Third state knocks down voter ID laws. That's THREE this week!!!

[Cigar]

It’s official: The week of the Republican National Convention has been a terrific week for voting rights in the United States. Not because of the RNC—the GOP platform explicitly endorses voter suppression laws—but because federal courts across the country have struck down state measures designed to make voting harder for minorities. First, a federal judge found that Wisconsin’s stringent voter ID laws placed an undue burden on many citizens’ fundamental right to vote; then an appeals court found that Texas’ even more draconian voter ID law had a discriminatory effect on minority communities in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Now a federal judge in Michigan has invalidated the state’s ban on straight-party voting, finding that the law violates both the Voting Rights Act and the United States Constitution.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/21/michigan_judge_strikes_down_straight_party_voting_ ban.html

[Oboe]

Showing ID is not voter suppression no matter how many liars say that it is.

[hanger4]

It’s official: The week of the Republican National Convention has been a terrific week for voting rights in the United States. Not because of the RNC—the GOP platform explicitly endorses voter suppression laws—but because federal courts across the country have struck down state measures designed to make voting harder for minorities. First, a federal judge found that Wisconsin’s stringent voter ID laws placed an undue burden on many citizens’ fundamental right to vote; then an appeals court found that Texas’ even more draconian voter ID law had a discriminatory effect on minority communities in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Now a federal judge in Michigan has invalidated the state’s ban on straight-party voting, finding that the law violates both the Voting Rights Act and the United States Constitution.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/21/michigan_judge_strikes_down_straight_party_voting_ ban.html

Your OP has nothing to do with voter ID. Did you even read it ??

[Standing Wolf]

Showing ID is not voter suppression no matter how many liars say that it is.

Including these "liars"?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html

[Cigar]

Your OP has nothing to do with voter ID. Did you even read it ??


Yea ... and have to read any of the Abortions Laws :laugh:

[Common]

http://i.imgur.com/DPEYtJc.jpg

[Subdermal]

I can only speak to Lynn Adelman. He's a leftist hack who has struck down the same Voter ID law twice.

Doesn't matter that the slimy leftist POS was reversed before over the same thing. Each time some idiot leftist group files suit, this clown sad sack excuse of a judge overturns the law.

This guy isn't practicing law, or judicial restraint. This is abuse of our legal system for his own radical agenda.

And no, Cigar: his ruling as zero chance of being upheld.

[zelmo1234]

Including these "liars"?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html

Well of course they are aimed at Democrat voters. Democrats are the ones that vote Dead People, Illegals, and Use the policy of vote early and vote often.

It is my belief that 100% of the Dead people that vote in this election will vote for Democrats.

[hanger4]

Yea ... and have to read any of the Abortions Laws :laugh:

Irrelevant Cigar. Your OP is about voting a straight ticket. Please proof read your emailed links or take some reading comprehension classes.

[Cigar]

Irrelevant Cigar. Your OP is about voting a straight ticket. Please proof read your emailed links or take some reading comprehension classes.


I'm not the Judge who handed down the ruling ... so call them with your complaints

[zelmo1234]

What I do not understand is the fact that people Must Show an ID for other things. For example Democrats tell us that this suppresses those that are poor and on Assistance programs? But they have to have an ID to be on those programs. So that can't be it.

Democrats tell us that there are those that can't afford a State ID, but most of the states will supply one for free, So that can't be it

Look at every excuse that Democrat have on Voter ID and quickly you will see that it really is a lie, so what could be the real reason that they want these laws abolished?

The answer is because they want to cheat! So the GOP just has to play their game, Take people around to several polling stations and have them vote. Get the lists and get people in early to cast the vote for those that have died. Democrats are usually too lazy to get up early, so you can beat them to that.

If the GOP beats the DNC to the punch on these illegal tactics one election cycle, there will be a national voter registration that will end the voter fraud.

[Cigar]

:grin: Follow The Law

[zelmo1234]

I hope that people start to use these ruling for other things. For example Why should I have to have a photo ID to drive a Car.

Why should I have to show a Photo ID to exercise my 2nd amendment rights to purchase a gun.

The authorities should really take my word for all things, don't you think.

[del]

I hope that people start to use these ruling for other things. For example Why should I have to have a photo ID to drive a Car.

Why should I have to show a Photo ID to exercise my 2nd amendment rights to purchase a gun.

The authorities should really take my word for all things, don't you think.

if you said the sun rose in the east, i'd ask for proof.

[zelmo1234]

if you said the sun rose in the east, i'd ask for proof.

That is OK I am still shocked that you can function this late in the month!

[del]

That is OK I am still shocked that you can function this late in the month!

that's not surprising coming from someone who couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the directions were printed on the heel.

[zelmo1234]

that's not surprising coming from someone who couldn't pour piss out of a boot if the directions were printed on the heel.

Queen , That is my nick name for you Drama or Welfare, they both fit!

[Subdermal]

:grin: Follow The Law

Oh? But you support the same judge overturning the same law twice, when the law reversed his own first attempt?

You don't care about anything but pushing liberalism. You are a vagrant vandal.

[Mac-7]

It’s official: The week of the Republican National Convention has been a terrific week for voting rights in the United States. Not because of the RNC—the GOP platform explicitly endorses voter suppression laws—but because federal courts across the country have struck down state measures designed to make voting harder for minorities. First, a federal judge found that Wisconsin’s stringent voter ID laws placed an undue burden on many citizens’ fundamental right to vote; then an appeals court found that Texas’ even more draconian voter ID law had a discriminatory effect on minority communities in violation of the Voting Rights Act. Now a federal judge in Michigan has invalidated the state’s ban on straight-party voting, finding that the law violates both the Voting Rights Act and the United States Constitution.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/21/michigan_judge_strikes_down_straight_party_voting_ ban.html

Cigar lies

The states represented the will of the people

It was unelected liberal judges who imposed their will from above

[Subdermal]

if you said the sun rose in the east, i'd ask for proof.

And - somehow - you think that is an indictment of him.

[Cigar]

Cigar lies

The states represented the will of the people

It was unelected liberal judges who imposed their will from above


:grin: Demographics ... Embrace it ...

[Standing Wolf]

Well of course they are aimed at Democrat voters. Democrats are the ones that vote Dead People, Illegals, and Use the policy of vote early and vote often.

It is my belief that 100% of the Dead people that vote in this election will vote for Democrats.

First of all the Dead Man Voting myth is exactly that - a myth.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/pictures/the-voter-fraud-myth-debunked-20120612/dead-voters-0459793

http://www.factandmyth.com/voter-fraud/are-dead-people-voting-fraud

Second, it doesn't make a lick of difference what Party you believe these mythical creatures want to cast their ballots for; even if they existed, you can't pass a law that disproportionately affects the right of live, legal voters to participate in an election because of the Party they belong to.

[Oboe]

Well now who could argue with link on the internet as proof? LMAO!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XId-xFT9Txc

[Cletus]

Including these "liars"?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html

ANYONE who says it is is a liar.

Presenting proof of identity before voting is a prudent, reasonable precaution against voter fraud. It disenfranchises nobody. It causes undue hardship to nobody. It prevents only those who are not ineligible to vote from voting.

I really have to suspect the motives of anyone who opposes it. There is no rational reason for doing so.

[stjames1_53]

I'm not the Judge who handed down the ruling ... so call them with your complaints


This is from the article..... nothing to do with voter ID

Now a federal judge in Michigan has invalidated the state’s ban (http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2016/07/21/straight-ticket/87391606/) on straight-party voting, finding that the law violates both the Voting Rights Act and the United States Constitution.
it has nothing to do with voter ID......just straight ticket voting....................unless Cigar is attempting to interpret the judges ruling.
Voter ID prevents the illegals aliens from voting unless you just happen to live in Gaylifornia. EVERYONE in Gaylifornia votes, whether or not they actually vote. And the dead vote in Florida............no ID required for them to vote Democrat

[hanger4]

I'm not the Judge who handed down the ruling ... so call them with your complaints

Your header lied Cigar even Slate head line wasn't about voter ID. It said voter restrictions.

