Making it easier to vote makes it easier to cheat. Making it harder to cheat makes it harder to vote. Where to draw the line is the ??

[Seymour Flops]

Almost any kind of requirement to vote besides just walking up to a polling place and saying "I want to vote," will mean that some people will be excluded from voting.

For example, picture ID seems a very reasonable requirement to ensure election integrity. It is required for almost any other important transaction. But there will always be someone who loses their ID over the weekend, and can't get off on Monday to go replace it, so they can't vote on Tuesday. So the question is will that happen often enough to be a significant concern, more significant than the danger of letting people vote without ID, and will that affect one type of voter more than other types of voters so that the election results would be affected?

My answer is that it is significant for even one person to be disenfranchised, but the few who would actually not be able to vote due to a lost ID or some other reason not to have one do not outweigh the need for elections we can trust. I also don't see why voters of one party are more likely to lose their ID than voters for another party.

Another example, mail in ballots. If they are unlimited, with every remote ballot mailed in or dropped off automatically counted with no recourse, that would be an open invitation to cheating. But if you eliminate mail-in ballots, that guarantees that some people will not be able to vote, and if you make the restrictions so hard that the very people who need a mail-in ballot cannot comply with the restrictions, you also disenfranchise people.

That is a tougher one, and a good solution would require good-faith negotiations. Shut-ins might need help with compliance with ID requirements for a mail-in ballot. Non-partisan volunteers could help make sure they can vote, but how to tell non-partisan volunteers who want to make sure older people get a say in elections from community organizers harvesting ballots to help one candidate win?

I don't have a solution that would please everyone. I do have a very distasteful idea that I'm afraid it may come to. I'll post that on another thread.

 

[pknopp]

Almost any kind of requirement to vote besides just walking up to a polling place and saying "I want to vote," will mean that some people will be excluded from voting.

For example, picture ID seems a very reasonable requirement to ensure election integrity.

And as I have pointed out over and over and over there is nothing stopping any state from issuing a photo voter registration card when people register to vote but not a single state does.

 

[occupied]

The prevailing wisdom going back to the founding of the nation has been that the people who vote twice or more are on both sides of an election and tend to cancel each other out. Quit attacking the voters.

 

[Woodznutz]

If a 'shut in' or disabled person can be transported to a hospital in an emergency, they can be transported to a polling place on election day. Disabled people are more mobile than is generally believed. If voting is important enough to such people they will find a way to vote on election day. It also must be acknowledged that even in very important elections huge numbers of able-bodied citizens don't vote.

 

[Dekster]

Almost any kind of requirement to vote besides just walking up to a polling place and saying "I want to vote," will mean that some people will be excluded from voting.

For example, picture ID seems a very reasonable requirement to ensure election integrity. It is required for almost any other important transaction. But there will always be someone who loses their ID over the weekend, and can't get off on Monday to go replace it, so they can't vote on Tuesday. So the question is will that happen often enough to be a significant concern, more significant than the danger of letting people vote without ID, and will that affect one type of voter more than other types of voters so that the election results would be affected?

My answer is that it is significant for even one person to be disenfranchised, but the few who would actually not be able to vote due to a lost ID or some other reason not to have one do not outweigh the need for elections we can trust. I also don't see why voters of one party are more likely to lose their ID than voters for another party.

Another example, mail in ballots. If they are unlimited, with every remote ballot mailed in or dropped off automatically counted with no recourse, that would be an open invitation to cheating. But if you eliminate mail-in ballots, that guarantees that some people will not be able to vote, and if you make the restrictions so hard that the very people who need a mail-in ballot cannot comply with the restrictions, you also disenfranchise people.

That is a tougher one, and a good solution would require good-faith negotiations. Shut-ins might need help with compliance with ID requirements for a mail-in ballot. Non-partisan volunteers could help make sure they can vote, but how to tell non-partisan volunteers who want to make sure older people get a say in elections from community organizers harvesting ballots to help one candidate win?

I don't have a solution that would please everyone. I do have a very distasteful idea that I'm afraid it may come to. I'll post that on another thread.

