Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities

[get_involved]

No Eric, voter ID's prevent fraud. Of course Democrats have come to rely on votes from dead people, ineligible people and illegal aliens. This poses a problem for them.

Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

 

[occupied]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

 

[Tank]

Anykind of law hurts minorities

 

[westwall]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

Why?

 

[occupied]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

Why?

How precious is your right to vote? When these laws are in place it will allow poll watchers to challenge the eligibility of people so much easier and invalidate their rights on BS grounds.

 

[occupied]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

Why?

Maybe I should be even clearer, the cost of robbing someone of their vote on a mere technicality is not worth the unquantifiable benefit of preventing fraudulent votes, not sure it is the problem some people make it out to be.

 

[get_involved]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

Why?

Maybe I should be even clearer, the cost of robbing someone of their vote on a mere technicality is not worth the unquantifiable benefit of preventing fraudulent votes, not sure it is the problem some people make it out to be.

Nobody is being "robbed" by not following the law. There is nothing complicated or unfair with voter ID laws like lefties like to portray. You lefties only want to follow the laws you like and think you are above the law. Robbing a candidate of being elected because of fraud is the real problem.

"Occupied"? I thought I smelled something. Goodnight.

 

[Tank]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZwng4omanI]CNN-Philly Man says he is voted a couple of times - YouTube[/ame]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

How in the hell does showing an ID disfranchise anyone? Well except those who are up to no good.,

 

[Mr.Nick]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

If you cant figure out how to obtain an ID than maybe you're just too fucking dumb to vote???

Considering all the voting fraud that goes on an ID requirement to vote is a good thing.

Besides, voter id laws disenfranchise no one...

Funny how I have to show an ID to buy my beer and cigarettes, however if you talk to some - showing an ID to elect the next president would be an atrocity..

There is no valid argument for NOT showing an ID to vote..

In theory I could register under 10 different names and vote 10 different times if I had to show no ID...

Progressives are opposed to voter ID laws because they strongly rely on voter fraud.

 

[frazzledgear]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

The claim that minorities can't possibly be expected to have a valid ID on them in order to vote is LUDICROUS and RACIST. But it is done for one reason only -it is to protect voter FRAUD, not to protect legitimate VOTERS.

Every right comes with responsibilities -without exception. None of your rights are more of a "right" under the Bill of Rights than another one. They are all our rights and none are considered less of a right than the next. You have a right to vote -you have the responsibility of providing the proof you do have that right -in order to protect YOU from those who would try to vote but do not have that right. Otherwise YOU, as the legitimate voter - are being harmed.

So saying any voting "rule" where X>0 is not worth the price of Y=0 is bullshit. You are defending measures that do the most HARM to legitimate voters -which begs the question why. The "its a terrible burden to have valid ID to vote" bullshit is just that and everyone knows it -TOTAL BULLSHIT.

We expect people who wish to exercise their right to own a gun to first provide...........valid ID. AND go through a waiting period so it is validated and checked! Wow -how is that even POSSIBLE when we know they can't possibly pull out a valid ID in order to VOTE? Gee, wouldn't it be unfairly hampering minorities to exercise their 2nd amendment rights by demanding valid ID from them in THAT instance? If we expect citizens to have that valid ID in order to exercise ONE right -then we sure as hell can expect them to have it to exercise another one. You can't get away with pretending one right is more important or more valuable to other people than another one. Not your call and it isn't that of government either so it is NEVER justified to pretend one right is more important than another one -which is exactly what the left does by insisting valid ID is required to exercise one right, but not another one. When it comes to voting, requiring valid ID protects the votes of those who actually have a right to vote. Otherwise your vote is diluted and YOUR right has actually been undermined! Liberals actually despise individual rights -and supporting measures that increases the likelihood of voter fraud is another way of diluting individual rights. If you have a right to vote -why would you support measures that guarantee the most voter fraud possible -unless you believe it provides you with an unfair advantage. One that comes by fucking over legal voters?

