Voter Suppression and the Principles of Democracy

[Dante]

Voter Suppression and the Principles of Democracy: What could be more at odds with the principles of democracy than voter suppression, voter fraud? I'd say no, depending on the scale.

Voter fraud, if and when it can be found, and I do believe it exists, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. I am not denying there isn't any fraud during any particular election.

While I view fraud as wrong. However, I accept that in an imperfect system like ours, or any other system I know of, a certain amount of fraud is inevitable, if not tolerable, to a sense of justice and fairness. Think of starting a small business, which would be open to the public. To insist on preventing all theft would be impractical. Either all customers would have to be terribly inconvenienced, and/or the prevention techniques of the perfect system would be cost prohibitive.

Likewise, I believe Voter Suppression if and where it can be found, and I do believe it also exists along with voter fraud, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. Voter suppression has a well documented history in the USA. The techniques used to suppress the vote spans the spectrum from distasteful to horrific. But as things move slowly in a society like ours, a democratic society alongside a republican form of government, we correct things, we right wrongs, we attempt to live up to what many of us view as our better natures.

Now we come to the meat of the matter: Voter I.D. laws. Do I support the concept? You Betcha.

But...Some things just aren't right.

Twelve years after disputes about hanging chads and butterfly ballots cast doubt on the credibility of the outcome of a presidential election, the integrity of the election process again has become a partisan issue. If the race between President Obama and Mitt Romney is a close one, look for the losing side to blame the outcome on either fraud or voter suppression. At this point the latter looks to be the bigger problem.

-- counterintuitive as it may seem to middle-class Americans — a significant number of voters do not have a photo ID

It's how we get there that counts. Sacrificing the principles of democracy to partisan gains benefits no one on the long run. Corrupting the process to the point that the system pronounces it's own principles as anathema.

To say that fraud is minimal doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that states shouldn't endeavor to make it less possible. Some proposed reforms, such as a system for checking voter lists against other government databases, would increase both accuracy and involvement. Even a photo ID requirement might be acceptable if states not only supplied IDs free of charge but also eliminated hurdles that make them difficult to obtain, such as inconveniently located driver's license centers or backlogged birth registries.

You betcha! youtube.com/watch?v=5RwWXs2NvII

Well, there are simple; common sense ways to eleviate voter fraud; instead of the state issuing a voter registration card, simply issue one with a picture ID. If the community college down the street can master the technology....the federal government should be able to do so.

As for whether or not it is serious, yes it is.

No President will ever be elected on strictly fraud.

One has to remember though that there are a great many down-ticket races and off year elections that have very small turnout.

In 2004, the supervisor of elections in Palm Beach County lost by a few percentage points which translated into a couple of hundred votes. This isn't a big deal in and of itself. However, the noteworthing thing about her losing was that this was the same person who approved the butterfly ballot. The butterfly ballot that was used in the 2000 election. The butterfly ballot which caused Pat Buchanan to get a disproportionate number of votes that likely would have went to Al Gore. The butterfly ballot that basically swung the State for George Bush and thus the election since Palm Beach County was in Florida.

As a result, we had a war in Iraq that Gore would have unlikely never considered staging. Thousands of American soldiers died, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed as a result.

Now, was this elections supervisor elected by fraudulent ballots? Nobody knows. Is it likely that some of the ballots for her (her name is Theresa LePore by the way) and against her were fraudulent? Yes. Why leave it to a greater degree of uncertainty than would otherwise be experienced?

First, great points on how to do what the local Community College can do. The states need (counties) step up.

Second, the seriousness you lay out is about the result of the decisions made after an election. In that sense voter fraud is very serious. But I purposefully put a narrow focus on the process and the system itself, not the end results of any partisan or ideological decisions by individuals on future events that are unforeseen. No election ever produces results that guarantee government decisions later on.

 

[Dante]

The left wing hypocrisy is stunning. We had a dozen posts last week criticizing the US Constitution and calling for new principles of democracy and now we get a lecture from a left winger about the old "principals of democracy". Ho hum.

