Voter ID

techieny

Conservative
Jun 19, 2011
2,553
623
48
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!
 
Perhaps you have missed the umpteen thousand other topics we've had on Voter ID in the past month.

.
 
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!

Because unlike driving, voting is a fundamental right. And ‘the left’ is more interested in protecting voting rights rather than trying to find ways to prevent Americans from voting.

You’re likely not stupid, but indeed partisan, and buy into the myth that ‘voter fraud’ is costing republicans elections.
 
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!

Most illegal aliens don't have ID. Those who live in states that offer anyone a license can vote because they are registered through motor voter registration.

Elderly people can still have valid IDs even if they don't drive. I wonder how many people who are still in their right mind will bother to register to vote or get themselves to the polls or request an absentee ballot if getting an ID is too much trouble. I think states who passed voter ID laws were offering IDs for free. No matter how old you are, you can still prove who you are if you are a citizen.

I just do not buy the fact that there are people who have no form of ID, yet are not working or taking some form of government aid. Whether a person has a job or is in a state nursing facility, they have their number. A valid Social Security number and/or birth certificate should suffice as ID. If elderly people had a driver's license in the past, the state has their information, so they would hand in the last ID they obtained, even if expired. The left claims there are people who don't work, don't take welfare, don't write checks, drive or any other thing that requires an ID. If that is so, how did they find these people because they can't buy houses or rent or even get a phone without ID? How do these people survive without an income or welfare?

The answer is that they are illegal aliens using a fake name and a stolen social security number and they would not be able to obtain a legal ID. Many are working or even buying homes using other people's numbers and identities. If they attempted to get a state driver's license using the same information they use to get their jobs or loans, they might get arrested for identity theft. The DMV has made the documents harder to duplicate and now they do a check when you renew or get one for the first time. One thing they check for is to see if someone else is already using your information. That is why the left refuses to accept voter ID laws. It would stop a lot of illegal voting and it would alert the public to just how rampant identity theft is in this country. It's staggering and the government does nothing.
 
Last edited:
A birth certificate is not free, and it takes time to get one. Some states charge a hundred dollars for a birth certificate.

You need a birth certificate to get most forms of government ID.

So the claim that IDs are free and easy to get is bullshit.

That is why a Republican judge in Pennsylvania halted their Voter ID law for this election. The ID requirements were too restrictive for everyone who needs an ID to get one in time.




.
 
Speaking of "most", most voter fraud occurs long before election day. In person voter fraud is practically negligible, and a very small percentage of those cases would be stopped by Voter ID. In person fraud cases such as someone voting in two different states would not be stopped by Voter ID. The only in person voter fraud that would be stopped by Voter ID is if someone voted as a dead person, and that problem can be solved simply by keeping voter registration rolls properly updated. Key word: properly. So before you mention Florida, you should know that Florida did it improperly and purged eligible citizens from their rolls. That is disenfranchisment.

There is no fraud which only Voter ID could prevent or catch. Voter ID brings no added value to the voting process. It does prevent some eligible citizens from voting, and that is a fact, and that is its real purpose.

Voter ID is a "solution" in search of a problem, as some judges have said.

Here is a birth certificate application for the state of CT: http://www.ct.gov/dph/LIB/dph/hisr/vr/vs_39b.pdf

It costs $20 to get a birth certificate.

The turnaround time is 6 weeks: DPH: State Vital Records Office - Birth Certificates


Voter ID proponents believe we need more government bureaucracy and hurdles in the exercising of our constitutional rights. They must also believe that more government bureacracy means more efficiency.

That's why I call them UnConservatives. They sure as shit aren't conservatives.




.
 
Last edited:
Yeah....I don't have an issue with requiring ID to vote. I didn't agree with the way the GOP was trying to implement it immediately.

It seemed to be more of an issue of voter suppression than fraud prevention.
 
Ben Stein pointed out American "citizens" have to now prove they have health insurance or pay a fine. Meanwhile non-citizens don't need to prove they are a citizen.

So American citizens prove who they are and buy health insurance, while non-citizens don't have to prove who they are and will get free healthcare.....fucking insane.
 
Granny says, "Dat's right - if dey ain't citizens, den dey shouldn't be able to vote...
:cool:
Judge: Florida voter purge can go on
Judge rules Fla. may remove noncitizens from voter rolls 90 days before an election
A federal judge in Fort Lauderdale ruled Thursday that Florida’s purge of potential noncitizens on the voter rolls can go on. U.S. District Judge William J. Zloch said federal law does not prohibit the state from removing voters who were never lawfully eligible to register in the first place. Florida has identified 198 voters as potential noncitizens — among an estimated 11.4 million registered voters — and sent the names to independent county elections supervisors for their review. A coalition of liberal-leaning voting-rights groups had asked the court to halt the purge, arguing in a hearing Monday that federal law prohibits purging the voter rolls 90 days before an election.

Attorneys for Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner countered that the state could purge noncitizens at any time because they should have never been on the voter rolls. “We’re very pleased another federal court has ruled that Florida’s efforts to remove noncitizens from the voter rolls are lawful and in the best interest of Florida voters,” Detzner said in a statement Thursday. “Ensuring ineligible voters can’t cast a ballot is a fundamental aspect of conducting fair elections.” Zloch’s ruling follows one issued by a Tallahassee federal judge in June in a separate case filed by the U.S. Justice Department. That judge also opined that the 90-day purge prohibition in the 1993 National Voter Registration Act applies to people lawfully registered to vote, such as felons, and is silent as to noncitizens.

