Why Do Democrats Oppose Voter ID?

[M14 Shooter]

Allow me to repeat myself - that is not the only way to verify voting qualifications. And since there are other - less restrictive ways - then disqualifying a person from voting because they are homeless is not a legitimate restriction on voting rights.

As the meaningful right to vote is predicated on every voter being who they say they are and voting in accordance with where they live, disqualifying someone because they cannot prove where they live is perfectly legitimate

For example a person can register in one, and only one, precinct and only be allowed to vote in the precinct they register in.
Homeless man: "I usually sleep under the bridge at 57th and 14th streets.
Election official: "Ok, that's precinct 98. That is your voting precinct and you'll vote at the King Community Center on 58th. You know where that is? Now, we're going to print your voter registration/voter ID (with photo). It will take about 15 minutes."

This is laughable at best for no reason other than there's no verification whatsoever by the state -- your idea allows anyone to claim to be anyone and vote virtually anywhere.

 

[AtticusF]

I never mentioned anything about registering voters. Are you trying to move the goalposts?
I asked why requiring an address to register is a legitimate restriction of voting. What's your answer to that?

I think you need to read your posts more carefully, as you are obviously talking about registering voters.
Registration is the least restrictive means for the state to verify that a prospective voter is eligible to vote and that he votes in the correct place. To verify that the person votes in the correct place, that person must have a verifiable home address.

I think YOU may need to read my posts again. I am asking why requiring an address to register is a legitimate restriction on voting

Allow me to repeat myself:

To verify that the person votes in the correct place, that person must have a verifiable home address.

There you go.

Allow me to repeat myself - that is not the only way to verify voting qualifications. And since there are other - less restrictive ways - then disqualifying a person from voting because they are homeless is not a legitimate restriction on voting rights.

so now you're arguing about homeless people? I really don't want someone who is so incompetent that they can't even provide themselves with a home voting anyway. Why would you?

Sorry, homeless people have a right to vote too. Property ownership or living in an apartment are not a requirement, nor should it be.

 

[g5000]

Look, the Democrats wanna rig Elections. But so do the Republicans. We know this. Voter ID helps make it harder for them to do that. It really is shocking so many oppose it.

Are you sure you are a Libertarian? Everything you post demonstrates you are not.

Voter ID is a government intrusion into our voting rights. It is also ineffective at stopping the types of fraud which occur. So what self-respecting Libertarian would support wasting taxpayer dollars on an ineffective government intrusion into our lives? Huh?

Voter ID is a yellow brick on the road to national identity papers. And that road to totalitarian hell is paved with good intentions.

It is shocking you support it.

My little finger is more Libertarian than you are.

What government costs are there to requiring ID to vote. You've never answered that question.

Who is going to make the IDs?

How many people who are otherwise eligible to vote don't have ID do you think? Maybe a couple thousand nationwide?

Come on, try some honesty for a change

Try being smarter than the average bear for a change. Recent court rulings have found much, much more than "a couple thousand nationwide" dumb ass. Did you not know this?

Of course you didn't. You are a Voter ID advocate. By definition, you don't know shit about the topic.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sorry, homeless people have a right to vote too. Property ownership or living in an apartment are not a requirement, nor should it be.

Everyone has a right to vote, at the proper place and time as assigned by the state
If you cannot prove to the state where you live, then the state cannot assign you that proper place.

 

[nodoginnafight]

"This is laughable at best for no reason other than there's no verification whatsoever by the state"

Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

So now you want an FBI background check on every prospective voter to verify the address? At some point no matter how you do it - someone is taking someone's word for it.

You do realize that don't you?

 

[M14 Shooter]

"This is laughable at best for no reason other than there's no verification whatsoever by the state"
Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

My point, proven. Thank you.

 

[AtticusF]

Sorry, homeless people have a right to vote too. Property ownership or living in an apartment are not a requirement, nor should it be.

Everyone has a right to vote, at the proper place and time as assigned by the state
If you cannot prove to the state where you live, then the state cannot assign you that proper place.

If you are registered to vote, you have fulfilled that requirement.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Sorry, homeless people have a right to vote too. Property ownership or living in an apartment are not a requirement, nor should it be.

Everyone has a right to vote, at the proper place and time as assigned by the state
If you cannot prove to the state where you live, then the state cannot assign you that proper place.

If you are registered to vote, you have fulfilled that requirement.

You cannot register to vote without a verifiable address.

 

[g5000]

Does a liquor store ask for ID because they don't want to sell liquor to one who can legally buy liquor?

Still going with the Apples and Oranges Fallacy? Really?