And ya know what Cigar I don't believe you lied, I believe you truly have problems with reading comprehension.

And another know what Cigar, I believe this is a good decision. One should be able to vote a straight ticket.

Do you understand now Cigar or would you still prefer me to contact the Judge to explain it to you ??

[Cigar]

:grin:

[Mac-7]

First of all the Dead Man Voting myth is exactly that - a myth.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/pictures/the-voter-fraud-myth-debunked-20120612/dead-voters-0459793

http://www.factandmyth.com/voter-fraud/are-dead-people-voting-fraud

Second, it doesn't make a lick of difference what Party you believe these mythical creatures want to cast their ballots for; even if they existed, you can't pass a law that disproportionately affects the right of live, legal voters to participate in an election because of the Party they belong to.

Just because you don't believe ie does not make it a myth

Dead people have been voting for the

democrats since before you were born

And the liberal judges will see to it that it never ends

[Quicksilver]

Well of course they are aimed at Democrat voters. Democrats are the ones that vote Dead People, Illegals, and Use the policy of vote early and vote often.

It is my belief that 100% of the Dead people that vote in this election will vote for Democrats.

I would be interested in seeing data on how many dead people voted.... A HUGE number? Enough to sway an election.. I call BS

[Subdermal]

I would be interested in seeing data on how many dead people voted.... A HUGE number? Enough to sway an election.. I call BS

Ah.

But the percentage of gun crimes is dwarfed by the amount of lawfully owned and used guns, and that's actionable?

That about right? And you leftists further push the "if it only saves one child" kind of policy?

Seems like your integrity and standards are about as malleable as fresh playdoh.

[Standing Wolf]

Just because you don't believe ie does not make it a myth

Dead people have been voting for the

democrats since before you were born

And the liberal judges will see to it that it never ends

By all means, mac, don't let mere facts and reality affect your beliefs in any way.

[Subdermal]

By all means, mac, don't let mere facts and reality affect your beliefs in any way.

You didn't even bother to research.

No honest person googles the topic and can ignore the absolute avalanche of evidence of it.

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Dead-and-Still-Voting-177286281.html

[Subdermal]

These are just two of the links included in the avalanche of evidence. It's incontrovertible - but none of us expect liberals to admit it. We have all just been treated to a fresh display of pure cognitive dissonant trolling with the decedent Hillary lie nonsense, so we know how mentally ill leftists are.

http://spectator.org/36248_dead-people-and-other-voters/

[Standing Wolf]

Ah.

But the percentage of gun crimes is dwarfed by the amount of lawfully owned and used guns, and that's actionable?

That about right? And you leftists further push the "if it only saves one child" kind of policy?

Seems like your integrity and standards are about as malleable as fresh playdoh.

The problem with some analogies, Sub, is that they can cut both ways; they can make a point that you are trying to make, and at the same time make a point that you might prefer not be made. Your guns-voting comparison is a good example.

First of all, I for one do recognize and frequently have occasion to lament on the extreme anti-gun faction's wildly exaggerated view of the danger of privately-owned firearms in America - the logical disconnect between the relatively miniscule number of such guns that will ever be used in any crime, and the measures they envision and support to ostensibly curb such abuses by inconveniencing honest citizens who are merely trying to exercise their rights.

There is certainly a good analogy to be made here - but it targets for criticism not only those who seek to enact unnecessary, wrong-headed laws restricting the purchase and possession of guns because of the actions of a minority, but those who advocate for similarly unnecessary, wrong-headed laws restricting the right to vote. Even if we were to buy into the wildly inflated, largely apocryphal stories about hordes of "dead voters", the numbers in those stories would not begin to approach the number of actual documented firearms-related deaths.

Overreaction and questionable motives are evident in both cases.

[stjames1_53]

First of all the Dead Man Voting myth is exactly that - a myth.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/pictures/the-voter-fraud-myth-debunked-20120612/dead-voters-0459793

http://www.factandmyth.com/voter-fraud/are-dead-people-voting-fraud

Second, it doesn't make a lick of difference what Party you believe these mythical creatures want to cast their ballots for; even if they existed, you can't pass a law that disproportionately affects the right of live, legal voters to participate in an election because of the Party they belong to.

another interesting read:
http://godfatherpolitics.com/doj-stops-florida-from-removing-dead-people-and-foreigners-from-registered-voter-list/

[Mac-7]

By all means, mac, don't let mere facts and reality affect your beliefs in any way.


Sorry, but Rolling Stone is not a credible source of information

[Tahuyaman]

Michigan only outlawed straight-party voting—which allows a voter to cast his or her ballot for every candidate of a specific party all at once—in 2016.

Republicans spearheaded the effort to ban the practice, asserting that citizens should vote for “individual people” instead of parties. “It’s time to choose people over politics,” Republican Gov. Rick Snyder said (http://www.mlive.com/lansing-news/index.ssf/2016/01/gov_rick_snyder_signs_bill_eli.html) while signing the bill,

How does one condemn that?

[Mac-7]

How does one condemn that?

In florida in 2000 democrats told democrat voters that they bused to the polls to "vote every page"

Unfortunately the list of presidential candidates ran over to two pages on the ballot.

So dumb-as-dirt Gore voters checked his name on one page and Pat Buchanan on another page.

All those ballots were thrown out and democrats had a fit.

[Subdermal]

The problem with some analogies, Sub, is that they can cut both ways; they can make a point that you are trying to make, and at the same time make a point that you might prefer not be made. Your guns-voting comparison is a good example.

First of all, I for one do recognize and frequently have occasion to lament on the extreme anti-gun faction's wildly exaggerated view of the danger of privately-owned firearms in America - the logical disconnect between the relatively miniscule number of such guns that will ever be used in any crime, and the measures they envision and support to ostensibly curb such abuses by inconveniencing honest citizens who are merely trying to exercise their rights.

There is certainly a good analogy to be made here - but it targets for criticism not only those who seek to enact unnecessary, wrong-headed laws restricting the purchase and possession of guns because of the actions of a minority, but those who advocate for similarly unnecessary, wrong-headed laws restricting the right to vote. Even if we were to buy into the wildly inflated, largely apocryphal stories about hordes of "dead voters", the numbers in those stories would not begin to approach the number of actual documented firearms-related deaths.

Overreaction and questionable motives are evident in both cases.

It only cuts both ways if one ignores the Constitution. Since I don't, I'm the one wielding the cutlery.

On to the next: there is an avalanche of evidence of dead voting. Tell me you don't see it.

[Cletus]

I would be interested in seeing data on how many dead people voted.... A HUGE number? Enough to sway an election.. I call BS

ONE vote can decide an election.

[MisterVeritis]

I would be interested in seeing data on how many dead people voted.... A HUGE number? Enough to sway an election.. I call BS
How many illegal votes do you believe it takes to steal an election?

[Tahuyaman]

ONE vote can decide an election.

theoretically.

Still, I'm wondering how anyone can condemn the idea of voting for individual candidates?

[Tahuyaman]

How many illegal votes do you believe it takes to steal an election?

Ask Al Franken. He knows the answer to that one.

[Cletus]

theoretically.

Still, I'm wondering how anyone can condemn the idea of voting for individual candidates?

It seems to me that is the only way to vote. It is how I always vote. I am a registered independent and have never voted a straight party ticket.

[Oboe]

All showing your id does is keep meskins from voting. I'm all for it. No ID, no vote. Get out.

