Voting rights advocates say Trump's executive order requiring proof of citizenship 'could block millions from voting'. Isn't that the point?

[Flopper]

And states need to verify citizenship before they issue either.

Some states do. Some states don't.

And that's a problem. If you can't see why it is, you simply don't take election security seriously.

Proof of citizenship is a solution for a problem we do not have. Discouraging a thousand people from voting to stop one person who is noncitizen from voting is a bad trade off . Yes, we have illegal voting problems but they will not be solve by proof of citizenship.

The Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Map .

 

[Flopper]

Voter ID laws don’t seem to suppress minority votes – despite what many claim​

However, when we examined the census data, we found strict ID laws did not disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters, whether it was Hispanic Americans, African Americans or anyone else. There’s also a working paper by economists Enrico Cantoni and Vincent Pons that’s generating some buzz. It found results that are similar to ours – namely, strict ID laws do not appear to negatively affect minority voters.

Are voter ID laws backfiring?​

Given that minorities are less likely to possess IDs, why are studies finding that these laws don’t suppress turnout?

Political scientists Jason Mycoff, Michael Wagner and David Wilson write that these laws likely don’t influence turnout because a voter’s political interest is strong enough to overcome the costs of having to obtain an ID. There’s also some evidence to suggest the laws actually act as a catalyst, inspiring and mobilizing minority voters. After a controversial North Dakota voter ID law was passed that made it more difficult for Native Americans to vote, Native Americans turned out in record numbers during the 2018 midterm elections.

---

It'd be awesome if the left stopped treating non-whites like they're idiot children.

These studies compare ID requirement with no ID requirement, not proof of citizenship. Even the homeless have ID's but having IDs that prove citizenship is lot different. You can get a state ID card with a social security card, a state vocation training card, etc,etc.

 

[Flopper]

And states need to verify citizenship before they issue either.

Some states do. Some states don't.

And that's a problem. If you can't see why it is, you simply don't take election security seriously.

In many states when you register, you show a drivers license or state id card and sign a document swearing you are a citizen with a false statement punishable under under the law.

 

[daveman]

Proof of citizenship is a solution for a problem we do not have. Discouraging a thousand people from voting to stop one person who is noncitizen from voting is a bad trade off . Yes, we have illegal voting problems but they will not be solve by proof of citizenship.

The Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Map .

Nobody's discouraged from voting by ID requirements.

 

[daveman]

These studies compare ID requirement with no ID requirement, not proof of citizenship. Even the homeless have ID's but having IDs that prove citizenship is lot different. You can get a state ID card with a social security card, a state vocation training card, etc,etc.

"Those poor brown people are just too DUMB to get ID!"

You're not the only Democrat who believes that.

 

[daveman]

In many states when you register, you show a drivers license or state id card and sign a document swearing you are a citizen with a false statement punishable under under the law.

Yeah, and how often is that law actually prosecuted?

It's cute how you believe nobody ever lies to the government.

 

[Flopper]

Yup. Prevents the dead, and the illegals from voting.

Shucks....

No, proof of citizenship will not prevent the dead from voting, which is a bigger problem than non-citizen voting.

 

[westwall]

No, proof citizen will not prevent the dead voting, which is a bigger problem non-citizen voting.

English....do you speak it?

 

[Flopper]

Yeah, and how often is that law actually prosecuted?

It's cute how you believe nobody ever lies to the government.

Almost never. No illegal immigrant is stupid enough to lie about their citizenship and risk going to jail for 10 years so they can vote in an election in a foreign country and risk being picked up by ICE.

Today, no illegal alien is going anywhere near a registration office or a polling. These people are skipping work, hoarding groceries so they can stay off the streets and you think they would be going to a government office that do have to go to where they might be picked up.

 

[toobfreak]

People should certainly be informed. However, people should be encourage to vote regardless how informed they might be. We need people to engage themselves in their community, support our laws and our government and the first step is voting.

