reindeer games.

Share this post


Link to post
chrisolson

I wonder how  our President's push to  discredit  or even financially punish states who vote by mail will affect Arizona?  In 2016 its been reported that 75% of Arizona votes were cast by mail.  The latest figures I've seen indicate that up to 80% of Arizona voters have signed up for mail in ballots for 2020.

 

So, will the President's demand invalidate Arizona's  vote and consequently the participation in the Electoral College?  Rhetorical question, don't think that would be possible but its a logical conclusion to his argument.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
szurszewski

I haven’t voted in person since we lived in Alaska - if it’s even an option anymore in WA or OR, that’s news to me! 

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby
40 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

 

Nope, no one forces me to own a weapon, it's a choice, no one should force you to vote, it's a choice.  Currently, selective service is law and is a "force" for males, and I believe legislation is being brought forth to add females (about time), census is not a requirement, it's a government want.  Don't do a tax return that's between you and the IRS but the government has the right to levy taxes, hence law.

 

Voting is important, but not a requirement, but if you're gonna participate in government activities, you should at least be a verified citizen, no matter what background you come from.

 

Actually it is against the law not to reply to the Census:   https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/07/a-boycott-of-the-2020-census/

 

But the real point is that the Census, filing tax returns, registering for the draft do NOT require a photo ID. So why do we all of a sudden need voters to have photo ID? 

 

Voter suppression. 

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
1 hour ago, realshelby said:

Actually it is against the law not to reply to the Census:   https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/07/a-boycott-of-the-2020-census/

 

But the real point is that the Census, filing tax returns, registering for the draft do NOT require a photo ID. So why do we all of a sudden need voters to have photo ID? 

 

Voter suppression. 

 

OK, I was wrong on the census (I've never completed one).

 

Anyway, this voter ID is not "all of a sudden", I remember hearing concerns of this back when I was in hi skool in the early 80's.

 

The question remains, do you want "ineligible" people voting for who is in charge?  You can say voter suppression all you'd like, but as a person that came from a very poor background, my mom had her ID.  My mom also maintained all (four brothers) of our birth certificates and social security cards.  Being poor is not an excuse.  If that opioid addict can find money to get the meth, that opioid addict can find money to get a replacement birth certificate and ID.

 

If those that say that they are too poor to fund a birth certificate, ID, "primary documents" but have internet, cell phone, car, motorcycle, horse, cat, dog, hamster or anything above the basic requirements of food, shelter and clothing, than I say they are not too poor to fund the requirements. 

 

I grew up poor and certainly don't want to go back there, but it isn't an excuse not being able to do this small thing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
lawnchairboy

^^^^^^^^^^That^^^^^^^^^^

 

Voter suppression for the ineligible, YEP!

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Warren Dean
50 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

 

OK, I was wrong on the census (I've never completed one).

 

Anyway, this voter ID is not "all of a sudden", I remember hearing concerns of this back when I was in hi skool in the early 80's.

 

The question remains, do you want "ineligible" people voting for who is in charge?  You can say voter suppression all you'd like, but as a person that came from a very poor background, my mom had her ID.  My mom also maintained all (four brothers) of our birth certificates and social security cards.  Being poor is not an excuse.  If that opioid addict can find money to get the meth, that opioid addict can find money to get a replacement birth certificate and ID.

 

If those that say that they are too poor to fund a birth certificate, ID, "primary documents" but have internet, cell phone, car, motorcycle, horse, cat, dog, hamster or anything above the basic requirements of food, shelter and clothing, than I say they are not too poor to fund the requirements. 

 

I grew up poor and certainly don't want to go back there, but it isn't an excuse not being able to do this small thing.

 

Better get your flame-proof suit on, Richard. That's gonna draw fire.  :4322:

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby
42 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

The question remains, do you want "ineligible" people voting for who is in charge?  You can say voter suppression all you'd like, but as a person that came from a very poor background, my mom had her ID.  My mom also maintained all (four brothers) of our birth certificates and social security cards.  Being poor is not an excuse.  If that opioid addict can find money to get the meth, that opioid addict can find money to get a replacement birth certificate and ID.

 

I grew up poor and certainly don't want to go back there, but it isn't an excuse not being able to do this small thing.

If you count ineligible as those legally not allowed to vote ( non-citizens that are here on green cards, illegal immigrants, etc. ) then I agree. But if you think those that are eligible today but would not be if a photo ID becomes law then we disagree. 

 

Because this is all about the Right Wing deception that voter fraud is a factor in elections! No facts to support that statement, plenty of facts that disband that claim.

 

To take away someones ability/right to vote SIMPLY because they choose ( for whatever reason ) to not have a photo ID that qualifies is voter suppression. 

 

I am sure we both could talk about what it is like to be poor when young. I can tell you that I would likely not have spent money on getting an ID at a couple points in my life. 

 

Would photo ID lower the chance of improper voting? I am sure there could be found some number of cases that someone would bring forward and say" look at this, we stopped this person from voting!". But you also must realize that if you want a photo ID, and like you said even if poor you CAN find a way, then getting fake photo ID's that would pass the glance the people at the polling stations give mine would be easy. 