[Tahuyaman]

It seems to me that is the only way to vote. It is how I always vote. I am a registered independent and have never voted a straight party ticket.


There are people here who believe in voting by straight party line no matter who those candidates are and what they propose individually. I think that's a dangerous mind-set.

[Professor Peabody]

I can only speak to Lynn Adelman. He's a leftist hack who has struck down the same Voter ID law twice.

Doesn't matter that the slimy leftist POS was reversed before over the same thing. Each time some idiot leftist group files suit, this clown sad sack excuse of a judge overturns the law.

This guy isn't practicing law, or judicial restraint. This is abuse of our legal system for his own radical agenda.

And no, Cigar: his ruling as zero chance of being upheld.

As long as it's struck down in November so the voting fraud can run rampant and get Hillary elected that's all that is necessary.

[Standing Wolf]

It seems to me that is the only way to vote. It is how I always vote. I am a registered independent and have never voted a straight party ticket.

I think you'd have to admit, though, that there is a major difference between doing it that way because you choose to, and being required by law to do it that way. The law was clearly aimed at inconveniencing voters of a certain Party affiliation, and had no purpose aside from that.

[Cletus]

There are people here who believe in voting by straight party line no matter who those candidates are and what they propose individually. I think that's a dangerous mind-set.

I agree completely. It is a dangerous mindset. It is also irresponsible.

[maineman]

There are people here who believe in voting by straight party line no matter who those candidates are and what they propose individually. I think that's a dangerous mind-set.

I don't think that is accurate. And it is the "no matter" part which I take issue with. My brother has never voted for the democrat for President, and I have never voted for the republican. I did vote for an independent once, and I chose not to vote one other time. My brother will not cast a ballot for President this year. I wouldn't either if I held my brother's viewpoint. Nearly all the time, the parties nominate folks who, for the most part, agree with their party's platform and rarely propose things that are diametrically opposed to that platform. Sometimes, that doesn't happen. Each presidential election year, after both conventions are past, I read both party's platforms from cover to cover. And I ask myself which one more closely mirrors my own personal philosophy. Thus far, the democratic platform always has been the better fit for me. If ever the democratic platform is not as agreeable to me as the republican platform, or if the democratic candidate espouses things that are against the platform, I certainly reserve the right to vote for the republican, or a third party candidate, or not cast a vote for that office.

[Cletus]

I think you'd have to admit, though, that there is a major difference between doing it that way because you choose to, and being required by law to do it that way. The law was clearly aimed at inconveniencing voters of a certain Party affiliation, and had no purpose aside from that.

MAYBE the law was intended to force people to actually examine the candidates.

People who vote straight party without question should be stripped of the right to vote. Of course, I also think a voter should be able to prove eligibility and pass a literacy test. I would even accept a verbal test to determine an awareness and base knowledge of the issues and candidates being voted on.

[Mac-7]

theoretically.

Still, I'm wondering how anyone can condemn the idea of voting for individual candidates?

I gave you the reason democrats dont like the idea.

many of their voters are too stupid to vote individually without screwing it up

[Cletus]

I don't think that is accurate. And it is the "no matter" part which I take issue with. My brother has never voted for the democrat for President, and I have never voted for the republican. I did vote for an independent once, and I chose not to vote one other time. My brother will not cast a ballot for President this year. I wouldn't either if I held my brother's viewpoint. Nearly all the time, the parties nominate folks who, for the most part, agree with their party's platform and rarely propose things that are diametrically opposed to that platform. Sometimes, that doesn't happen. Each presidential election year, after both conventions are past, I read both party's platforms from cover to cover. And I ask myself which one more closely mirrors my own personal philosophy. Thus far, the democratic platform always has been the better fit for me. If ever the democratic platform is not as agreeable to me as the republican platform, or if the democratic candidate espouses things that are against the platform, I certainly reserve the right to vote for the republican, or a third party candidate, or not cast a vote for that office.

NOT voting, even if you write in your own candidate, should be punishable by law.

[maineman]

NOT voting, even if you write in your own candidate, should be punishable by law.

all you need to do is run against the incumbent where you live, get elected to Congress or the Senate, and make that happen!

good luck.

If I hear you are running with that as one of your campaign promises, I will, however, donate to your opponent.

[maineman]

And I would never NOT vote altogether... I would simply refrain from casting a ballot in an individual race.

[Cletus]

all you need to do is run against the incumbent where you live, get elected to Congress or the Senate, and make that happen!

good luck.

If I hear you are running with that as one of your campaign promises, I will, however, donate to your opponent.

I didn't ask for a smart assed remark.

Throw your bullshit at somebody else. If you don't like my opinion, either ignore it or explain why.

[Cletus]

And I would never NOT vote altogether... I would simply refrain from casting a ballot in an individual race.

It is the same thing.

[Standing Wolf]

MAYBE the law was intended to force people to actually examine the candidates.

People who vote straight party without question should be stripped of the right to vote. Of course, I also think a voter should be able to prove eligibility and pass a literacy test. I would even accept a verbal test to determine an awareness and base knowledge of the issues and candidates being voted on.

And you don't see a potential for - not to mention an actual history of - all manner of abuse in such a scheme?

[Standing Wolf]

NOT voting, even if you write in your own candidate, should be punishable by law.

Can you provide either a Constitutional basis for, or a compelling public interest in, wanting to jail, fine or otherwise sanction people for not voting? You also want to keep people from voting if they're not (according to some standard yet to be determined) sufficiently literate, or aware and knowledgeable about the issues; if they failed to vote because they did not feel that they could "pass muster" in those areas, would you advocate that we test them to make sure they're not just playing dumb?

[Cletus]

And you don't see a potential for - not to mention an actual history of - all manner of abuse in such a scheme?

For what, the proof of eligibility and the literacy test?

I do not.

I could see some potential difficulty with the straight party issue. Somebody MIGHT find a ticket in which all the candidates of the one party reflect his views on the issues, but I seriously doubt it. Maybe the way to handle that is to eliminate a reference to party on the ballot.

[Cletus]

Can you provide either a Constitutional basis for, or a compelling public interest in, wanting to jail, fine or otherwise sanction people for not voting? You also want to keep people from voting if they're not (according to some standard yet to be determined) sufficiently literate, or aware and knowledgeable about the issues; if they failed to vote because they did not feel that they could "pass muster" in those areas, would you advocate that we test them to make sure they're not just playing dumb?

Voting is or at least should be as much of a responsibility as it is a right. If someone doesn't want to live up to their responsibilities, there should be consequences. It doesn't have to be jail or a financial penalty. It could be something as simple as stripping them of their voting rights for at least the next voting cycle. However you go about it, there should be a penalty for not doing your civic duty.

[jimmyz]

I love when Cigar gets owned in his own OP.

[maineman]

It is the same thing.

and you think that writing in Mickey Mouse isn't the same thing as not casting a ballot for President?

[zelmo1234]

Your header lied @Cigar (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=294) even Slate head line wasn't about voter ID. It said voter restrictions.

And ya know what Cigar I don't believe you lied, I believe you truly have problems with reading comprehension.

And another know what Cigar, I believe this is a good decision. One should be able to vote a straight ticket.

Do you understand now Cigar or would you still prefer me to contact the Judge to explain it to you ??

Are you saying that Cigar, like Hillary, is too Stupid to know the difference? I can see that

[Cletus]

and you think that writing in Mickey Mouse isn't the same thing as not casting a ballot for President?

I didn't say anything about Mickey Mouse.

I don't know about you, but I would write in whoever I thought was best suited for the position, even if he wasn't in the race.