Wrong. The first priority is to see to it that the people are well-informed, then they will naturally want to be involved.
Then the second priority is to see to it they have every opportunity to vote.
Hardly NO ONE is incapable of rather easily meeting the requirements of Voter ID laws. If they can't produce simple ID of themselves, then, in all likelihood, they must be either very stupid or lazy.

Stupid people should stay home to keep random noise out of elections so that we know that the voices counted actually stand for something.

 

[Flopper]

Wrong. The first priority is to see to it that the people are well-informed, then they will naturally want to be involved.
Then the second priority is to see to it they have every opportunity to vote.
Hardly NO ONE is incapable of rather easily meeting the requirements of Voter ID laws. If they can't produce simple ID of themselves, then, in all likelihood, they must be either very stupid or lazy.

Stupid people should stay home to keep random noise out of elections so that we know that the voices counted actually stand for something.

Regardless of whether they are stupid or not they have the right to vote. And there state, not Donald Trump get's determine the conditions under which they can vote.

 

[toobfreak]

Regardless of whether they are stupid or not they have the right to vote. And there state, not Donald Trump get's determine the conditions under which they can vote.

Triggered much? You should need to be informed. You would not ask a garbage man for his figures on quantum variation, a person educated and informed in quantum statistics will give you a much better, more accurate figure.

If you were driving, would you be willing to GUESS with your eyes closed whether the traffic light had turned green? People voting with no idea who or what they are voting on, is like driving with your eyes closed just guessing.

Being educated and informed always results in better, more valuable output.

Likewise with voting. Voters need to be informed of the real facts and issues. Then their vote will actually MEAN something. Voters should need to study and pass a simple 3 question basic test to demonstrate they are not total idiots so we know their vote actually counts for a valid view.

If you cannot pass the test, then you must have an IQ below 70. Idiots, imbeciles and morons have no place in our voting system--- noise merely dilutes the value of the other people. I mean, if you took a room full of 30 people whom none knew the first thing about building construction and asked all of them their opinions on the efficacy of the design of a new skyscraper, would you take their votes on whether the design was good or bad seriously? Then act on it? Yet this is what you are arguing for in picking a future leader of the country.

If we educate and inform voters of the issues and candidates, there will be no need to bar hardly anyone.

But I understand: while you are arguing from a position of IDEALISM, I operate from the position of practicality and functionality.

 

[Delldude]

This is the wrong hill for the Leftists to die on...lol

Which ones they've chosen aren't?

 

[TheGreatSatan]

Well, yeah.

And that is why Dems be big mad. And naturally, they're suing over it.

Very few actual Americans vote for democrats.

The average Democrat voter doesn't know it voted. Their ballots get harvested and filled out by WEF operatives.

 

[Delldude]

That is not even statistically meaningful, certainly not enough to potentially disenfranchise legitimate voters.

One illegal voting is more than meaningful. Can you show where this was duplicated elsewhere and what amount were voting illegally, obviously supported by democrats?

 

[Flopper]

Regardless of whether they are stupid or not they have the right to vote. And there state, not Donald Trump get's determine the conditions under which they can v

Triggered much? You should need to be informed. You would not ask a garbage man for his figures on quantum variation, a person educated and informed in quantum statistics will give you a much better, more accurate figure.

If you were driving, would you be willing to GUESS with your eyes closed whether the traffic light had turned green? People voting with no idea who or what they are voting on, is like driving with your eyes closed just guessing.

Being educated and informed always results in better, more valuable output.

Likewise with voting. Voters need to be informed of the real facts and issues. Then their vote will actually MEAN something. Voters should need to study and pass a simple 3 question basic test to demonstrate they are not total idiots so we know their vote actually counts for a valid view.

If you cannot pass the test, then you must have an IQ below 70. Idiots, imbeciles and morons have no place in our voting system--- noise merely dilutes the value of the other people. I mean, if you took a room full of 30 people whom none knew the first thing about building construction and asked all of them their opinions on the efficacy of the design of a new skyscraper, would you take their votes on whether the design was good or bad seriously? Then act on it? Yet this is what you are arguing for in picking a future leader of the country.

If we educate and inform voters of the issues and candidates, there will be no need to bar hardly anyone.