I don't have any problem with how we do it here in Virginia. I think the voter ID thing has actually sped up the process. Now instead of having to to wait for two old people to find your name in two different sets of books and mark you off, they can just zap your info off the back of your license/ID and send you on your way. We use scantrons and that helps speed things up too because you don't have to wait for one of the handful of machines to become available. Instead of having 25 people in line with 5 people voting, you can have all 30 at tables filling in their little circles at once. Takes like 5 seconds to run them through the counter on your way out the door.

 

[Bobob]

Almost any kind of requirement to vote besides just walking up to a polling place and saying "I want to vote," will mean that some people will be excluded from voting.

For example, picture ID seems a very reasonable requirement to ensure election integrity. It is required for almost any other important transaction. But there will always be someone who loses their ID over the weekend, and can't get off on Monday to go replace it, so they can't vote on Tuesday. So the question is will that happen often enough to be a significant concern, more significant than the danger of letting people vote without ID, and will that affect one type of voter more than other types of voters so that the election results would be affected?

My answer is that it is significant for even one person to be disenfranchised, but the few who would actually not be able to vote due to a lost ID or some other reason not to have one do not outweigh the need for elections we can trust. I also don't see why voters of one party are more likely to lose their ID than voters for another party.

Another example, mail in ballots. If they are unlimited, with every remote ballot mailed in or dropped off automatically counted with no recourse, that would be an open invitation to cheating. But if you eliminate mail-in ballots, that guarantees that some people will not be able to vote, and if you make the restrictions so hard that the very people who need a mail-in ballot cannot comply with the restrictions, you also disenfranchise people.

That is a tougher one, and a good solution would require good-faith negotiations. Shut-ins might need help with compliance with ID requirements for a mail-in ballot. Non-partisan volunteers could help make sure they can vote, but how to tell non-partisan volunteers who want to make sure older people get a say in elections from community organizers harvesting ballots to help one candidate win?

I don't have a solution that would please everyone. I do have a very distasteful idea that I'm afraid it may come to. I'll post that on another thread.

My view is that voting should be somewhat more difficult to inhibit cheating, if that is what it takes.
However, the effort to get to the voting booth should be made easy, and that is the issue for me.

 

[BlackSand]

And as I have pointed out over and over and over there is nothing stopping any state from issuing a photo voter registration card when people register to vote but not a single state does.

.

Just Stop ...

"Be prepared to show a photo identification card with your photo and signature or
a United States military identification card that contains your name and picture when voting.
If you do not have a photo ID, you may obtain a free Louisiana special identification card by presenting your voter registration information card to the
Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles (OMV) or you may vote by affidavit after correctly answering identifying information before voting."

Our state requires a state issued photo ID to vote ... And they are free, unless you get one as a driver's license.
I have to present my driver's license every time I go vote ... They use it to find my name in the book where I sign,
then pass it to two others who each add my info to a list.

If I early vote at the Sheriff's Department or Registrar's Office, they scan the ID to give you the card that goes with your exact precinct.

It's not difficult to do things the correct way.
The only problem we have is in enforcement of the requirements in precincts that don't care ...
and they tend to be precincts where it isn't safe to walk down the street, and there are no poll observers.

.​

 

[Seymour Flops]

And as I have pointed out over and over and over there is nothing stopping any state from issuing a photo voter registration card when people register to vote but not a single state does.

I must have missed that. That is actually a very good idea.

 

[pknopp]

.

Just Stop ...

"Be prepared to show a photo identification card with your photo and signature or
a United States military identification card that contains your name and picture when voting.
If you do not have a photo ID, you may obtain a free Louisiana special identification card by presenting your voter registration information card to the
Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles (OMV) or you may vote by affidavit after correctly answering identifying information before voting."

Our state requires a state issued photo ID to vote ... And they are free, unless you get one as a driver's license.
I have to present my driver's license it every time I go vote ... They use it to find my name in the book where I sign,
then pass it to two others who each add my info to a list.

If I early vote at the Sheriff's Department or Registrar's Office, they scan the ID to give you the card that goes with your exact precinct.