Please, suicide is a viable option for people like you. Look into it.

Dante never criticizes the US Constitution. He has started many a thread on it. Threads where people like you are out of you element, because it requires reading and comprehension, rationality, reason, and more...

 

[Dante]

The only reason voter fraud is an issue now is because the GOP is desperate to return to power and know they cannot win on 1) their performance; 2) their ideas(?) laughable, really; and 3) without suppressing the votes of those they believe will not vote for a small tent party.

I believe if the GOP cannot win this year using dirty tricks, CU v. FEC and voter suppression the Republican Party will fade away and be replaced by a party of RINO's (those appalled by what has happened to their party) and the right wing fringe which now controls the Congress and many state legislators.

Even if they win, and govern as they have in the past, the win will be Pyhrric - for what they advocate benefits the haves and punishes the rest and the vast majority of real Americans will send them packing in 2014 and 2016. If elections occur and we have not collapsed into a pure plutocarcy where only one party is allowed.

Voter fraud has been an issue for conservatives since the USA started demanding minorities and the poor have equal access to the voting booth. Sad but true.

The plutocracy stuff is pure hyperbole and a bit of alarmist paranoia.

 

[candycorn]

Voter Suppression and the Principles of Democracy: What could be more at odds with the principles of democracy than voter suppression, voter fraud? I'd say no, depending on the scale.

Voter fraud, if and when it can be found, and I do believe it exists, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. I am not denying there isn't any fraud during any particular election.

While I view fraud as wrong. However, I accept that in an imperfect system like ours, or any other system I know of, a certain amount of fraud is inevitable, if not tolerable, to a sense of justice and fairness. Think of starting a small business, which would be open to the public. To insist on preventing all theft would be impractical. Either all customers would have to be terribly inconvenienced, and/or the prevention techniques of the perfect system would be cost prohibitive.

Likewise, I believe Voter Suppression if and where it can be found, and I do believe it also exists along with voter fraud, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. Voter suppression has a well documented history in the USA. The techniques used to suppress the vote spans the spectrum from distasteful to horrific. But as things move slowly in a society like ours, a democratic society alongside a republican form of government, we correct things, we right wrongs, we attempt to live up to what many of us view as our better natures.

Now we come to the meat of the matter: Voter I.D. laws. Do I support the concept? You Betcha.

But...Some things just aren't right.



It's how we get there that counts. Sacrificing the principles of democracy to partisan gains benefits no one on the long run. Corrupting the process to the point that the system pronounces it's own principles as anathema.



You betcha! youtube.com/watch?v=5RwWXs2NvII

Well, there are simple; common sense ways to eleviate voter fraud; instead of the state issuing a voter registration card, simply issue one with a picture ID. If the community college down the street can master the technology....the federal government should be able to do so.

As for whether or not it is serious, yes it is.

No President will ever be elected on strictly fraud.

One has to remember though that there are a great many down-ticket races and off year elections that have very small turnout.

In 2004, the supervisor of elections in Palm Beach County lost by a few percentage points which translated into a couple of hundred votes. This isn't a big deal in and of itself. However, the noteworthing thing about her losing was that this was the same person who approved the butterfly ballot. The butterfly ballot that was used in the 2000 election. The butterfly ballot which caused Pat Buchanan to get a disproportionate number of votes that likely would have went to Al Gore. The butterfly ballot that basically swung the State for George Bush and thus the election since Palm Beach County was in Florida.

As a result, we had a war in Iraq that Gore would have unlikely never considered staging. Thousands of American soldiers died, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed as a result.

Now, was this elections supervisor elected by fraudulent ballots? Nobody knows. Is it likely that some of the ballots for her (her name is Theresa LePore by the way) and against her were fraudulent? Yes. Why leave it to a greater degree of uncertainty than would otherwise be experienced?

First, great points on how to do what the local Community College can do. The states need (counties) step up.