Government SHOULD filter out those who actually have no right to vote -and by doing so, it protects the votes being cast by those who really DO have a right to vote. Supporting measures that open the doors wide to voter fraud -means FUCKING OVER legitimate voters by diluting the power of their vote as much as possible. It is actually why Republicans don't have to just win a majority to win an election -they have to win by a large enough margin to overcome the widespread voter fraud. It is no more of a burden for anyone -regardless of their skin color, ethnic heritage, sexual orientation or gender -to provide a valid ID to exercise one right as it is to provide that same valid ID to exercise THIS right.

We all know the REAL reason leftists oppose requiring valid ID to exercise THIS particular right. Leftists clearly believe protecting voter fraud gives THEM an advantage by diluting and weakening the votes being cast by LEGITIMATE voters. Evidently they have no confidence that legitimate voters will vote their way -while those with no right to vote will. A form of treason in my book. We all know and see firsthand the sickening hypocrisy of the left as a matter of routine. If they weren't convinced they were the ones scamming the system, the ones fucking over legitimate voters and the primary beneficiaries of voter fraud -they would suddenly be appalled that government wasn't trying to protect the votes of those who had a right to vote and are being harmed by those who have no right to vote. The fact Democrats and Republicans are on opposite sides on this and the best the left can come up with to justify their position is the RACIST BULLSHIT that minorities can't possibly be expected to have valid ID in this country -a country that requires valid ID for everything from banking, driving, ALL government entitlement programs AND to exercise other rights - tells you everything you need to know about which is trying to protect those who have a right to vote -and those who are trying to protect voter fraud in order to harm those who have a right to vote. No in-between on this one.

 

[imbalance]

Can anyone post the specific laws that are disenfranchising minority voters? I read that entire article and all it cited was:

This year, eight states have passed laws that require voters to show identification at the polls. Two of those states, South Carolina and Texas, need so-called pre-clearance from the Justice Department or a court, which has not yet been granted. Some states are also rolling back early voting options and adding new registration procedures, while others are imposing rules that could make it more difficult for college students and the elderly to vote.

Read more: Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

If states must cooperate with procedural requirements in order to enact voter ID laws then fine, they need to follow the standard operating procedure and get it done in time. If they do, and the new voter ID laws are legally enacted and enforced/applied to every voter then there needs to be much more to the story for me to believe minorities are being disenfranchised. If you choose to go through life as an adult without having an ID then you have chosen not to participate in society. Voting is never perfectly convenient for anyone and if anything, not holding the election on the weekend 'disenfranchises' those of us with demanding 60hr/wk whitecollar non-union jobs.

If you want to spin voter ID laws as a voter fee (I don't think anyone honestly believes that btw) how about a compromise where those who find themselves disenfranchised by ID requirements can apply in person for a free voter ID prior to the election? If they can't provide sufficient documentation with their name or SSN, they can be given a unique "voter number" as a name to attach to their picture. A statewide voter facial recognition database would prevent multiple voter numbers from being issued to any one face.

 

[imbalance]

CNN-Philly Man says he is voted a couple of times - YouTube

lol to be fair I think the guy meant he showed up to get in line and vote multiple times rather than he actually voted multiple times. Like he showed up to vote at 8am saw the line was too long and left, came back at noon saw the line was too long and left, came back at 2pm saw the line was too long and left, etc etc

 

[FA_Q2]

Voter ID laws will disfranchise (X) amount of voters and prevent (Y) amount of fraudulent votes. Neither number is zero and there is no way of knowing the exact amounts. To my way of thinking any voting rule that results in (X>0) is not worth the price of (Y=0).

Why?

Maybe I should be even clearer, the cost of robbing someone of their vote on a mere technicality is not worth the unquantifiable benefit of preventing fraudulent votes, not sure it is the problem some people make it out to be.