[zelmo1234]

Can you provide either a Constitutional basis for, or a compelling public interest in, wanting to jail, fine or otherwise sanction people for not voting? You also want to keep people from voting if they're not (according to some standard yet to be determined) sufficiently literate, or aware and knowledgeable about the issues; if they failed to vote because they did not feel that they could "pass muster" in those areas, would you advocate that we test them to make sure they're not just playing dumb?

Actually, there is the ACA, which to my knowledge is the first law that punishes people for doing Nothing.

So if you can punish people for not buying insurance, then why not punish them with a TAX for not voting.

[Bo-4]

Including these "liars"?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html

Like this asshat who flat out admitted that it would allow Romney win the state of PA?

"DONE!"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8

[maineman]

I didn't say anything about Mickey Mouse.

I don't know about you, but I would write in whoever I thought was best suited for the position, even if he wasn't in the race.

so you think it is a civic responsibility to cast a vote for someone - anyone - for every office on every ballot in every election?

[Cletus]

so you think it is a civic responsibility to cast a vote for someone - anyone - for every office on every ballot in every election?

I think in order to succeed, our government must be participatory. If you choose not to participate, you don't deserve a voice. I think you have a responsibility to express yourself on every issue brought before you for consideration.

We do that by voting.

[MisterVeritis]

Ask Al Franken. He knows the answer to that one.
The answer is, "not very many".

[Cletus]

Our current District Attorney was elected by a THREE vote margin.

[Peter1469]

The soft bigotry of low exceptions strikes again.

For the record, I don't believe anyone is too stupid to figure out how to get a voter ID based on race, gender, sexual identity or socioeconomic status.

I, however, am not surprised that bigotry still exists in America.

[maineman]

I think in order to succeed, our government must be participatory. If you choose not to participate, you don't deserve a voice. I think you have a responsibility to express yourself on every issue brought before you for consideration.

We do that by voting.

so... I participate in every single down ballot choice...from senator, congressman, state senator, state representative, county commissioner, mayor , alderman, school board member, six bond issues, but I chose not to vote for present and I have not lived up to my civic responsibility? REALLY???

[Tahuyaman]

I gave you the reason democrats dont like the idea.

many of their voters are too stupid to vote individually without screwing it up

I'd be willing to bet that you always vote a straight party line ticket. Am I right?

[Tahuyaman]

The answer is, "not very many".

It only took a few hundred to get him elected

[Cletus]

so... I participate in every single down ballot choice...from senator, congressman, state senator, state representative, county commissioner, mayor , alderman, school board member, six bond issues, but I chose not to vote for present and I have not lived up to my civic responsibility? REALLY???

Really.

[maineman]

Really.

even if the vote is symbolic and utterly inconsequential? Like writing in one's own name? If I did THAT, you'd think that I lived up to my civic responsibility but if I did not vote or write anyone in for one office, I am being irresponsible. Leaving it blank is irresponsible, but writing "Bruce Springsteen" gets me a gold star from the civics teacher?

[birddog]

It's sad that you libtards are not in favor of eradicating voter fraud, but you are in favor of eradicating any possible gun show loophole.

[maineman]

I believe there is an epidemic of gun violence in America. I do NOT believe there is an epidemic of voter fraud.

[birddog]

I believe there is an epidemic of gun violence in America. I do NOT believe there is an epidemic of voter fraud.

The gun violence you refer to is mostly gang related, and making more laws will not solve the problem. Voter fraud is likely far more rampant than you will admit to.

[maineman]

Voter fraud is likely far more rampant than you will admit to.

it is likely that you have zero evidence to support such an assertion.

[birddog]

it is likely that you have zero evidence to support such an assertion.

I expected that answer. Anecdotal, common-sense evidence is good enough for me. The news media avoids the subject most of the time, likely for PC and legal reasons.

As a liberal, you will not admit to it as it does not fit your agenda. Period!

[maineman]

I expected that answer. Anecdotal, common-sense evidence is good enough for me. The news media avoids the subject most of the time, likely for PC and legal reasons.

As a liberal, you will not admit to it as it does not fit your agenda. Period!

come on....myth is good enough for YOU!

[Oboe]

It's pretty simple really. If you don't want people to have to show ID to vote, then you are for voter fraud and allowing people who are not qualified to vote, to vote. There is NO reason not to show ID to vote.

[maineman]

It's pretty simple really. If you don't want people to have to show ID to vote, then you are for voter fraud and allowing people who are not qualified to vote, to vote. There is NO reason not to show ID to vote.

we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point, amigo.

[Peter1469]

Stop the bigotry. Nobody is so stupid that they can't figure out how to get an ID.

[birddog]

come on....myth is good enough for YOU!

Are you saying you don't respect testimonies, and have no common sense?

[maineman]

Are you saying you don't respect testimonies, and have no common sense?

no. I am saying that you imagine voter fraud where it does not exist.... and certainly you imagine voter fraud frequency FAR greater than it actually is. You can claim that your supposed "common sense" leads you to those imaginings.... and I can laugh at you when you say that.

[birddog]

Stop the bigotry. Nobody is so stupid that they can't figure out how to get an ID.

True, if they are that stupid, they should not be allowed to vote anyway. That's kind of like the dimocrats going to nursing homes to get absentee votes from those who don't understand. The nursing home people are not stupid, but are often mental or too aged to understand.

[maineman]

Stop the bigotry. Nobody is so stupid that they can't figure out how to get an ID.

I have never suggested or implied that stupidity had anything to do with it.

[Peter1469]

I have never suggested or implied that stupidity had anything to do with it.

I didn't quote anything you said.

[maineman]

I didn't quote anything you said.

to whom was post #86 addressed? Who demonstrated bigotry? Who suggested that anyone was too stupid to get an ID?

[Peter1469]

to whom was post #86 addressed? Who demonstrated bigotry? Who suggested that anyone was too stupid to get an ID?


I was speaking in general. If I address you I will name you or quote you.

[Subdermal]

no. I am saying that you imagine voter fraud where it does not exist.... and certainly you imagine voter fraud frequency FAR greater than it actually is. You can claim that your supposed "common sense" leads you to those imaginings.... and I can laugh at you when you say that.

You've already been provided many links to voter fraud. I've seen no acknowledgement of them. So let's get you on the record.

How much voter fraud is acceptable to you?

[maineman]

You've already been provided many links to voter fraud. I've seen no acknowledgement of them. So let's get you on the record.

How much voter fraud is acceptable to you?
none is acceptable. but when voter fraud is measured in numbers that I can reach without taking off both shoes, it is not something I believe we need to enact new and potentially discriminatory practices to combat.

If you have a link that discloses massive voter fraud, I'd love to see it.

[maineman]

I was speaking in general. If I address you I will name you or quote you.

So...nobody expressed any bigotry... and nobody suggested that anyone else was too stupid to get an ID?

Got it. You just made that shit up and posted it.

thanks for that.

[Peter1469]

So...nobody expressed any bigotry... and nobody suggested that anyone else was too stupid to get an ID?

Got it. You just made that shit up and posted it.

thanks for that.

Incorrect. My initial message stands and is valid. If you think it applies to you, that is not my intent, but perhaps you should just comply.

[MisterVeritis]

You've already been provided many links to voter fraud. I've seen no acknowledgment of them. So let's get you on the record.

How much voter fraud is acceptable to you?
Only that level required for the win, of course. But no more than that!

[maineman]

Incorrect. My initial message stands and is valid. If you think it applies to you, that is not my intent, but perhaps you should just comply.

but yet you cannot name names.

[Peter1469]

but yet you cannot name names.

Use the correct words when you make statements.

Won't. Not can't.

[maineman]

a distinction without a difference.

[stjames1_53]

none is acceptable. but when voter fraud is measured in numbers that I can reach without taking off both shoes, it is not something I believe we need to enact new and potentially discriminatory practices to combat.