Second, the seriousness you lay out is about the result of the decisions made after an election. In that sense voter fraud is very serious. But I purposefully put a narrow focus on the process and the system itself, not the end results of any partisan or ideological decisions by individuals on future events that are unforeseen. No election ever produces results that guarantee government decisions later on.

Thats true...maybe any elections supervisor would have made that decision to go with the butterfly ballot in 2000; not just this woman who must be totally numb at the thought of what that one decision did...

It would be not out of the realm of possibility however that given the information mining operations that now go on to identify the 10-15 swing counties in a swing state and pull some strings to have an election supervisor aligned with one ideology or another installed. If I recall, the election that Ms. LePore last had a total of 6,000 votes cast in it in her county.

We all know that David Axelrod and Karl Rove are way above reproach to try something so dastardly...don't we?

 

[Dante]

Well, there are simple; common sense ways to eleviate voter fraud; instead of the state issuing a voter registration card, simply issue one with a picture ID. If the community college down the street can master the technology....the federal government should be able to do so.

As for whether or not it is serious, yes it is.

No President will ever be elected on strictly fraud.

One has to remember though that there are a great many down-ticket races and off year elections that have very small turnout.

In 2004, the supervisor of elections in Palm Beach County lost by a few percentage points which translated into a couple of hundred votes. This isn't a big deal in and of itself. However, the noteworthing thing about her losing was that this was the same person who approved the butterfly ballot. The butterfly ballot that was used in the 2000 election. The butterfly ballot which caused Pat Buchanan to get a disproportionate number of votes that likely would have went to Al Gore. The butterfly ballot that basically swung the State for George Bush and thus the election since Palm Beach County was in Florida.

As a result, we had a war in Iraq that Gore would have unlikely never considered staging. Thousands of American soldiers died, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were killed as a result.

Now, was this elections supervisor elected by fraudulent ballots? Nobody knows. Is it likely that some of the ballots for her (her name is Theresa LePore by the way) and against her were fraudulent? Yes. Why leave it to a greater degree of uncertainty than would otherwise be experienced?

First, great points on how to do what the local Community College can do. The states need (counties) step up.

Second, the seriousness you lay out is about the result of the decisions made after an election. In that sense voter fraud is very serious. But I purposefully put a narrow focus on the process and the system itself, not the end results of any partisan or ideological decisions by individuals on future events that are unforeseen. No election ever produces results that guarantee government decisions later on.

Thats true...maybe any elections supervisor would have made that decision to go with the butterfly ballot in 2000; not just this woman who must be totally numb at the thought of what that one decision did...

It would be not out of the realm of possibility however that given the information mining operations that now go on to identify the 10-15 swing counties in a swing state and pull some strings to have an election supervisor aligned with one ideology or another installed. If I recall, the election that Ms. LePore last had a total of 6,000 votes cast in it in her county.

We all know that David Axelrod and Karl Rove are way above reproach to try something so dastardly...don't we?

Oh I see what you're saying and it is on the mark regarding corruption of the system itself through corruption of the process. Uses of technology are threatening the system.

Reminds me of Black Box Voting: TO BE CLEAR: THE PUBLIC HAS BOTH THE RIGHT TO INSPECT BALLOTS AND THE RIGHT TO A SECRET BALLOT

 

[Dante]

Voter Suppression and the Principles of Democracy: What could be more at odds with the principles of democracy than voter suppression, voter fraud? I'd say no, depending on the scale.

Voter fraud, if and when it can be found, and I do believe it exists, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. I am not denying there isn't any fraud during any particular election.

While I view fraud as wrong. However, I accept that in an imperfect system like ours, or any other system I know of, a certain amount of fraud is inevitable, if not tolerable, to a sense of justice and fairness. Think of starting a small business, which would be open to the public. To insist on preventing all theft would be impractical. Either all customers would have to be terribly inconvenienced, and/or the prevention techniques of the perfect system would be cost prohibitive.