'Disenfranchise' is not robbing nor is it even a concern. Voter registration, locations, the use of machines and the time/day/date of voting all can and does disenfranchise some people. Tough. If you want to vote a simple method has been provided for you. Having an ID is a requirement for almost anything in this country. You need one in order to cash a check, buy many items, drive or do any other of a myriad things but there never seems to be any problems with that. No, the only problem with having an ID seems to crop up when you need to limit voter fraud.

 

[Billy000]

No Eric, voter ID's prevent fraud. Of course Democrats have come to rely on votes from dead people, ineligible people and illegal aliens. This poses a problem for them.

Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

You way off base about voter fraud. Both Bush and Obama have conducted investigations into voter fraud and they turned up with nothing. VOTER FRAUD IS NOT AN ISSUE. Has their been cases of voter fraud? Of course, but it's so rare that it does not need to be controlled.

This Republican measure is completely political.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Why?

Maybe I should be even clearer, the cost of robbing someone of their vote on a mere technicality is not worth the unquantifiable benefit of preventing fraudulent votes, not sure it is the problem some people make it out to be.

'Disenfranchise' is not robbing nor is it even a concern. Voter registration, locations, the use of machines and the time/day/date of voting all can and does disenfranchise some people. Tough. If you want to vote a simple method has been provided for you. Having an ID is a requirement for almost anything in this country. You need one in order to cash a check, buy many items, drive or do any other of a myriad things but there never seems to be any problems with that. No, the only problem with having an ID seems to crop up when you need to limit voter fraud.

I know...

I don't see anyone bitching about having to have a drivers license to drive a car.... However when it comes to voting all of a sudden its a big ass controversy??..

IMO, one should have to take a civics exam to vote...

If a person doesn't know what the three branches of government are or what their powers are then they have no business voting in the first place..

It seems we have zero standards for voting, however we have standards for almost everything else... I have to take a vision test to get my drivers license renewed, hell way back when I had to take test to get my license...

If I want a loan from a bank I have to prove I can pay it back or show I have some sort of asset that can cover it.

However if you want to vote there are no prerequisites?

 

[imbalance]

No Eric, voter ID's prevent fraud. Of course Democrats have come to rely on votes from dead people, ineligible people and illegal aliens. This poses a problem for them.

Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

You way off base about voter fraud. Both Bush and Obama have conducted investigations into voter fraud and they turned up with nothing. VOTER FRAUD IS NOT AN ISSUE. Has their been cases of voter fraud? Of course, but it's so rare that it does not need to be controlled.

This Republican measure is completely political.

Well shit, if both Bush and Obama say so then it must be true.

 

[imbalance]

The Second Amendment says I have the right to keep and bear arms. Does that mean I can show up at my state capitol or anywhere else without ID or $ and demand a gun since it's my constitutional right to keep and bear arms?

 

[Billy000]

No Eric, voter ID's prevent fraud. Of course Democrats have come to rely on votes from dead people, ineligible people and illegal aliens. This poses a problem for them.

Eric Holder: Voter ID laws hurt minorities - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com

You way off base about voter fraud. Both Bush and Obama have conducted investigations into voter fraud and they turned up with nothing. VOTER FRAUD IS NOT AN ISSUE. Has their been cases of voter fraud? Of course, but it's so rare that it does not need to be controlled.

This Republican measure is completely political.

Well shit, if both Bush and Obama say so then it must be true.

Yes, it must. Because otherwise there isn't any point in assuming it's an issue.

 

[chanel]

Doug Ross's reaction: "Needle on Hypocrisy-Meter Breaks Off."

At some point during all these years of covering the voter-ID issue, you would think that someone in the press, much of which is unionized (specifically the Associated Press, which has the credit for the photo above), would have noted that unions at least occasionally and likely far more than occasionally require that members present a photo ID to be able to cast their ballots. Nope. How typically irresponsible.

Read more: Union Election Requires Photo ID; Politico Fails to Note Irony | NewsBusters.org