Still using the cop out by saying it is apples and oranges without backing it up, I see.
That twice in one thread....and over a dozen times in the past few weeks.

I get tired of explaining the stupidity of that liquor ID bullshit. And I have explained it several times in the past few weeks.

But I guess you willfully blind yourself to avoid seeing how stupid the argument is.

There is only one way to prove someone is of age at the point of purchase for liquor, and that is with an ID.

Got it? Has that sunk in? Don't let it slide off your brain as I add some more explanation. Hold onto that. I'll say it again. There is only one way to prove someone is of age at the point of purchase for liquor, and that is with an ID.

So there is your Apple.


Here's the Orange: Voter ID has never been proven, not even once, to be the only means to stop or prevent the types of voter fraud which occur.

Let's put those two statements together so you can write them down. And let's color-code them and make them real big so you can't say I avoid splainin the fallacy of your argument:

Apple: There is only one way to prove someone is of age at the point of purchase for liquor, and that is with an ID.

Orange: Voter ID has never been proven, not even once, to be the only means to stop or prevent the types of voter fraud which occur.


Now copy this down. Write it on a Post-It Note and stick it on your computer so you never, ever make this ridiculous mistake again.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

So now you want an FBI background check on every prospective voter to verify the address? At some point no matter how you do it - someone is taking someone's word for it.

You do realize that don't you?

So if that proves your point - then you have been arguing against address requirements ???

Odd.

 

[Impenitent]

Does a liquor store ask for ID because they don't want to sell liquor to one who can legally buy liquor?

Or is the law in place that they must ask for ID to ensure one who can NOT legally buy liquor, does not do so?

Do you believe that people who can legally buy liquor, do not because they don't want to go through the hassle of showing ID?

Would you say the law that was passed that insisted on liquor stores asking for ID was designed to suppress liquor sales to those that can legally buy liquor?

Texas AG and Gov candidate Greg Abbott can buy liquor with his ID, but can't vote with it:

"Abbott was flagged because his license lists his name as “Gregory Wayne Abbott” while his voter registration record simply calls him “Greg Abbott."

"

Surely you're not suggesting Abbott wasn't allowed to vote.

By his own law, he would have been disenfranchised, for that election, if not for an amendment offered by Wendy Davis, who was also blocked from voting, that would allow other documents as proof that the different names applied to the same people,

My 94 year old mother, who has voted
republican in every election since WWII, was blocked from voting by this law, even though the local election judge knew her quite well.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Allow me to repeat myself - that is not the only way to verify voting qualifications. And since there are other - less restrictive ways - then disqualifying a person from voting because they are homeless is not a legitimate restriction on voting rights.

For example a person can register in one, and only one, precinct and only be allowed to vote in the precinct they register in.

Homeless man: "I usually sleep under the bridge at 57th and 14th streets.
Election official: "Ok, that's precinct 98. That is your voting precinct and you'll vote at the King Community Center on 58th. You know where that is? Now, we're going to print your voter registration/voter ID (with photo). It will take about 15 minutes."

Too many people have fought and died to secure the right to vote for all Americans for us to just piss that away for no legitimate reason.

I disagree. I think a person should EARN the right to vote. Would I make "have a home" a requirement? No, but for sure most homeless wouldn't meet my requirements.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

As I said: your idea allows anyone to claim to be anyone and vote virtually anywhere.
I again thank you for proving my point.

As the meaningful right to vote is predicated on every voter being who they say they are and voting in accordance with where they live, disqualifying someone because they cannot prove who they are and where they live is perfectly legitimate.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Allow me to repeat myself - that is not the only way to verify voting qualifications. And since there are other - less restrictive ways - then disqualifying a person from voting because they are homeless is not a legitimate restriction on voting rights.

For example a person can register in one, and only one, precinct and only be allowed to vote in the precinct they register in.

Homeless man: "I usually sleep under the bridge at 57th and 14th streets.
Election official: "Ok, that's precinct 98. That is your voting precinct and you'll vote at the King Community Center on 58th. You know where that is? Now, we're going to print your voter registration/voter ID (with photo). It will take about 15 minutes."

Too many people have fought and died to secure the right to vote for all Americans for us to just piss that away for no legitimate reason.

Shut the fuck up. I mean seriously. Shut the fuck up.

Can you go into a gun store and buy a gun without providing ID? No ? then shut up about with your stupid " you can't make it harder for people to exercise their rights bullshit"

 

[nodoginnafight]

Allow me to repeat myself - that is not the only way to verify voting qualifications. And since there are other - less restrictive ways - then disqualifying a person from voting because they are homeless is not a legitimate restriction on voting rights.

