Voter ID laws boost democracy

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw]Paul Weyrich - "I don't want everybody to vote" (Goo Goo) - YouTube[/ame]
 
*shrug* I'm not the one suggesting states are incompetent at voter regulations. We go through this every 4 years, if they fuck it up every 4 years then clearly they shouldn't have that right.

I'd rather have 50 states (or in Obama's case 57 sates) regulate voting than concentrating in one Federal place. The Federal government can't be trusted as it is.

So does the fact Romney committed voter fraud bother you? You started a thread on voter fraud after all.

I don't read anything linked to Truthmatters. If you want to post the source to back you up, I'd be happy to take a look but I will not search through anything related to that idiot.
 
GOP Memo Admits Plan Could 'Keep Black Vote Down' - Los Angeles Times


In an Aug. 13 memo the court made public Friday, Kris Wolfe, the Republican National Committee Midwest political director, wrote Lanny Griffith, the committee's Southern political director, and said of the Louisiana campaigning:

"I know this race is really important to you. I would guess that this program will eliminate at least 60-80,000 folks from the rolls. . . . If it's a close race . . . which I'm assuming it is, this could keep the black vote down considerably."

Unseals Document

She said in the memorandum that the program had been approved by Gregory Graves, deputy political director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

The document, called Exhibit 13, was unsealed by U.S. District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise when lawyers for the Democratic National Committee said it was needed to question Wolfe.
 
Last edited:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/us/politics/03voting.html?_r=1


U.S. Judge Opposes Republicans on Elections
By JOHN SCHWARTZ

Published: December 2, 2009


The Republican National Committee will not be able to use election tactics that have been linked to suppression of voting by racial minorities without court supervision, a federal judge in New Jersey has ruled.



The measures, known as “ballot security” programs, were the subject of a lawsuit between the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee that ended with a consent decree in 1982. Under the agreement, some election tactics could only be used with court approval, including the creation of voter challenge lists, photographing voters at the polls and posting off-duty police and sheriffs officers at the polls in minority precincts.

The restrictions on the Republican National Committee were extended by the courts to cover the nation in 1987.
 
Last edited:
Florida Central Voter File - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


James Lee's testimony

On 17 April 2001, James Lee testified, before the McKinney panel, that the state had given DBT the directive to add to the purge list people who matched at least 90% of a last name. DBT objected, knowing that this would produce a huge number of false positives (non-felons).[7]

Lee went on saying that the state then ordered DBT to shift to an even lower threshold of 80% match, allowing also names to be reversed (thus a person named Thomas Clarence could be taken to be the same as Clarence Thomas). Besides this, middle initials were skipped, Jr. and Sr. suffixes dropped, and some nicknames and aliases were added to puff up the list.

"DBT told state officials", testified Lee, "that the rules for creating the [purge] list would mean a significant number of people who were not deceased, not registered in more than one county, or not a felon, would be included on the list. DBT made suggestions to reduce the numbers of eligible voters included on the list". According to Lee, to this suggestion the state told the company, "Forget about it".

"The people who worked on this (for DBT) are very adamant... they told them what would happen", said Lee. "The state expected the county supervisors to be the failsafe." Lee said his company will never again get involved in cleansing voting rolls. "We are not confident any of the methods used today can guarantee legal voters will not be wrongfully denied the right to vote", Lee told a group of Atlanta-area black lawmakers in March 2001
 
Since we all agree states are apparently incompetent when it comes to regulating voting, it should no longer be a state issue. Take that power out of their hands since they are having such trouble and give it to the fed to regulate.

We don't all agree, and when it comes to incompetency, nobody does that better than the federal government. It would take an Amendment to the Constitution to change the present system. Good luck with that.
 
They have done this for decades to win elections


The fewer Americans who vote the better the republicans do
 
Imagine if the the current Federal Government controlled the voting. Obama and his henchman would have the election rigged and won before the first debate...Chicago style.

Got it, your ok with state officials changing laws to favor their base.

No, I'm favor of EVERYONE having to show I.D. when they vote. Validated I.D.! Not something easily forged.
 
[Pant, pant, pant, sweat..] OK, here you go:
Meanwhile, Romney appears to have escaped relatively unsinged from the apparently unrelated revelation that he may have committed voter fraud in January 2010, when – despite not owning a house in Massachusetts and having given every appearance of having moved to California – he registered and voted in the Massachusetts special election to replace the deceased Senator Ted Kennedy.
 

Newtons_cradle_animation_book_2.gif
 
Don't have much of a problem with showing my ID when I want to vote. It's not a hard thing to do, nor was it a hard thing to obtain. It costs 25 bucks thereabouts to get an ID here, even the poorest people I've seen around here at least have that much at one time or another. And because they are so poor, voting for candidates who do not care about them is the last thing on their minds. And so they don't bother to vote, which is why all of this outrage from the left confuses me. They're gnashing their teeth about folks that just don't care about this election or any other.


Game, set, match...you hit the nail right on the head. The only people opposed to showing I.D. are people who likely shouldn't be voting in the first place.

No I.D. = FRAUD

Well that's part of my point. The people opposed to showing ID already have IDs to which they can use to vote. We've heard absolutely nothing from the people who are actually at the center of this issue and I find that interesting. Why is that? Because they don't really care about this election or any other and to be absolutely honest, I don't blame them. If I was struggling to make ends meet, I wouldn't give a damn about what rich, lying politicians are saying either when it's clear that they don't really want to help make anything better.
 
The Challenge of Obtaining Voter Identification | Brennan Center for Justice


Ten states now have unprecedented restrictive voter ID laws. Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin all require citizens to produce specific types of government-issued photo identification before they can cast a vote that will count. Legal precedent requires these states to provide free photo ID to eligible voters who do not have one. Unfortunately, these free IDs are not equally accessible to all voters. This report is the first comprehensive assessment of the difficulties that eligible voters face in obtaining free photo ID.
 
[Pant, pant, pant, sweat..] OK, here you go:
Meanwhile, Romney appears to have escaped relatively unsinged from the apparently unrelated revelation that he may have committed voter fraud in January 2010, when – despite not owning a house in Massachusetts and having given every appearance of having moved to California – he registered and voted in the Massachusetts special election to replace the deceased Senator Ted Kennedy.


If he did, he should have been called out on it and punished accordingly. Since it was known and I assume proven that he did, and nothing was done, then there is nothing more to say two years later.

He was one man casting one vote...his own. He didn't make an attempt to vote multiple times or deceive anyone if in fact that is what he tried to do.. which he didn't.


Why don't you address dogs, (the one Obama ate can no longer vote of course) cats and dead people on Democratic voter rolls.
 
Last edited:

A link to a Truthmatters post... Too funny!!!!:clap2:

Voter fraud is voter fraud. Do you not agree?

Yes I do... That is why I cannot understand why showing a simple ID to vote is such a major problem for people... Unless of course people favor election fraud. Nobody is being disenfranchised, we need to show ID's in all walks of our lives. Show me a poor person with an EBT card who doesn't have an ID card... Ridiculous.
 

Forum List

Back
Top