If you have a link that discloses massive voter fraud, I'd love to see it.

so, you are fully convince that a voter ID is not required, that is, unless, you think Canadians, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Afghani's, French can vote in our elections without proof of residency. How about anyone from NKorea or China? In fact, you seem to think that anyone who is in the US at the time of elections should be allowed to vote.
I wonder if those counties are going to let YOU vote in their election.

[maineman]

so, you are fully convince that a voter ID is not required, that is, unless, you think Canadians, Vietnamese, Mexicans, Afghani's, French can vote in our elections without proof of residency. How about anyone from NKorea or China? In fact, you seem to think that anyone who is in the US at the time of elections should be allowed to vote.
I wonder if those counties are going to let YOU vote in their election.

I think anyone who has gone through the process in his community to register to vote should be able to walk up to a polling official, give his name and address, and then vote. I don't think that anyone who has not registered to vote should be allowed to vote.

[Newpublius]

none is acceptable. but when voter fraud is measured in numbers that I can reach without taking off both shoes, it is not something I believe we need to enact new and potentially discriminatory practices to combat.

If you have a link that discloses massive voter fraud, I'd love to see it.

If ID isn't required how would you know? You'd have no reason to suspect fraud to begin with.

[maineman]

If ID isn't required how would you know? You'd have no reason to suspect fraud to begin with.

you'd know the first time that a voter came to the polling official and was told that he could not vote twice when he had not, himself, already voted. Show me the number of folks that happened to. I'll wait.

[Newpublius]

you'd know the first time that a voter came to the polling official and was told that he could not vote twice when he had not, himself, already voted. Show me the number of folks that happened to. I'll wait.

I don't think voter impersonation is what anybody is worried about. Politicians are running for office with trillions of dollar hanging in the balance, don't trust them not to cheat. I'd cheat.

[maineman]

I don't think voter impersonation is what anybody is worried about. Politicians are running for office with trillions of dollar hanging in the balance, don't trust them not to cheat. I'd cheat.

explain to me how this massive, election changing voter fraud is supposed to actually work.

[Subdermal]

none is acceptable. but when voter fraud is measured in numbers that I can reach without taking off both shoes, it is not something I believe we need to enact new and potentially discriminatory practices to combat.

If you have a link that discloses massive voter fraud, I'd love to see it.

You contradict yourself. If none is acceptable, but you need to see massive amounts in order to justify policy changes to counteract it, you are not logical.

Secondly, I already posted two links, and you have ignored them.

[Cletus]

none is acceptable. but when voter fraud is measured in numbers that I can reach without taking off both shoes, it is not something I believe we need to enact new and potentially discriminatory practices to combat.

What is discriminatory about requiring proof of identity if that requirement is applied uniformly and applies to ALL voters?

[Tahuyaman]

Requiring ID to vote will not eliminate fraud. Ask Al Franken. He's knows a little bit about voter fraud.

what's the traditional way they conduct voter fraud in Illinois? Chicago is in a class by itself. Would requiring ID eliminate that? When you can get dead people to vote and vote multiple times, I'm not sure how you eliminate that?

[Bethere]

What is discriminatory about requiring proof of identity if that requirement is applied uniformly and applies to ALL voters?

In general I, and the courts, agree with you. But the 24th amendment made poll taxes in federal elections unconstitutional.

And Harper v Virginia made poll taxes illegal for all other public elections.

So if those documents are not free and very very easy to get then they are poll taxes and they violate the spirit of the 14th amendment (Harper) and the 24th amendment.

The way the south beat reconstruction and purged blacks from congress was by erecting barriers to voting. Poll taxes. Civics tests. Access to machines. You know the drill.

It isn't the debate on this topic that concerns me as much as the gop's intent in doing it.

Considering that there is virtually no voter fraud in this country, why do you suppose southern states are doing this now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/09/7-papers-4-government-inquiries-2-news-investigations-and-1-court-ruling-proving-voter-fraud-is-mostly-a-myth/

Why the sense of urgency?

[Cletus]

In general I, and the courts, agree with you. But the 24th amendment made poll taxes in federal elections unconstitutional. And Harper v Virginia made poll taxes illegal for all other public elections.

So if those documents are not free and very very easy to get then they are poll taxes and they violate the spirit of the 14th amendment (Harper) and the 24th amendment.

They are not poll taxes and only someone who thinks the Obamacare penalties are really taxes would be stupid enough to believe they were.

[Bethere]

They are not poll taxes and only someone who thinks the Obamacare penalties are really taxes would be stupid enough to believe they were.

If you don't buy the id you can't vote. It's a poll tax.

When we name the next Supreme Court Justice this will be a moot point. Gosh, after last week it might be a moot point now.

As for Obama care? Only one other poster on this forum knows my opinion on that one.

You are free to speculate, but your opinion is no substitute for my opinion.

[Mac-7]

If you don't buy the id you can't vote. It's a poll tax.

When we name the next Supreme Court Justice this will be a moot point. Gosh, after last week it might be a moot point now.

As for Obama care? Only one other poster on this forum knows my opinion on that one.

You are free to speculate, but your opinion is no substitute for my opinion.

State issued picture id's cost nothing.

This is just liberal democrat judge payback to their party for the cushy lifetime job they got.

[Peter1469]

Show your ID. We know you have one.

[hanger4]

In general I, and the courts, agree with you. But the 24th amendment made poll taxes in federal elections unconstitutional.

And Harper v Virginia made poll taxes illegal for all other public elections.

So if those documents are not free and very very easy to get then they are poll taxes and they violate the spirit of the 14th amendment (Harper) and the 24th amendment.

The way the south beat reconstruction and purged blacks from congress was by erecting barriers to voting. Poll taxes. Civics tests. Access to machines. You know the drill.

It isn't the debate on this topic that concerns me as much as the gop's intent in doing it.

Considering that there is virtually no voter fraud in this country, why do you suppose southern states are doing this now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/09/7-papers-4-government-inquiries-2-news-investigations-and-1-court-ruling-proving-voter-fraud-is-mostly-a-myth/

Why the sense of urgency?

It's simply amazing the number of people that will argue points they know absolutely nothing about.

[stjames1_53]

I agree completely. It is a dangerous mindset. It is also irresponsible.

primaries in Indiana are straight ticket, but we don't have to check all the boxes. I reviewed the list of candidates on the dem ticket and found that list wanting as well. I voted for Trump, the sheriff, one local commissioner, and the sheriff and that was how my vote was cast.
The rest were pretty much unqualified.

[Cletus]

If you don't buy the id you can't vote. It's a poll tax.

When we name the next Supreme Court Justice this will be a moot point. Gosh, after last week it might be a moot point now.

As for Obama care? Only one other poster on this forum knows my opinion on that one.

You are free to speculate, but your opinion is no substitute for my opinion.


I didn't speculate on your opinion of Obamacare. I don't care what it is. I was commenting on the Chief Justice's weasel move to avoid shutting it down by declaring the associated penalty a tax when even the people who wrote it said it isn't a tax.

The ID might be considered a poll tax if it was a "voting ID" only. However, there are hundreds of things you cannot do in this country without presenting proof of identity. It would be easy to generate a list of approved forms of identification without requiring one specifically for voting. Some states already issue photo IDs free of charge to those who need them.

[Cletus]

primaries in Indiana are straight ticket, but we don't have to check all the boxes. I reviewed the list of candidates on the dem ticket and found that list wanting as well. I voted for Trump, the sheriff, one local commissioner, and the sheriff and that was how my vote was cast.
The rest were pretty much unqualified.

We are not talking about primaries. They aren't really elections. They are just internal party actions. I was speaking specifically of general elections in which the people decide who is going to hold public office.

[Bethere]

State issued picture id's cost nothing.

This is just liberal democrat judge payback to their party for the cushy lifetime job they got.

