Asa Hutchinson Turned Away from Polls Because of Voter ID Law

[edthecynic]

Asa Hutchinson was turned away from the polls because he didn’t have proper ID as required under Arkansas’s Voter ID Law.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8dfQq8SZJ0]Asa Hutchinson Turned Away from Polls Because of Voter ID Law - YouTube[/ame]

 

[The Rabbi]

I had no idea he was black. Because we know voter ID is only to suppress the black vote.

 

[depotoo]

Good. He should have known better.

 

[Amelia]

 

[depotoo]

Guess he didn't pull a Wendy Davis or Alec Baldwin, since it isn't running rampant through the left media and blogosphere. Good for him!

 

[g5000]

Guess he didn't pull a Wendy Davis or Alec Baldwin, since it isn't running rampant through the left media and blogosphere. Good for him!

Don't want to make a scene while being hoist by one's own petard, you see.

 

[g5000]

I had no idea he was black. Because we know voter ID is only to suppress the black vote.

Fallacy of the inverse.

Asa clearly wanted to vote fraudulently.

 

[Avatar4321]

So? He has two choices, he can go home and get his id or not vote.

 

[The Rabbi]

I had no idea he was black. Because we know voter ID is only to suppress the black vote.

Fallacy of the inverse.

Asa clearly wanted to vote fraudulently.

Wrong.

He was not eligible to vote by reason of not being able to indentify himself. Just lke anyone else. So the argument that it is solely for suppression of black votes is a failure. It is to maintain the integrity of the ballot box. Something Democrats oppose.

 

[Stephanie]

I guess it's the laws fault he forgot his ID
Good grief just silly nonsense over a person needing an ID to vote, you need one for everything else you do in life..

and how fortunate someone was there to video tape it

the propaganda coming at us is sickening

 

[The T]

I had no idea he was black. Because we know voter ID is only to suppress the black vote.

Fallacy of the inverse.

Asa clearly wanted to vote fraudulently.

Wrong.

He was not eligible to vote by reason of not being able to indentify himself. Just lke anyone else. So the argument that it is solely for suppression of black votes is a failure. It is to maintain the integrity of the ballot box. Something Democrats oppose.

And the only way they win. Period.

 

[The T]

So? He has two choices, he can go home and get his id or not vote.

But...but...it's such an imposition...

 

[norwegen]

You mean a right can be denied on account of ID?

I know a privilege can, but a right?

Weird.

 

[emilynghiem]

There are some places that let you go ahead and vote,
and allow 10 days to validate your ID for your vote to count.

I think that makes more sense, and doesn't block people at the polls where
they miss their chance to vote, but gives some leeway.

Asa Hutchinson was turned away from the polls because he didn’t have proper ID as required under Arkansas’s Voter ID Law.

Asa Hutchinson Turned Away from Polls Because of Voter ID Law - YouTube

If voting were organized where parties took responsibility for their membership
and platforms, including funding the policies they push for their members,
we would have less problems with accountability.

If parties commit fraud or their members don't pay taxes to support their programs,
that problem remains internal with that party and shouldn't have to affect other parties.
If your party signs up a bunch of crooks who want to free ride off others,
then your party takes responsibility for educating, supporting and funding those members.

parties that require members to be self-sufficient and pay back what they borrow (and/or provide training and mentorship to follow educational and business plans to all members to become stable) could implement more sustainable programs run at a lower costs because of the standard of financial responsibility required to participate.

 

[The Rabbi]

You mean a right can be denied on account of ID?

I know a privilege can, but a right?

Weird.

Try buying a gun without one.

 

[MaxGrit]

There are some places that let you go ahead and vote,
and allow 10 days to validate your ID for your vote to count.

I think that makes more sense, and doesn't block people at the polls where
they miss their chance to vote, but gives some leeway.

Asa Hutchinson was turned away from the polls because he didn’t have proper ID as required under Arkansas’s Voter ID Law.

Asa Hutchinson Turned Away from Polls Because of Voter ID Law - YouTube

If voting were organized where parties took responsibility for their membership
and platforms, including funding the policies they push for their members,
we would have less problems with accountability.

If parties commit fraud or their members don't pay taxes to support their programs,
that problem remains internal with that party and shouldn't have to affect other parties.
If your party signs up a bunch of crooks who want to free ride off others,
then your party takes responsibility for educating, supporting and funding those members.

parties that require members to be self-sufficient and pay back what they borrow (and/or provide training and mentorship to follow educational and business plans to all members to become stable) could implement more sustainable programs run at a lower costs because of the standard of financial responsibility required to participate.

There's a name for that: nation-states.

 

[depotoo]

There are some places that let you go ahead and vote,
and allow 10 days to validate your ID for your vote to count.

I think that makes more sense, and doesn't block people at the polls where
they miss their chance to vote, but gives some leeway.

Asa Hutchinson was turned away from the polls because he didn’t have proper ID as required under Arkansas’s Voter ID Law.

Asa Hutchinson Turned Away from Polls Because of Voter ID Law - YouTube

If voting were organized where parties took responsibility for their membership
and platforms, including funding the policies they push for their members,
we would have less problems with accountability.

If parties commit fraud or their members don't pay taxes to support their programs,
that problem remains internal with that party and shouldn't have to affect other parties.
If your party signs up a bunch of crooks who want to free ride off others,
then your party takes responsibility for educating, supporting and funding those members.

parties that require members to be self-sufficient and pay back what they borrow (and/or provide training and mentorship to follow educational and business plans to all members to become stable) could implement more sustainable programs run at a lower costs because of the standard of financial responsibility required to participate.

He could have voted provisionally, but he just wanted to return with id.