It's not difficult to do things the correct way.
The only problem we have is in enforcement of the requirements in precincts that don't care ...
and they tend to be precincts where it isn't safe to walk down the street, and there are no poll observers.

.​

As I said........


"Be prepared to show a photo identification card with your photo and signature or
a United States military identification card that contains your name and picture when voting.
If you do not have a photo ID, you may obtain a free Louisiana special identification card by presenting your voter registration information card to the
Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles (OMV) or you may vote by affidavit after correctly answering identifying information before voting."

They want you to jump through additional hoops to vote. Why should I have to go to the OMV to be able to vote?

I have a voters registration card. I got it when I registered to vote. I will not jump through any additional hoops to exercise my right to vote. If you wish to make me a new one when I go to vote, do so. The issue is people like yourself wanting people to jump through additional hoops to vote.

Screw you.

 

[BlackSand]

As I said........


"Be prepared to show a photo identification card with your photo and signature or
a United States military identification card that contains your name and picture when voting.
If you do not have a photo ID, you may obtain a free Louisiana special identification card by presenting your voter registration information card to the
Louisiana Office of Motor Vehicles (OMV) or you may vote by affidavit after correctly answering identifying information before voting."

They want you to jump through additional hoops to vote. Why should I have to go to the OMV to be able to vote?

I have a voters registration card. I got it when I registered to vote. I will not jump through any additional hoops to exercise my right to vote. If you wish to make me a new one when I go to vote, do so. The issue is people like yourself wanting people to jump through additional hoops to vote.

Screw you.

.

Because they are the ones who make the ID's ...
And the DMV in my area is two doors down from the Registrar's Office.
In a lot of places, they are in the same damn building, even the same desk
since we have Motor-Voter laws and a one stop shop you retard ...

Meaning you can go to any DMV and Register to Vote.

Stop making excuses ...
And just say you don't care if they take the proper measures to verify and validate.

.​

 

[pknopp]

.

Because they are the ones who make the ID's ...
And the DMV in my area is two doors down from the Registrar's Office.
In a lot of places, they are in the same damn building, even the same desk
since we have Motor-Voter laws and a one stop shop you retard ...

Stop making excuses ...
And just say you don't care if they take the proper measures to verify and validate.

.​

They can as long as they do not make people jump through additional hoops. Allow people to vote at the DMV. They make portable photo units.

 

[Thunk]

Photo ID or 2 utility bills with your name & address.

If there is any question a photo is taken of you and if you are found guilty of voter fraud you are executed!

All problems solved!

 

[BlackSand]

They can as long as they do not make people jump through additional hoops. Allow people to vote at the DMV. They make portable photo units.

.

You don't vote at the DMV ... It is not an approved polling place.

The only time you go to anywhere other than your approved polling place is if you early vote.
That is done at the Registrar's Office or the Sheriff's Department ... No monkey business.

They don't need portable photo unit ... Because you can Register to Vote where they make the ID's.

Just stop making excuses ... They know how to do things.
The only time things aren't done correctly is in the individual Precincts,
when it comes to poll workers who do not enforce the requirements, the people who want to cheat.

.​

 

[pknopp]

.

You don't vote at the DMV ... It is not an approved polling place.​

Make it one. You want the people voting to do the extra work as opposed to those who want those already registered to no longer be able to vote.

.​

 

[Slade3200]

Almost any kind of requirement to vote besides just walking up to a polling place and saying "I want to vote," will mean that some people will be excluded from voting.

For example, picture ID seems a very reasonable requirement to ensure election integrity. It is required for almost any other important transaction. But there will always be someone who loses their ID over the weekend, and can't get off on Monday to go replace it, so they can't vote on Tuesday. So the question is will that happen often enough to be a significant concern, more significant than the danger of letting people vote without ID, and will that affect one type of voter more than other types of voters so that the election results would be affected?

My answer is that it is significant for even one person to be disenfranchised, but the few who would actually not be able to vote due to a lost ID or some other reason not to have one do not outweigh the need for elections we can trust. I also don't see why voters of one party are more likely to lose their ID than voters for another party.