You are wrong. In my state, ohio, for example, they cost $8.50--a poll tax.

[Bethere]

I didn't speculate on your opinion of Obamacare. I don't care what it is. I was commenting on the Chief Justice's weasel move to avoid shutting it down by declaring the associated penalty a tax when even the people who wrote it said it isn't a tax.

The ID might be considered a poll tax if it was a "voting ID" only. However, there are hundreds of things you cannot do in this country without presenting proof of identity. It would be easy to generate a list of approved forms of identification without requiring one specifically for voting. Some states already issue photo IDs free of charge to those who need them.

You are arguing with the 14th and 24th amendments, not me.

Why don't you like the us constitution?

[Bethere]

I didn't speculate on your opinion of Obamacare. I don't care what it is. I was commenting on the Chief Justice's weasel move to avoid shutting it down by declaring the associated penalty a tax when even the people who wrote it said it isn't a tax.

The ID might be considered a poll tax if it was a "voting ID" only. However, there are hundreds of things you cannot do in this country without presenting proof of identity. It would be easy to generate a list of approved forms of identification without requiring one specifically for voting. Some states already issue photo IDs free of charge to those who need them.

You are 100% allowed to live in the us without, say, a driver's license. Driving is a privilege, not a right.

And yet voting is a right, not a privilege, in which it is arguably mandatory to buy an otherwise optional license--a poll tax--in order to exercise that right.

This is why you guys keep losing in court.

[TrueBlue]

In general I, and the courts, agree with you. But the 24th amendment made poll taxes in federal elections unconstitutional.

And Harper v Virginia made poll taxes illegal for all other public elections.

So if those documents are not free and very very easy to get then they are poll taxes and they violate the spirit of the 14th amendment (Harper) and the 24th amendment.

The way the south beat reconstruction and purged blacks from congress was by erecting barriers to voting. Poll taxes. Civics tests. Access to machines. You know the drill.

It isn't the debate on this topic that concerns me as much as the gop's intent in doing it.

Considering that there is virtually no voter fraud in this country, why do you suppose southern states are doing this now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/07/09/7-papers-4-government-inquiries-2-news-investigations-and-1-court-ruling-proving-voter-fraud-is-mostly-a-myth/

Why the sense of urgency?
You're quite right in that there is no voter fraud to speak of. Whatever has been found to date has to be miniscule. However, even if there isn't, the right is going to try to create it in order to have the gullible believe that there is thereby, getting their foot in the door to pass more egregious poll-tax type legislation to further prevent minorities from voting.

[Bethere]

You're quite right in that there is no voter fraud to speak of. Whatever has been found to date has to be miniscule. However, even if there isn't, the right is going to try to create it in order to have the gullible believe that there is thereby, getting their foot in the door to pass more egregious poll-tax type legislation to further prevent minorities from voting.



Theirs are the same exact arguments 'whitey' used during reconstruction to deny the vote to millions for their own personal political gain.

We aren't going back.

The gop is doomed. The intelligent well-intentioned republican has a difficult choice to make.

I don't envy them.

[Subdermal]

You are 100% allowed to live in the us without, say, a driver's license. Driving is a privilege, not a right.

And yet voting is a right, not a privilege, in which it is arguably mandatory to buy an otherwise optional license--a poll tax--in order to exercise that right.

This is why you guys keep losing in court.

Your definition of 'losing' is interesting, since Voter ID has been upheld numerous times.

[Subdermal]

You are wrong. In my state, ohio, for example, they cost $8.50--a poll tax.

Repetition is no substitute for truth.

Is there any other purpose for a picture ID?

[Bethere]

Your definition of 'losing' is interesting, since Voter ID has been upheld numerous times.

It depends on what you mean by voter id, which court made the ruling, and whether or not it happened before or after the death of Anton Scalia.

[Bethere]

Repetition is no substitute for truth.

Is there any other purpose for a picture ID?


Buying beer, cashing checks, proving identity to the police, qualifying for a passport, are just a few examples of what a picture id is for.

And if you charge for it or make it difficult to get? It can be a poll tax as well.

[Archer0915]

It is a bigoted view! You are saying only minorities are too stupid to get an ID. Only democrat voters are affected is what you seem to be saying.

Well if they are so damn stupid they can not get an ID perhaps they are not intelligent enough to vote.

[Subdermal]

It depends on what you mean by voter id, which court made the ruling, and whether or not it happened before or after the death of Anton Scalia.

Don't forget that it also depends upon the definition of the word 'is'!

:biglaugh:

Only an imbecile leftist calls an ID a 'poll tax' - because there is no other leg upon which to even begin to stand. A ID has uses beyond simply proving one's identity to vote.

A poll tax has no other use. As such, there is no fitting definition for acquiring an ID as a 'poll tax', any more than there is any legitimate ability to be forced to furnish said proof of identity to register to vote.

Your argument is laid bare.

[Subdermal]

Buying beer, cashing checks, proving identity to the police, qualifying for a passport, are just a few examples of what a picture id is for.

And if you charge for it or make it difficult to get? It can be a poll tax as well.

:biglaugh:

Let lost. Your argument is asinine on its face.

[Cletus]

[QUOTE=Bethere;1652766]You are arguing with the 14th and 24th amendments, not me.

All I am doing is highlighting your ignorance.

Do you even know what a poll tax is?

[hanger4]

You are wrong. In my state, ohio, for example, they cost $8.50--a poll tax.

How convenient for you to ignore the types of ID available for use to vote in Ohio.

The forms of identification that may be used by a voter who appears at a polling place to vote on Election Day include

An unexpired Ohio driver’s license or state identification card with present or former address so long as the voter’s present residential address is printed in the official list of registered voters for that precinct;
A military identification;
A photo identification that was issued by the United States government or the State of Ohio, that contains the voter’s name and current address and that has an expiration date that has not passed;
An original or copy of a current utility bill with the voter’s name and present address;
An original or copy of a current bank statement with the voter’s name and present address;
An original or copy of a current government check with the voter’s name and present address;
An original or copy of a current paycheck with the voter’s name and present address; or
An original or copy of a current other government document (other than a notice of voter registration mailed by a board of elections) that shows the voter’s name and present address.

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/voters/FAQ/ID.aspx

And to help you catch up on a topic you seem to know little about Bethere

https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_identification_laws_by_state

[Bethere]

Don't forget that it also depends upon the definition of the word 'is'!

:biglaugh:

Only an imbecile leftist calls an ID a 'poll tax' - because there is no other leg upon which to even begin to stand. A ID has uses beyond simply proving one's identity to vote.

A poll tax has no other use. As such, there is no fitting definition for acquiring an ID as a 'poll tax', any more than there is any legitimate ability to be forced to furnish said proof of identity to register to vote.

Your argument is laid bare.

All you have to do is make the voter id free and easy to get and virtually all arguments against voter id would be neutered.

The gop refuses to do that and in so doing the gop reveals its true motivation.

[Subdermal]

All you have to do is make the voter id free and easy to get and virtually all arguments against voter id would be neutered.

The argument is already dead.


The gop refuses to do that and in so doing the gop reveals its true motivation.

I'd say the true motivation is revealed when leftists continually challenge an established ruling on the topic.

[Bethere]

How convenient for you to ignore the types of ID available for use to vote in Ohio.

The forms of identification that may be used by a voter who appears at a polling place to vote on Election Day include

An unexpired Ohio driver’s license or state identification card with present or former address so long as the voter’s present residential address is printed in the official list of registered voters for that precinct;
A military identification;
A photo identification that was issued by the United States government or the State of Ohio, that contains the voter’s name and current address and that has an expiration date that has not passed;
An original or copy of a current utility bill with the voter’s name and present address;
An original or copy of a current bank statement with the voter’s name and present address;
An original or copy of a current government check with the voter’s name and present address;
An original or copy of a current paycheck with the voter’s name and present address; or
An original or copy of a current other government document (other than a notice of voter registration mailed by a board of elections) that shows the voter’s name and present address.