Zloch reached a similar conclusion. The 90-day purge prohibition, he ruled, applies to voters who have recently changed their address, but not to people who should not be on the rolls, such as minors or noncitizens. “Certainly, the NVRA does not require the State to idle on the sidelines until a noncitizen violates the law before the State can act,” he wrote. “And surely the NVRA does not require the State to wait until after the critical juncture — when the vote has been cast and the harm has been fully realized — to address what it views as nothing short of ‘voter fraud.’” Gov. Rick Scott’s administration has cited fraud as the reason for moving forward with the purge, despite critics’ concerns that lawful voters will be wrongly blocked from voting. Some of the people on the list of 198 potential noncitizens, based on a federal citizenship database, have told the Miami Herald they were citizens. Others said they are not.

About 58 percent of those on the list are minorities — 41 percent Hispanic and 17 percent black. A poll released Thursday and conducted last week by Latino Decisions for America’s Voice, a Washington D.C.-based immigrant-rights group, found that 45 percent of Hispanic voters in Florida are “very concerned” over the noncitizen voter purge. “What we’re saying is that going after U.S. citizens with Hispanic and Haitian last names and potentially disenfranchising them is not the right way,” said Jose Suarez, communications director for 1199 SEIU United Healthcare Workers East, one of the groups that sued over the purge. “The state has to find a better way.”

Read more here: Judge: Florida voter purge can go on - Florida - MiamiHerald.com
 
Last edited:
Speaking of "most", most voter fraud occurs long before election day. In person voter fraud is practically negligible, and a very small percentage of those cases would be stopped by Voter ID. In person fraud cases such as someone voting in two different states would not be stopped by Voter ID. The only in person voter fraud that would be stopped by Voter ID is if someone voted as a dead person, and that problem can be solved simply by keeping voter registration rolls properly updated. Key word: properly. So before you mention Florida, you should know that Florida did it improperly and purged eligible citizens from their rolls. That is disenfranchisment.

There is no fraud which only Voter ID could prevent or catch. Voter ID brings no added value to the voting process. It does prevent some eligible citizens from voting, and that is a fact, and that is its real purpose.

Voter ID is a "solution" in search of a problem, as some judges have said.

Here is a birth certificate application for the state of CT: http://www.ct.gov/dph/LIB/dph/hisr/vr/vs_39b.pdf

It costs $20 to get a birth certificate.

The turnaround time is 6 weeks: DPH: State Vital Records Office - Birth Certificates


Voter ID proponents believe we need more government bureaucracy and hurdles in the exercising of our constitutional rights. They must also believe that more government bureacracy means more efficiency.

That's why I call them UnConservatives. They sure as shit aren't conservatives.




.

There you go with that "in person voter fraud" red herring again. There are MILLIONS of potential fraudulent votes just waiting to be cast in the illegal immigrant community, and you ignore them like they don't even exist. These people have been voting illegally and will continue to vote illegally until they are required to present a valid, state-issued ID.
 
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!

Even when every assurance is made that ID's will be made easy to get, and even provided for free to those who can't afford them. The Left still opposes voter ID. one can only conclude the real reason they oppose it, is because they want people who should not be able to legally Vote, to be able to vote.
 
thimgsthatrequireid.jpg


This list isn't all-inclusive...
 
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!
because the left wants illegal immigrants and others not qualified to vote to have the right to vote because without them they would lose.
 
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!

Because unlike driving, voting is a fundamental right. And ‘the left’ is more interested in protecting voting rights rather than trying to find ways to prevent Americans from voting.

You’re likely not stupid, but indeed partisan, and buy into the myth that ‘voter fraud’ is costing republicans elections.
Not a myth, and only reason libtards hate voter id is they hate fair elections because they would lose.
 
C_Clayton_Jones said:
Because unlike driving, voting is a fundamental right.

Is it? Who told you that? Can you direct me to that section of the constitution?

I might argue that voting is a greater responsibility than driving, for instance. In my opinion, another persons inability to vote competently is an even greater danger than their inability to operate a vehicle competently. So how can we expect someone who is not capable of obtaining an ID to have even a minimal working knowledge of how our government is structured or how it operates, let alone have an understanding of the key issues or points of contention in a given election?...but that isn't even the reason for proposed voter ID laws, is it?

It is about preventing voter fraud. Election fraud is a real problem. Democrats try to downplay the severity of voter fraud, but that is likely because for them it is more of a strategy than a crime.

As is the case with so many things these days, the leftist claim that requiring an ID to vote places an unfair burden on minorities is an insult to those same minorities and exposes the left as the real home of bigotry and racism. If I'm wrong, and the left is correct, then that is an indictment of many segments of our society as racists, isn't it? Because one can not even cash their own paycheck in this country without a photo ID.

C_Clayton_Jones said:
and ‘the left’ is more interested in protecting voting rights rather than trying to find ways to prevent Americans from voting.

You’re likely not stupid, but indeed partisan, and buy into the myth that ‘voter fraud’ is costing republicans elections.

"The left" is complety dependent on being able to commit large scale voter fraud. Their chances of winning a national election without it in what has always been a center/right nation are slim and none. If you disagree, tell me what other reason they could possibly have for opposing so vehemently, a law aimed at protecting something we all can agree is worthy of protection: the integrity of the outcome of an election? Give me one GOOD reason.


Jeffrey
 
Why is this an issue. Most Americans has some form of ID. A drivers license, medicare card, social security card, etc. Who does the inability to produce ID disenfranchise? I just don't get it. Why does the left continue to support NOT producing ID when voting. Perhaps I'm just a stupid conservative!

Yes you are stupid. The left wants illegals voting and that's why they oppose voter ID. Everyone but you knows that.
 
This topic is interesting. I can say I never really thought of it witch is wrong. How have we gone this far and not needed Identification to vote. Every form of life needs it. If you get a job to get paid you need Identification. To get on a plane you need ID. But to vote you don't need ID. This law should of been enforced years ago
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top