But I understand: while you are arguing from a position of IDEALISM, I operate from the position of practicality and functionality.

I don't know what it's like where you are. However, in Washington State, you vote by mail. When you receive your ballot, you also receive a thick pamphlet with complete backgrounds of every candidate. For ever resolution you are voting on there is explanation of the resolution, a cost breakdown, and the arguments of those that approve and those that oppose the resolution. There is also a help line that you call with question or to report any problems with voting and unlike voting at polling places, you can take as much time as like to completed your ballot. As you go through your ballot, you can use your voter pamphlet to make comparison and you use the internet to lookup candidates and see where they stand on various issues. These are things you just can do in a voting booth. And after you vote you can go on line and track your ballot as it goes through processing and counting.

I believe we have some of the most informed voters of any state and voter turnout varies from from 6th to 10th in nation.

 

[toobfreak]

However, in Washington State, you vote by mail. When you receive your ballot, you also receive a thick pamphlet with complete backgrounds of every candidate. For ever resolution you are voting on there is explanation of the resolution, a cost breakdown, and the argument of those that approve and those that oppose the resolution. There is also a help line that you call with question or to report any problems with voting.

I wonder who writers these booklets or operates the answer line?

If it is in Washington State, then I must assume some crazy, radical group.

 

[Flopper]

Triggered much? You should need to be informed. You would not ask a garbage man for his figures on quantum variation, a person educated and informed in quantum statistics will give you a much better, more accurate figure.

If you were driving, would you be willing to GUESS with your eyes closed whether the traffic light had turned green? People voting with no idea who or what they are voting on, is like driving with your eyes closed just guessing.

Being educated and informed always results in better, more valuable output.

Likewise with voting. Voters need to be informed of the real facts and issues. Then their vote will actually MEAN something. Voters should need to study and pass a simple 3 question basic test to demonstrate they are not total idiots so we know their vote actually counts for a valid view.

If you cannot pass the test, then you must have an IQ below 70. Idiots, imbeciles and morons have no place in our voting system--- noise merely dilutes the value of the other people. I mean, if you took a room full of 30 people whom none knew the first thing about building construction and asked all of them their opinions on the efficacy of the design of a new skyscraper, would you take their votes on whether the design was good or bad seriously? Then act on it? Yet this is what you are arguing for in picking a future leader of the country.

If we educate and inform voters of the issues and candidates, there will be no need to bar hardly anyone.

But I understand: while you are arguing from a position of IDEALISM, I operate from the position of practicality and functionality.

I completely disagree with voter tests. You don't need be smart to understand ballots, candidates and issue. Every state sends voter information and sample ballots to the voters. Intelligence is not an issue in voting. The willingness to spend the time investigating candidates and determining which candidates and resolutions on the ballot you agree with is the mark of an informed voter. There is no test that can measure this.

 

[toobfreak]

I completely disagree with voter tests.

So you need a test to drive a car or get a job, but not one to pick the next world leader.

You don't need be smart to understand ballots, candidates and issue.

You need to be smart to understand most anything. Intelligence is what mainly separates us from the Chimps.

Every state sends voter information and sample ballots to the voters.

My state sends no such thing. They don't even send a sample ballot, paper ballot or anything (unless you ASK for one).

Intelligence is not an issue in voting.

They why can't my dog vote?

 

[Flopper]

So you need a test to drive a car or get a job, but not one to pick the next world leader.


You need to be smart to understand most anything. Intelligence is what mainly separates us from the Chimps.


My state sends no such thing. They don't even send a sample ballot, paper ballot or anything (unless you ASK for one).


They why can't my dog vote?

Voting is essential for political representation, whereas driving is a convenience. Losing the right to drive is inconvenient, but losing the right to vote means having no say in governance and being subject to others' decisions.

Disenfranchising voters weakens democracy by excluding people from political decision-making, leading to policies that do not reflect the needs or interests of the population.

People that have no voice in how they are governed lose respect for those that govern, their policies, and their laws. In the end the results are more autocratic government with policies and laws that further weaken democracy and centralize power.