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/voters/FAQ/ID.aspx

And to help you catch up on a topic you seem to know little about @ Bethere

https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_identification_laws_by_state

For those people who aren't home owners, or in the military, or payers of utiity bills, or drivers, or members of the military, or concealed carry owners, etc.?

They still have the right to vote, and the state has an obligation to provide them appropriate id that is free and easy to obtain or they are likely in violation of the 14th and 24th amendments concerning poll taxes.

[Bethere]

The argument is already dead.



I'd say the true motivation is revealed when leftists continually challenge an established ruling on the topic.

Actually, due to the voting rights act it is perpetually under review--but you knew that, right?

[Subdermal]

For those people who aren't home owners, or in the military, or payers of utiity bills, or drivers, or members of the military, or concealed carry owners, etc.?

They still have the right to vote, and the state has an obligation to provide them appropriate id that is free and easy to obtain or they are likely in violation of the 14th and 24th amendments concerning poll taxes.

No, they are not. Your repetition - while annoying - doesn't add one scintilla of credibility to the claim. It is asinine to claim such. Were it so, my expenditure of gas to drive to the polls; my requirement to expend energy to walk to the polls; the requirement that I wear clothes to the polls...

...all would be examples of a poll tax. I'm happy to continue to illustrate the absurd with absurdity - because this is where morally dead liberals have dragged us.

[Subdermal]

Actually, due to the voting rights act it is perpetually under review--but you knew that, right?

I said your argument is dead.

[Bethere]

I said your argument is dead.

Are you going to cry?

[hanger4]

For those people who aren't home owners, or in the military, or payers of utiity bills, or drivers, or members of the military, or concealed carry owners, etc.?

They still have the right to vote, and the state has an obligation to provide them appropriate id that is free and easy to obtain or they are likely in violation of the 14th and 24th amendments concerning poll taxes.

You really should have read your states link I provided.

"the last four digits of your Social Security number and cast a provisional ballot. Once the information is reviewed and verified by the board of elections, your ballot will be counted."

Your talent of ignoring seems to be circling around to bite you on the arse.

[Bethere]

You really would have read your states link I provided.

"the last four digits of your Social Security number and cast a provisional ballot. Once the information is reviewed and verified by the board of elections, your ballot will be counted."

Your talent of ingnoring seems to be circling around to bite you on the arse.

Actually that isn't the way provisional ballots work in practice here in Ohio. You have to go down to the boe and defend your ballot, and that second trip to vote is a trip that few make--which is the chilling effect racists were hoping for in order to minimize the minority vote.

The provisional ballots from the California primary, for example, have yet to be counted weeks later.

But you knew that, right?

[Subdermal]

Actually that isn't the way provisional ballots work in ohio. You have to go down to the boe and defend your ballot, and that second trip to vote is a trip that few make--which is the chilling effect racists were hoping for in order to minimize the minority vote.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YoVYBO1WvHU/UfMC0pUmjXI/AAAAAAAACoM/LGMs5oUQKBs/s1600/1slj61.gif

Racists? You mean voter ID is a race issue? Isn't it racist to claim that?

[Subdermal]

Are you going to cry?

Why would I do that, lefty?

I would have no issue whatsoever making an ID free, btw - anyone who cannot afford one is also receiving a tax credit. Simply deduct the amount from it.

The fact that leftists haven't suggested that is further evidence of their real agenda.

[Bethere]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-YoVYBO1WvHU/UfMC0pUmjXI/AAAAAAAACoM/LGMs5oUQKBs/s1600/1slj61.gif

Racists? You mean voter ID is a race issue? Isn't it racist to claim that?

It is a race issue, and no it is not racist to point that out.

There's an indian tribe in the Dakotas that has no place to get said voter id on its reservation. They have to bus 100 miles into town on the one day a month the bmv office is open to buy their id.

[hanger4]

Actually that isn't the way provisional ballots work in practice here in Ohio. You have to go down to the boe and defend your ballot, and that second trip to vote is a trip that few make--which is the chilling effect racists were hoping for in order to minimize the minority vote.

The provisional ballots from the California primary, for example, have yet to be counted weeks later.

But you knew that, right?

And yet they voted.

But you knew that, right ??

[Subdermal]

No.

Why isn't it racist? It sounds racist. You should not be a racist. It's embarrassing for your position to plead a claim that minorities are somehow different than whites regarding acquisition of an ID.

[Bethere]

And yet they voted.

But you knew that, right ??

If it didn't count then they didn't vote.

[Bethere]

Why isn't it racist? It sounds racist. You should not be a racist. It's embarrassing for your position to plead a claim that minorities are somehow different than whites regarding acquisition of an ID.

Don't have a hematoma, Subderal!

It's OK to disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.

[Oboe]

It is a race issue, and no it is not racist to point that out.

There's an indian tribe in the Dakotas that has no place to get said voter id on its reservation. They have to bus 100 miles into town on the one day a month the bmv office is open to buy their id.

Then that's what they have to do, or, like me, I just renew mine online. No ID, no vote.

[Subdermal]

It is a race issue, and no it is not racist to point that out.

There's an indian tribe in the Dakotas that has no place to get said voter id on its reservation. They have to bus 100 miles into town on the one day a month the bmv office is open to buy their id.

:biglaugh:

Nice post edit.

Link to discuss this horrible circumstance you're citing, since membership of a Tribe requires ID with which to begin. (http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/xraca/documents/text/idc1-029262.pdf)

So tell me! How do these Dakota Indians receive their benefits without their ID?

:biglaugh:

You're FOS. Totally.

[Subdermal]

Don't have a hematoma, Subderal!

It's OK to disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.

Please tell us how a Tribe member of voting age receives his benefits without ID. Feel free to peruse the prior link.

Your argument is dead, and apparently endures constant review by zombies.

[hanger4]

If it didn't count then they didn't vote.

How many didn't count ?? For that matter how many can't produce one of the many forms required by Ohio ??

[hanger4]

Don't have a hematoma, Subderal!

It's OK to disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.

Lacking an argument again. Seems to be a common occurrence for you.

Try harder.

[AeonPax]

`
`
In Wisconsin, the voter ID law is in force. In all honesty, it's just not an issue here that resonates with black voters, leastways, to my perspective, in Milwaukee. It's the younger black youth who do not vote because they will not get any ID's. It's like a street creed. There are kids I know only by their street name, which is cool but I cannot hire them. You need certain ID's to get a job. The far left is fond of pointing out the social inequalities of voter ID but absolutely fail at grasping the idea that the black youth, wants to be totally off the grid, so to speak. But that is their choice, which includes ID's needed to drive, own a car, own a gun, etc, etc, etc. I hope people will excuse me while I flick off the PC democrats and their elitist ideas for a better America.

[Bethere]

:biglaugh:

Nice post edit.

Link to discuss this horrible circumstance you're citing, since membership of a Tribe requires ID with which to begin. (http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/xraca/documents/text/idc1-029262.pdf)

So tell me! How do these Dakota Indians receive their benefits without their ID?

:biglaugh:

You're FOS. Totally.


CDIB don't always include a residential address.

But you knew that, right?

[Bethere]

How many didn't count ?? For that matter how many can't produce one of the many forms required by Ohio ??Votes that don't count: More than 200k provisional primary ballots discarded in 2016. https://www.rt.com/usa/347208-provisional-ballots-primaries-california/

[Bethere]

How many didn't count ?? For that matter how many can't produce one of the many forms required by Ohio ??