Likewise, I believe Voter Suppression if and where it can be found, and I do believe it also exists along with voter fraud, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. Voter suppression has a well documented history in the USA. The techniques used to suppress the vote spans the spectrum from distasteful to horrific. But as things move slowly in a society like ours, a democratic society alongside a republican form of government, we correct things, we right wrongs, we attempt to live up to what many of us view as our better natures.

Now we come to the meat of the matter: Voter I.D. laws. Do I support the concept? You Betcha.

But...Some things just aren't right.

Twelve years after disputes about hanging chads and butterfly ballots cast doubt on the credibility of the outcome of a presidential election, the integrity of the election process again has become a partisan issue. If the race between President Obama and Mitt Romney is a close one, look for the losing side to blame the outcome on either fraud or voter suppression. At this point the latter looks to be the bigger problem.

-- counterintuitive as it may seem to middle-class Americans — a significant number of voters do not have a photo ID

It's how we get there that counts. Sacrificing the principles of democracy to partisan gains benefits no one on the long run. Corrupting the process to the point that the system pronounces it's own principles as anathema.

To say that fraud is minimal doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that states shouldn't endeavor to make it less possible. Some proposed reforms, such as a system for checking voter lists against other government databases, would increase both accuracy and involvement. Even a photo ID requirement might be acceptable if states not only supplied IDs free of charge but also eliminated hurdles that make them difficult to obtain, such as inconveniently located driver's license centers or backlogged birth registries.

You betcha! [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RwWXs2NvII]Sarah Palin: You Betcha Trailer - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Intense]

The only reason voter fraud is an issue now is because the GOP is desperate to return to power and know they cannot win on 1) their performance; 2) their ideas(?) laughable, really; and 3) without suppressing the votes of those they believe will not vote for a small tent party.

I believe if the GOP cannot win this year using dirty tricks, CU v. FEC and voter suppression the Republican Party will fade away and be replaced by a party of RINO's (those appalled by what has happened to their party) and the right wing fringe which now controls the Congress and many state legislators.

Even if they win, and govern as they have in the past, the win will be Pyhrric - for what they advocate benefits the haves and punishes the rest and the vast majority of real Americans will send them packing in 2014 and 2016. If elections occur and we have not collapsed into a pure plutocarcy where only one party is allowed.

Voter fraud has been an issue for conservatives since the USA started demanding minorities and the poor have equal access to the voting booth. Sad but true.

The plutocracy stuff is pure hyperbole and a bit of alarmist paranoia.

Shut up Girl. The Integrity of the Election Process has nothing to do with Party affiliation. It is about Principle , or lack of it. The same holds for who is doing the counting.

 

[Vel]

Does the Texas Voter ID Law Discriminate Against Blacks, Hispanics?
The three-panel judge likely will decide before the November elections.

Why would it? Are you one of those that think that minorities aren't smart enough to meet the same standards as white people?

 

[Dante]

The only reason voter fraud is an issue now is because the GOP is desperate to return to power and know they cannot win on 1) their performance; 2) their ideas(?) laughable, really; and 3) without suppressing the votes of those they believe will not vote for a small tent party.

I believe if the GOP cannot win this year using dirty tricks, CU v. FEC and voter suppression the Republican Party will fade away and be replaced by a party of RINO's (those appalled by what has happened to their party) and the right wing fringe which now controls the Congress and many state legislators.

Even if they win, and govern as they have in the past, the win will be Pyhrric - for what they advocate benefits the haves and punishes the rest and the vast majority of real Americans will send them packing in 2014 and 2016. If elections occur and we have not collapsed into a pure plutocarcy where only one party is allowed.

Voter fraud has been an issue for conservatives since the USA started demanding minorities and the poor have equal access to the voting booth. Sad but true.

The plutocracy stuff is pure hyperbole and a bit of alarmist paranoia.

Shut up Girl. The Integrity of the Election Process has nothing to do with Party affiliation. It is about Principle , or lack of it. The same holds for who is doing the counting.

Girl? You're starting to drift into Gaga Land with the other wussies here?
They have meds for whatever ails you.

