Get out & vote!

[LoneLaugher]

I think that some liberals would in fact turn someone in that they knew was voting fraudulently even if that person was wearing an Obama tee shirt. I consider Deanie to be a knee jerk liberal idiot who would find someway of excusing just about ANY behavior if it was going to lead to a vote for Barry.

Well....your love fest with Deanie is irrelevant. You have shown yourself to be fairly knee-jerk yourself here.

Yeah, us conservatives that are pro-choice and don't have a problem with same sex marriage or stricter gun control laws are real "knee jerkers", Laugher! I pose a simple question of why it's "unreasonable" to ask for a valid form of ID to cast a vote when people are asked to provide multiple forms of ID to conduct everyday transactions and I'm a "knee jerk" conservative? That's amusing.

See post #31

 

[Peach]

Well....your love fest with Deanie is irrelevant. You have shown yourself to be fairly knee-jerk yourself here.

Yeah, us conservatives that are pro-choice and don't have a problem with same sex marriage or stricter gun control laws are real "knee jerkers", Laugher! I pose a simple question of why it's "unreasonable" to ask for a valid form of ID to cast a vote when people are asked to provide multiple forms of ID to conduct everyday transactions and I'm a "knee jerk" conservative? That's amusing.

See post #31

aren't voting improperly.
***************************
One could run a marathon with that; again, the poor & disabled do not have equal access to PHOTO ID. I do, and lost mine for a few hours three days ago. The problem THIS country faces is not ENOUGH people exercising this fundamental right. IF provisional ballots are available & WILL BE verified by the rolls, not a problem. But imaginary busloads of phantom UNION or BUSINESS "frauds" are just that. IMAGINARY problems. Florida now has early voting, which can help, still, more restriction reeks of poll taxes and literacy tests.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You can quote caselaw until the cows come home, Peach and that won't change the fundamental absurdity of someone saying that asking for valid ID before letting someone vote is an infringement on the rights of citizens when those very same citizens are asked for valid ID for countless other activities every single day.

Those ‘countless other activities’ aren’t a fundamental right, the comparison is irrelevant. As the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, the precedent established by that case law is the only thing relevant.

Each ID requirement law should be subject to review, it should be free of animus and it should be predicated on objective evidence, evidence which is clearly lacking with regard to incidents of actual voter fraud.

 

[Peach]

Those ‘countless other activities’ aren’t a fundamental right, the comparison is irrelevant. As the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, the precedent established by that case law is the only thing relevant.

Each ID requirement law should be subject to review, it should be free of animus and it should be predicated on objective evidence, evidence which is clearly lacking with regard to incidents of actual voter fraud.
__________________
All the "illegal" voters will be racing around madly, county to county, state to state, and that will alter election results. It does not seem plausible.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

All the "illegal" voters will be racing around madly, county to county, state to state, and that will alter election results. It does not seem plausible.

Not only is it implausible, but it’s non-existent.

For example:

[L]ast week, the South Carolina State Elections Commission returned from its perilous mission to find zombie voters and – surprise! – did not find any.

The great deceased-voter hunt began when South Carolina’s Republican Attorney General, Alan Wilson, tried to defend his state’s new voter ID law by claiming that 900 dead people had voted in “recent elections.” (Mr. Wilson used data from the Department of Motor Vehicles, an institution all Americans know is beyond reproach.)

Republicans nearly always use voter fraud as a pretext for ID laws. When Democrats point out that they have an unfair impact on the poor, the elderly and students, they shrug their shoulders. (Photo IDs aren’t free, and obtaining them can be a hardship for working people, as well as individuals in rural areas who don’t own cars. Student IDs are not considered valid for voting in some states.)

It was pretty obvious that these allegations were just silly, but once they were made the elections commission was obliged to follow up, so it investigated 207 cases of allegedly dead people voting in the 2010 elections.

Of those cases, 106 were clerical errors by poll workers; 56 were “bad data matching,” which means the motor vehicles folks were wrong in assuming the voters were dead; 32 were cases in which someone was listed as voting but did not actually vote; and three were absentee ballots cast by voters who died before Election Day. That’s 197.

That leaves 10 questionable ballots where polling lists were missing or signatures were confusing, or … well, who cares. The dead did not vote in South Carolina in 2010.

Mr. Wilson accused the elections commission of drawing “premature conclusions,” which of course he didn’t do in the first place. And his office announced they’d be looking at the 693 suspicious votes cast before 2010. We don’t know how many years back that list extends. I draw some comfort from knowing it probably won’t reach further than 1868, when South Carolina re-entered the Union.

I’d brush this off as a comical waste of time, and taxpayers’ money, if the issue were not so deadly serious. The proponents of voter ID laws and other barriers to the ballot are trying to suppress participation in the most important democratic ritual. The Obama Justice Department, fortunately, is trying to stop them, but it’s unclear which side the courts will take.

South Carolina Finds No Evidence of Voter Fraud - NYTimes.com