Ohio is "exemplary" in that we are one of just 3 states which counted more than 74% of provisional ballots.

https://www.rt.com/usa/347208-provisional-ballots-primaries-california/

Your case stinks.

[hanger4]

Ohio is "exemplary" in that we are one of just 3 states which counted more than 74% of provisional ballots.

https://www.rt.com/usa/347208-provisional-ballots-primaries-california/

Your case stinks.

Actually my case demonstrated your insistence that voter ID is a poll tax was bogus. Your example from your own state (cost of ID) was especially bogus.

[Subdermal]

CDIB don't always include a residential address.

But you knew that, right?

Always? And you get this...where?

:biglaugh:

[Subdermal]

`
`
In Wisconsin, the voter ID law is in force. In all honesty, it's just not an issue here that resonates with black voters, leastways, to my perspective, in Milwaukee. It's the younger black youth who do not vote because they will not get any ID's. It's like a street creed. There are kids I know only by their street name, which is cool but I cannot hire them. You need certain ID's to get a job. The far left is fond of pointing out the social inequalities of voter ID but absolutely fail at grasping the idea that the black youth, wants to be totally off the grid, so to speak. But that is their choice, which includes ID's needed to drive, own a car, own a gun, etc, etc, etc. I hope people will excuse me while I flick off the PC democrats and their elitist ideas for a better America.

Lynn Adelman has overturned Voter ID - for the time being. It is being challenged, and will be reversed. Again.

[stjames1_53]

and here all this time I thought the OP was about straight ticket voting being unconstitutional............
now the libs want the illegals to vote and holding that vote back is unconstitutional.................with no ID, one should NOT be allowed to vote.
Personally, the only people that should be allowed to vote are property owners, IMO
Easier to count those votes than trying to filter the chaff

[Bethere]

Actually my case demonstrated your insistence that voter ID is a poll tax was bogus. Your example from your own state (cost of ID) was especially bogus.

All of the other id's required them to be something that wasn't required by the constitution to vote.

So you don't need a state id if you own house or are a member of the military.

Those exemptions are discriminatory against people who don't own a house or aren't members of the military.

All you have to do to win the voter id argument is to make them free and easy to obtain.

A good start here in ohio would be to honor the voter registration card as a voter id.

I think we both know why that is not the case now.

[Bethere]

Always? And you get this...where?

:biglaugh:

I said 'don't always. '

I am never responsible for what you think I said.

[hanger4]

All of the other id's required them to be something that wasn't required by the constitution to vote.

So you don't need a state id if you own house or are a member of the military.

Those exemptions are discriminatory against people who don't own a house or aren't members of the military.

All you have to do to win the voter id argument is to make them free and easy to obtain.

A good start here in ohio would be to honor the voter registration card as a voter id.

I think we both know why that is not the case now.

Citizenship is a requirement to vote. Proof of citizenship is not a restriction. The right to vote is subject to reasonable restrictions as is the right to keep and bear arms.

[Bethere]

Citizenship is a requirement to vote. Proof of citizenship is not a restriction. The right to vote is subject to reasonable restrictions as is the right to keep and bear arms.

A driver's license is not proof of citizenship. Neither is a utility bill, concealed carry card, state id, etc.

[Peter1469]

We should make it harder to vote, not easier.

If you are voting because Candidate X has nice hair you ought not have the right to vote.

If you are voting because someone told you it was a good idea yet you don't know what the issues are, you ought not have the right to vote.

[Bethere]

We should make it harder to vote, not easier.

If you are voting because Candidate X has nice hair you ought not have the right to vote.

If you are voting because someone told you it was a good idea yet you don't know what the issues are, you ought not have the right to vote.

If you are 18, not a felon, and an American citizen you have the right to vote.

People like you are not empowered to sit in judgment.

[stjames1_53]

If you are 18, not a felon, and an American citizen you have the right to vote.

People like you are not empowered to sit in judgment.

so, how does one "prove" citizenship?

[hanger4]

A driver's license is not proof of citizenship. Neither is a utility bill, concealed carry card, state id, etc.

Social Security cards are.

[Peter1469]

If you are 18, not a felon, and an American citizen you have the right to vote.

People like you are not empowered to sit in judgment.

You are correct. I was only suggesting improvements to the current system.

When vapid droolers vote they dilute the vote of citizens.

[maineman]

Citizenship is a requirement to vote. Proof of citizenship is not a restriction. The right to vote is subject to reasonable restrictions as is the right to keep and bear arms.

wouldn't a voter registration card be proof of citizenship?

[Bethere]

Social Security cards are.

Social Security cards are not valid id's for voting.

You are so easy.

[Bethere]

You are correct. I was only suggesting improvements to the current system.

When vapid droolers vote they dilute the vote of citizens.

When vapid droolers vote they are most likely exercising their constitutional rights.

[Bethere]

wouldn't a voter registration card be proof of citizenship?

It is irrelevant to this discussion as they aren't valid voter id in the vast majority of, if not all, jurisdictions.

Of course, it SHOULD BE.

[Bethere]

so, how does one "prove" citizenship?

By asking if they are citizens. If they aren't and they vote, feel free to prosecute.

Considering that there is virtually no voter fraud in this country the way things are the burden of proof should be on the accuser.

[hanger4]

Social Security cards are not valid id's for voting.

You are so easy.

You need them for proof of citizenship, you know, for acquiring those other forms of ID.

[Oboe]

By asking if they are citizens. If they aren't and they vote, feel free to prosecute.

Considering that there is virtually no voter fraud in this country the way things are the burden of proof should be on the accuser.

Bullshot.

[hanger4]

It is irrelevant to this discussion as they aren't valid voter id in the vast majority of, if not all, jurisdictions.

Of course, it SHOULD BE.

Reckon why they aren't ??

[maineman]

any voter fraud in America is statistically bug dust.

[Oboe]

any voter fraud in America is statistically bug dust.

Trump 2016.

[Peter1469]

When vapid droolers vote they are most likely exercising their constitutional rights.That is what I want to change. Tighten up voting requirements so we don't have idiots messing up the results.

[Peter1469]

any voter fraud in America is statistically bug dust.

Untrue (http://blackboxvoting.org/).

[Subdermal]

By asking if they are citizens. If they aren't and they vote, feel free to prosecute.

Wait. Your notion of proof is waiting for the answer to a question?

:biglaugh:


Considering that there is virtually no voter fraud in this country the way things are the burden of proof should be on the accuser.

That is absolutely untrue. I've posted two links which contain proof of considerable voter fraud, and Peter posted a link with an amalgam of proof.

You aren't being honest.

[maineman]

Untrue (http://blackboxvoting.org/).

which one of those irrelevant articles supposedly proves your point?

[Peter1469]

which one of those irrelevant articles supposedly proves your point?

Read first. Understand second. Then post.

I will wait.

[maineman]

Read first. Understand second. Then post.

I will wait.

I have no intention of reading a fucking book. If you have one of those nine articles that you think discusses voter fraud, identify it for me, and I will read it... or not, and then I won't.

[Bethere]

That is what I want to change. Tighten up voting requirements so we don't have idiots messing up the results.

If you are affected by government you deserve a vote.

Whether you are impressed with their intellectual preparation is meaningless. I am not impressed by YOUR intellectual preparation, but I would have gone to war to defend your right to vote.

[Bethere]

You need them for proof of citizenship, you know, for acquiring those other forms of ID.

A social security card is not proof of citizenship.

[stjames1_53]

I have no intention of reading a $#@!ing book. If you have one of those nine articles that you think discusses voter fraud, identify it for me, and I will read it... or not, and then I won't.

of course not...........that is why you're voting for Hildebeast. No effort required when Hillary does your thinking for you
http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M8677e9de00d791807cfdaa73682c557do0&w=289&h=165&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0