In the quotes above, I do not mention party affiliation. I mention ideological affiliation. Republicans and Conservatives like to point out that the DNC used to be a hotbed of racism. It's true, White, Southern, Conservatives gave the DNC a terrible rep...but then they all mostly left into the welcoming arms of the GOP.

sad but true...as I am quoted saying above

 

[Dante]

Does the Texas Voter ID Law Discriminate Against Blacks, Hispanics?
The three-panel judge likely will decide before the November elections.

Why would it? Are you one of those that think that minorities aren't smart enough to meet the same standards as white people?

Do you even have a clue what anyone including yourself is talking about? The Texas law is about discrimination. You can discriminate against very bright people. Look at how Southern, White, Conservatives and Christians discriminated against MLK and others with advanced degrees from major Universities and against black men and women who were extremely bright?

I support voter I.D., but how it is implemented is the issue. Making it hard for poor people and others without I.D. is nasty. You would never pass an intelligence test for a ballot. Meeting you and listening to your imbecilities, has me rethinking intelligence tests for voters

 

[Vel]

Does the Texas Voter ID Law Discriminate Against Blacks, Hispanics?
The three-panel judge likely will decide before the November elections.

Why would it? Are you one of those that think that minorities aren't smart enough to meet the same standards as white people?

Do you even have a clue what anyone including yourself is talking about? The Texas law is about discrimination. You can discriminate against very bright people. Look at how Southern, White, Conservatives and Christians discriminated against MLK and others with advanced degrees from major Universities and against black men and women who were extremely bright?

I support voter I.D., but how it is implemented is the issue. Making it hard for poor people and others without I.D. is nasty. You would never pass an intelligence test for a ballot. Meeting you and listening to your imbecilities, has me rethinking intelligence tests for voters

So, you're saying that you support voter I.D laws? Well tell us with your imagined genius exactly how YOU would implement those laws. And bless your little heart, you would NEVER support minimum I.Q. tests for voting rights because you know in that case the Democrats could never win.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If and When?

My god you are an idiot.....

Wa st. Where a thousand votes more then voters is the norm.

I suggest you look up the sec of states remarks on this subject...

Then shut the fuck up.

percentages?

please try and make a coherent point or stfu

Oh now you want percentages. If they are low you dont mind fucking people over.

So what has changed............Nothing.

Florida’s Voter Purge Targets Veteran, Minorities and Democrats​

"When a political party has become so derailed that it has to depend on disenfranchisement of voters and rigging voting districts to get their candidates elected, it might be time for some reflection on the party’s platform. Taking the right to vote away from a decorated war veteran shouldn’t be a part of any political party’s agenda in America. It’s obscene and treasonous."

​

 

[Claudette]

Why would it? Are you one of those that think that minorities aren't smart enough to meet the same standards as white people?

Do you even have a clue what anyone including yourself is talking about? The Texas law is about discrimination. You can discriminate against very bright people. Look at how Southern, White, Conservatives and Christians discriminated against MLK and others with advanced degrees from major Universities and against black men and women who were extremely bright?

I support voter I.D., but how it is implemented is the issue. Making it hard for poor people and others without I.D. is nasty. You would never pass an intelligence test for a ballot. Meeting you and listening to your imbecilities, has me rethinking intelligence tests for voters

So, you're saying that you support voter I.D laws? Well tell us with your imagined genius exactly how YOU would implement those laws. And bless your little heart, you would NEVER support minimum I.Q. tests for voting rights because you know in that case the Democrats could never win.

LOL Voter ID is Common Sense 101.

 

[Sallow]

Voter Suppression and the Principles of Democracy: What could be more at odds with the principles of democracy than voter suppression, voter fraud? I'd say no, depending on the scale.

Voter fraud, if and when it can be found, and I do believe it exists, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. I am not denying there isn't any fraud during any particular election.