For example a person can register in one, and only one, precinct and only be allowed to vote in the precinct they register in.

Homeless man: "I usually sleep under the bridge at 57th and 14th streets.
Election official: "Ok, that's precinct 98. That is your voting precinct and you'll vote at the King Community Center on 58th. You know where that is? Now, we're going to print your voter registration/voter ID (with photo). It will take about 15 minutes."

Too many people have fought and died to secure the right to vote for all Americans for us to just piss that away for no legitimate reason.

I disagree. I think a person should EARN the right to vote. Would I make "have a home" a requirement? No, but for sure most homeless wouldn't meet my requirements.

Have you ever noticed that people who select a screen name that attests to their intelligence are some of the most idiotic posters on these boards.

I guess it just goes to show you ... you don't have to try to TELL people you are intelligent. If you really ARE intelligent, they'll know.

 

[nodoginnafight]

"As I said: your idea allows anyone to claim to be anyone and vote virtually anywhere."

As I said, same thing goes for your system too.

 

[g5000]

Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

So now you want an FBI background check on every prospective voter to verify the address? At some point no matter how you do it - someone is taking someone's word for it.

You do realize that don't you?

So if that proves your point - then you have been arguing against address requirements ???

Odd.

I am okay with tightening up voter registration. That will actually have an impact on voter fraud.

I am also okay with a proper purging of voter registration rolls. This will remove the deceased and those who have moved out of the voting district. Key word: proper. Some of the purges have been done incompetently. But when done properly, this will prevent someone voting in a deceased or relocated person's name.

I also like the electronic system that has been put in place in several states that keeps track of when someone has voted so if they try to vote in more than one place, it triggers an alert. This has actually caught fraudsters.

Not only am I okay with these things, I think we should be doing them in earnest.

Voter ID has not done shit. It is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

So now you want an FBI background check on every prospective voter to verify the address? At some point no matter how you do it - someone is taking someone's word for it.

You do realize that don't you?

So if that proves your point - then you have been arguing against address requirements ???

Odd.

I am okay with tightening up voter registration. That will actually have an impact on voter fraud.

I am also okay with a proper purging of voter registration rolls. This will remove the deceased and those who have moved out of the voting district. Key word: proper. Some of the purges have been done incompetently. But when done properly, this will prevent someone voting in a deceased or relocated person's name.

I also like the electronic system that has been put in place in several states that keeps track of when someone has voted so if they try to vote in more than one place, it triggers an alert. This has actually caught fraudsters.

Voter ID has not done shit. It is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

I think we are pretty close to agreement. I have no problem with any provisions that clean up problems as long as they don't prevent the eligible from voting. And not having a home address should NOT render someone as ineligible.

Honestly, it pisses me off to see people disregard the sacrifices so many have made to secure that right to vote for all Americans. They are essentially pissing on the graves of heroes.

 

[M14 Shooter]

"As I said: your idea allows anyone to claim to be anyone and vote virtually anywhere." As I said, same thing goes for your system too.

Yes... because being able to vote because you can claim your name is Joe and live under the 82nd street bridge is just as secure and requiring a state-issued photo ID with an address.
:doh:

The state has a compelling interest in protecting the right to vote; the meaningful right to vote is predicated on every voter being who they say they are and voting in accordance with where they live. To that end, the state can and absolutely should require that you prove you are who you say you are when you live where you say you live, both when you show up to vote and, absolutely, when you register to vote. If this ever changes, as you apparently hope it does, then everyone's right to vote is diminished.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Utterly absurd. The verification is the prospective voter's sworn statement.
How is the state going to verify that the presented verification of address is not fake?

So now you want an FBI background check on every prospective voter to verify the address? At some point no matter how you do it - someone is taking someone's word for it.

You do realize that don't you?

So if that proves your point - then you have been arguing against address requirements ???

Odd.

I am okay with tightening up voter registration. That will actually have an impact on voter fraud.

I am also okay with a proper purging of voter registration rolls. This will remove the deceased and those who have moved out of the voting district. Key word: proper. Some of the purges have been done incompetently. But when done properly, this will prevent someone voting in a deceased or relocated person's name.

I also like the electronic system that has been put in place in several states that keeps track of when someone has voted so if they try to vote in more than one place, it triggers an alert. This has actually caught fraudsters.

Not only am I okay with these things, I think we should be doing them in earnest.

Voter ID has not done shit. It is a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Without the requirement that you present a valid ID at the poll, how does the state verify that you are who you claim to be?