 

Laws are passed to fix problems. Voter fraud isn't a problem, and photo ID would do almost nothing to change what little fraud there is. WE do not need more laws. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
1 minute ago, Warren Dean said:

 

Better get your flame-proof suit on, Richard. That's gonna draw fire.  :4322:

 

I've been shot at before, it's ok.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
TEWKS

Not laughing at you, just the casualness of it! ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
realshelby
1 hour ago, Warren Dean said:

 

Better get your flame-proof suit on, Richard. That's gonna draw fire.  :4322:

Why?

Richard gives his point of view. We both likely have made technical errors! But both contribute in a way that makes us think, or should. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
32 minutes ago, TEWKS said:

Not laughing at you, just the casualness of it! ;)

 

I guess it'd be like you saying, "I've been in a house on fire, it's ok"  Good training breeds areas of relaxability, why worry about the rounds that didn't hit ya.

 

One rocket attack was of particular note.  Walking from the chowhall to the HQ, our little group hears the "whoooshhh" of a rocket going overhead,.....fairly close,......and non-nonchalantly, the replies were "damn,.....that was a close one" and continued to walk to the HQ unaffected by the "boom" behind us,.......it kinda felt like the action star walking away from the big boom.  There was another that hit less than ten meters from a building that we were having an operations meeting,.....boom, rumble, continue with the meeting.

 

Prior to any combat experience, the "crack" I'd hear at the ranges, I always thought that it was the sound of the round going through the targets (cheesecloth and paper),.........boy, was I wrong!!!!

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Selden

DJT is attempting to change his legal residence to Mar-a-Lago, despite signing an agreement in 1993 that he will never do so. Guess who is likely to vote by mail on November 3?

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
4 hours ago, realshelby said:

If you count ineligible as those legally not allowed to vote ( non-citizens that are here on green cards, illegal immigrants, etc. ) then I agree. But if you think those that are eligible today but would not be if a photo ID becomes law then we disagree. 

 

As a Constitutional right, those that are eligible to vote should.  As a Constitutional right, certain requirements can be placed to ensure that only eligible voters are the actual ones voting.   I can walk into my voting precinct and say I'm Carroll Shelby, they'd write that name down and let me pick the winners........how in any world is that acceptable?  Whether it happens or not ain't even close to a point, voting is putting people in charge and only eligible voters should be doing that.

 

4 hours ago, realshelby said:

Because this is all about the Right Wing deception that voter fraud is a factor in elections! No facts to support that statement, plenty of facts that disband that claim.

 

The voter fraud may be the call to enact photo ID, but I still believe it should be a requirement to "prove" you are who you say you are

 

4 hours ago, realshelby said:

 

To take away someones ability/right to vote SIMPLY because they choose ( for whatever reason ) to not have a photo ID that qualifies is voter suppression. 

 

 

Take away my ability to purchase a weapon SIMPLY because bad PEOPLE do bad things with them is Constitutional right suppression.

 

4 hours ago, realshelby said:

 

I am sure we both could talk about what it is like to be poor when young. I can tell you that I would likely not have spent money on getting an ID at a couple points in my life. 

 

No disagreement with you, but, if you were concerned about who got elected and it was a requirement to get an ID, I'd venture a SWAG that you'd find a way to fund the ID.

 

4 hours ago, realshelby said:

 

Would photo ID lower the chance of improper voting? I am sure there could be found some number of cases that someone would bring forward and say" look at this, we stopped this person from voting!". But you also must realize that if you want a photo ID, and like you said even if poor you CAN find a way, then getting fake photo ID's that would pass the glance the people at the polling stations give mine would be easy. 

 

Nothing is perfect, no system is perfect but to add an additional layer to vote for those actually concerned about who is in charge seems just a wee bit more reassurance that you are who you say you are.

 

4 hours ago, realshelby said:

 

Laws are passed to fix problems. Voter fraud isn't a problem, and photo ID would do almost nothing to change what little fraud there is. WE do not need more laws. 

 

Me purchasing a weapon is not a problem, but I have to deal with the get a permit, provide proof of who I am and pay various fees on top of the price of the weapon.  None of my weapons have hurt anyone, none will hurt anyone that doesn't deserve it (yes, I'd bet my life/kids life/wifes life on that).   Apples and oranges, yes, but it goes to the point of some Constitutional rights have restrictions.

 

For all my absentee ballots while active duty, I had to have an officer sign to verify I am who I said I am.  This is active duty military that raised their right hands to support, defend and die for the Constitution, if we require active duty personnel to have someone (a trusted officer/notary) verify why, the average citizen, should get a pass.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Rougarou
32 minutes ago, Selden said:

DJT is attempting to change his legal residence to Mar-a-Lago, despite signing an agreement in 1993 that he will never do so. Guess who is likely to vote by mail on November 3?

 

The agreement was not that he would ever change his residence,......look it up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...