While I view fraud as wrong. However, I accept that in an imperfect system like ours, or any other system I know of, a certain amount of fraud is inevitable, if not tolerable, to a sense of justice and fairness. Think of starting a small business, which would be open to the public. To insist on preventing all theft would be impractical. Either all customers would have to be terribly inconvenienced, and/or the prevention techniques of the perfect system would be cost prohibitive.

Likewise, I believe Voter Suppression if and where it can be found, and I do believe it also exists along with voter fraud, would have to reach huge proportions to destroy the process we in the USA use in our system of democratic elections. Voter suppression has a well documented history in the USA. The techniques used to suppress the vote spans the spectrum from distasteful to horrific. But as things move slowly in a society like ours, a democratic society alongside a republican form of government, we correct things, we right wrongs, we attempt to live up to what many of us view as our better natures.

Now we come to the meat of the matter: Voter I.D. laws. Do I support the concept? You Betcha.

But...Some things just aren't right.

Twelve years after disputes about hanging chads and butterfly ballots cast doubt on the credibility of the outcome of a presidential election, the integrity of the election process again has become a partisan issue. If the race between President Obama and Mitt Romney is a close one, look for the losing side to blame the outcome on either fraud or voter suppression. At this point the latter looks to be the bigger problem.

-- counterintuitive as it may seem to middle-class Americans — a significant number of voters do not have a photo ID

It's how we get there that counts. Sacrificing the principles of democracy to partisan gains benefits no one on the long run. Corrupting the process to the point that the system pronounces it's own principles as anathema.

To say that fraud is minimal doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that states shouldn't endeavor to make it less possible. Some proposed reforms, such as a system for checking voter lists against other government databases, would increase both accuracy and involvement. Even a photo ID requirement might be acceptable if states not only supplied IDs free of charge but also eliminated hurdles that make them difficult to obtain, such as inconveniently located driver's license centers or backlogged birth registries.

You betcha! [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RwWXs2NvII]Sarah Palin: You Betcha Trailer - YouTube[/ame]

Voter ID laws would be fine with 2 conditions.

1. Registering for the vote would be eliminated or streamlined.
2. IDs are provided free of charge.

 

[Seawytch]

Does the Texas Voter ID Law Discriminate Against Blacks, Hispanics?
The three-panel judge likely will decide before the November elections.

Why would it? Are you one of those that think that minorities aren't smart enough to meet the same standards as white people?

It has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with access. Did you know that in some parts of Texas a person has to travel over 100 miles to get to the nearest DMV? What do these people without transportation do to get their required identification?

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Access to Photo-ID in Texas

How many voters is it worth to disenfranchise to stop one case of Voter Fraud? I'd like a number.

 

[Dante]

Do you even have a clue what anyone including yourself is talking about? The Texas law is about discrimination. You can discriminate against very bright people. Look at how Southern, White, Conservatives and Christians discriminated against MLK and others with advanced degrees from major Universities and against black men and women who were extremely bright?

I support voter I.D., but how it is implemented is the issue. Making it hard for poor people and others without I.D. is nasty. You would never pass an intelligence test for a ballot. Meeting you and listening to your imbecilities, has me rethinking intelligence tests for voters

So, you're saying that you support voter I.D laws? Well tell us with your imagined genius exactly how YOU would implement those laws. And bless your little heart, you would NEVER support minimum I.Q. tests for voting rights because you know in that case the Democrats could never win.

LOL Voter ID is Common Sense 101.

Pennsylvania's strict voter ID law faces ACLU lawsuit - latimes.com

On July 3, state officials sent out a news release to "confirm the vast majority of registered voters have the identification that can be used for voting." But its own analysis of state driving records revealed that 9% of those on its voting rolls — 758,939 in all — could not be found in the state Department of Transportation database. In Philadelphia alone, about 18% did not have the proper identification, according to this analysis.

"If the election were held today, we would have more than 100,000 of our voters who could not vote," said Stephanie Singer, chairwoman of Philadelphia's elections commission. "It's a cynical attempt by the Republican leadership to steal the election. And absolutely it could sway the outcome."