Another example, mail in ballots. If they are unlimited, with every remote ballot mailed in or dropped off automatically counted with no recourse, that would be an open invitation to cheating. But if you eliminate mail-in ballots, that guarantees that some people will not be able to vote, and if you make the restrictions so hard that the very people who need a mail-in ballot cannot comply with the restrictions, you also disenfranchise people.

That is a tougher one, and a good solution would require good-faith negotiations. Shut-ins might need help with compliance with ID requirements for a mail-in ballot. Non-partisan volunteers could help make sure they can vote, but how to tell non-partisan volunteers who want to make sure older people get a say in elections from community organizers harvesting ballots to help one candidate win?

I don't have a solution that would please everyone. I do have a very distasteful idea that I'm afraid it may come to. I'll post that on another thread.

I always ask people who are worried about election integrity and who think the election was rigged and stolen if they can give some examples of how this cheating and fraud happened and they always fall flat. Can you give some examples of how people would use no voter ID to cheat or how people would use mail in to cheat?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Almost any kind of requirement to vote besides just walking up to a polling place and saying "I want to vote," will mean that some people will be excluded from voting.

For example, picture ID seems a very reasonable requirement to ensure election integrity. It is required for almost any other important transaction. But there will always be someone who loses their ID over the weekend, and can't get off on Monday to go replace it, so they can't vote on Tuesday. So the question is will that happen often enough to be a significant concern, more significant than the danger of letting people vote without ID, and will that affect one type of voter more than other types of voters so that the election results would be affected?

My answer is that it is significant for even one person to be disenfranchised, but the few who would actually not be able to vote due to a lost ID or some other reason not to have one do not outweigh the need for elections we can trust. I also don't see why voters of one party are more likely to lose their ID than voters for another party.

Another example, mail in ballots. If they are unlimited, with every remote ballot mailed in or dropped off automatically counted with no recourse, that would be an open invitation to cheating. But if you eliminate mail-in ballots, that guarantees that some people will not be able to vote, and if you make the restrictions so hard that the very people who need a mail-in ballot cannot comply with the restrictions, you also disenfranchise people.

That is a tougher one, and a good solution would require good-faith negotiations. Shut-ins might need help with compliance with ID requirements for a mail-in ballot. Non-partisan volunteers could help make sure they can vote, but how to tell non-partisan volunteers who want to make sure older people get a say in elections from community organizers harvesting ballots to help one candidate win?

I don't have a solution that would please everyone. I do have a very distasteful idea that I'm afraid it may come to. I'll post that on another thread.

You need ID to board a plane, and even to buy whipped cream in NY, you should have a valid ID to vote

 

[Seymour Flops]

You need ID to board a plane, and even to buy whipped cream in NY, you should have a valid ID to vote

That's another good point. Do we really want someone who cannot obtain a photo ID to board a plane? Something is basically wrong with that person, if he is capable of going to an airport, but for some reason has no ID.

It would be fair to say the same about voting.

 

[Slade3200]

If a 'shut in' or disabled person can be transported to a hospital in an emergency, they can be transported to a polling place on election day. Disabled people are more mobile than is generally believed. If voting is important enough to such people they will find a way to vote on election day. It also must be acknowledged that even in very important elections huge numbers of able-bodied citizens don't vote.

Of course they can be transported. Does that mean we should require them to be? Hell no. We are better than that as a nation… I hope

 

[Slade3200]

My view is that voting should be somewhat more difficult to inhibit cheating, if that is what it takes.
However, the effort to get to the voting booth should be made easy, and that is the issue for me.

What kind of cheating to do you think is occurring within our current system?

 

[BlackSand]

Make it one. You want the people voting to do the extra work as opposed to those who want those already registered to no longer be able to vote.

.

Why would you make someone go to vote at the DMV when their approved polling location
is the school in their neighborhood that they can walk to?

Stop making excuses or trying to think of things that are unnecessary, and already accounted for ...
We don't want to make it so people cannot vote you silly nitwit ... That's just an excuse people like you keep trying to make.

I already told you ... It's not that damn difficult ...

.​