That view of the law's importance is not unique to Democrats. Last month, state House Republican leader Mike Turzai, who represents the north suburbs of Pittsburgh, ticked off this year's accomplishments before a meeting of state Republicans. "Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: Done," he said.

 

[GuyPinestra]

So, you're saying that you support voter I.D laws? Well tell us with your imagined genius exactly how YOU would implement those laws. And bless your little heart, you would NEVER support minimum I.Q. tests for voting rights because you know in that case the Democrats could never win.

LOL Voter ID is Common Sense 101.

Pennsylvania's strict voter ID law faces ACLU lawsuit - latimes.com

On July 3, state officials sent out a news release to "confirm the vast majority of registered voters have the identification that can be used for voting." But its own analysis of state driving records revealed that 9% of those on its voting rolls — 758,939 in all — could not be found in the state Department of Transportation database. In Philadelphia alone, about 18% did not have the proper identification, according to this analysis.

"If the election were held today, we would have more than 100,000 of our voters who could not vote," said Stephanie Singer, chairwoman of Philadelphia's elections commission. "It's a cynical attempt by the Republican leadership to steal the election. And absolutely it could sway the outcome."

That view of the law's importance is not unique to Democrats. Last month, state House Republican leader Mike Turzai, who represents the north suburbs of Pittsburgh, ticked off this year's accomplishments before a meeting of state Republicans. "Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: Done," he said.

Let's just take a look at what ID is acceptable to vote in Pa. before we start wringing our hands and gnashing our teeth, OK?

Starting on November 6, you must prove your identity by showing one of the following photo IDs issued by:

The United States government, e.g., a U.S. passport

The Commonwealth of PA, e.g., a driver’s license (NOTE: An expired driver’s license is okay as long as it is within 12 months after the expiration date)

A PA municipality (e.g., city, county, borough, incorporated town) to municipal employees

An accredited PA public or private institution of higher learning, e.g., a student card

A PA care facility, which includes a long‐term care nursing facility, an assisted living residence or a personal care home

U.S. Armed Forces branches or their reserves, including the PA National Guard (NOTE: The ID holder can be a veteran or current member; the expiration date can be indefinite.)

What You Need to Know About PA's New Voter ID Law | Pennsylvania Democratic Party

I'm really sorry if your illegal voters are unable to cheat for you again this year, but if they AREN'T illegal and STILL can't come up with one of these they're TOO STUPID to vote.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

It's not surprising that the Alinsky left wing radicals would quote the "principals of democracy" while advocating voter fraud and it's no surprise that the left wing racists would claim that Black people are too dumb to obtain a photo I.D.

What a crock.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

LOL Voter ID is Common Sense 101.

Pennsylvania's strict voter ID law faces ACLU lawsuit - latimes.com

Let's just take a look at what ID is acceptable to vote in Pa. before we start wringing our hands and gnashing our teeth, OK?

Starting on November 6, you must prove your identity by showing one of the following photo IDs issued by:

The United States government, e.g., a U.S. passport

The Commonwealth of PA, e.g., a driver’s license (NOTE: An expired driver’s license is okay as long as it is within 12 months after the expiration date)

A PA municipality (e.g., city, county, borough, incorporated town) to municipal employees

An accredited PA public or private institution of higher learning, e.g., a student card

A PA care facility, which includes a long‐term care nursing facility, an assisted living residence or a personal care home

U.S. Armed Forces branches or their reserves, including the PA National Guard (NOTE: The ID holder can be a veteran or current member; the expiration date can be indefinite.)

What You Need to Know About PA's New Voter ID Law | Pennsylvania Democratic Party

I'm really sorry if your illegal voters are unable to cheat for you again this year, but if they AREN'T illegal and STILL can't come up with one of these they're TOO STUPID to vote.

And, EXACTLY how many cases of fraudulent voting have been proven?

 

[Katzndogz]

If the dead can't vote, there is no point to democracy.

All those people who live 100 miles from the DMV, how do they get to the store? The doctor? We know they can't go to the bank, because the bank requires ID.