http://twitchy.com/2013/08/14/fundamenta...r-id-laws/

Quote:Alone among all of my public civil rights -- assembly, trial, bearing arms, political speech -- somehow, voting cannot be burdened with ID.

Quote:Voting should be as easy as buying liquor. Which of course requires a valid photo ID and a minimum age of 21...

Another issue where the dems are aligned against public opinion. But that is not what they care about. There is a reason that the political corruption in Chicago was the subject of jokes. Everybody knew it was routine and there was little they could do about it.

Is it a coincidence that Chicago was/is one of two strongholds of the Communists in this country and Chi-town is acknowledged to be the leader in election shenanigans?

Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Want to rethink that?

(08-14-2013 08:21 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  http://twitchy.com/2013/08/14/fundamenta...r-id-laws/

Quote:Alone among all of my public civil rights -- assembly, trial, bearing arms, political speech -- somehow, voting cannot be burdened with ID.

Quote:Voting should be as easy as buying liquor. Which of course requires a valid photo ID and a minimum age of 21...

Another issue where the dems are aligned against public opinion. But that is not what they care about. There is a reason that the political corruption in Chicago was the subject of jokes. Everybody knew it was routine and there was little they could do about it.

Is it a coincidence that Chicago was/is one of two strongholds of the Communists in this country and Chi-town is acknowledged to be the leader in election shenanigans?

Of course they are being dishonest. Democrats rely on voter fraud to win elections. Voter ID makes that harder to accomplish.

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

LOL.

One vote per legal voter is a right.

(08-14-2013 10:32 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  One vote per legal voter is a right.

I voted in 6 states in the last election.

(08-15-2013 01:01 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 10:32 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  One vote per legal voter is a right.

I voted in 6 states in the last election.

I should report you.

The conservatives that have taken control in NC are pushing this agenda. I oppose their bill because they went too far. I fully support voter ID..but oppose the end of early voting and registration on voting day. I see nothing wrong with either of these things.

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Bless your heart.

I still haven't had it explained to me in any convincing way how requiring you to prove you are who you say you are is inherently racist.

(08-15-2013 12:55 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  The conservatives that have taken control in NC are pushing this agenda. I oppose their bill because they went too far. I fully support voter ID..but oppose the end of early voting and registration on voting day. I see nothing wrong with either of these things.

Do not see how registering on a voting day is a good thing.
Too busy taking care of the voting to do registration. Shouldn't
something be mailed out to verify they live at an address before voting?

(08-15-2013 12:55 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  The conservatives that have taken control in NC are pushing this agenda. I oppose their bill because they went too far. I fully support voter ID..but oppose the end of early voting and registration on voting day. I see nothing wrong with either of these things.

Going too far is de rigeur in political agendas... It gives you something to compromise with and still end up where you want to be.

So long as we have the technology to avoid putting the burden of recognizing valid ID onto a poll volunteer. Slide your ID into a machine that reads it and a database that pulls up a picture on a screen that the pollster can view and match to the ID (if not the person) and I'm okay.

What I don't want is deceased or incapacitated John Smith's ID with a picture of Jack Doe on it being used by Jack Doe to vote twice hoping that the pollster looks closely enough to recognize the re-lamination.

(08-15-2013 12:10 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 01:01 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 10:32 PM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  One vote per legal voter is a right.

I voted in 6 states in the last election.

I should report you.

Go ahead and waste your time and tax dollars on a joke.

(08-15-2013 12:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Bless your heart.

I still haven't had it explained to me in any convincing way how requiring you to prove you are who you say you are is inherently racist.

It's not. It's the forms of ID which are prejudicial. College ID doesn't count? Why?

(08-15-2013 01:56 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 12:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Bless your heart.

I still haven't had it explained to me in any convincing way how requiring you to prove you are who you say you are is inherently racist.

It's not. It's the forms of ID which are prejudicial. College ID doesn't count? Why?

I don't know. I'm not sure how that makes it racist, though.

(08-15-2013 01:56 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 12:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Bless your heart.

I still haven't had it explained to me in any convincing way how requiring you to prove you are who you say you are is inherently racist.

It's not. It's the forms of ID which are prejudicial. College ID doesn't count? Why?

College ID doesn't work because it establishes who you are but not that you live in the precinct. There was the story of the University of Texas student complaining because he couldn't vote in Austin on his UT ID or his California driver's license. Umm, dude, if you have a California license, shouldn't you be voting in California?

Given that more whites go to university than blacks, hard to see how prohibiting a university ID is racist.

(08-15-2013 02:36 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 01:56 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 12:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Bless your heart.

I still haven't had it explained to me in any convincing way how requiring you to prove you are who you say you are is inherently racist.

It's not. It's the forms of ID which are prejudicial. College ID doesn't count? Why?

College ID doesn't work because it establishes who you are but not that you live in the precinct. There was the story of the University of Texas student complaining because he couldn't vote in Austin on his UT ID or his California driver's license. Umm, dude, if you have a California license, shouldn't you be voting in California?

Given that more whites go to university than blacks, hard to see how prohibiting a university ID is racist.

I'm not saying it's racist. You should just provide some sort of bill. If you've been voting in the same precinct then any ID should be fine. Why shorten early voting?

(08-15-2013 12:55 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  The conservatives that have taken control in NC are pushing this agenda. I oppose their bill because they went too far. I fully support voter ID..but oppose the end of early voting and registration on voting day. I see nothing wrong with either of these things.

I'd like to see early voting reduced, I don't have a problem with it in general, but it's just not necessary to have it for as long as they do in my opinion. Now same-day registration needs to be eliminated. It invites way too much opportunity for voter fraud, and besides, it's not like elections are a surprise.

(08-15-2013 03:07 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 12:55 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  The conservatives that have taken control in NC are pushing this agenda. I oppose their bill because they went too far. I fully support voter ID..but oppose the end of early voting and registration on voting day. I see nothing wrong with either of these things.

I'd like to see early voting reduced, I don't have a problem with it in general, but it's just not necessary to have it for as long as they do in my opinion. Now same-day registration needs to be eliminated. It invites way too much opportunity for voter fraud, and besides, it's not like elections are a surprise.

56 percent of the voters in the last election here in NC voted early. Those 17 days helped in several ways. It prevented election day polling places from being overwhelmed. It also allows people an opportunity to vote that might not be able to on election day. If you work out of town it can be difficult to make it to the polls by 7:30pm. If you go to the polls before work and there is a two hour wait do you stay in line and risk getting docked pay or fired? If you arrive after work and there is a two hour wait, do you leave because you have to pick up your child at daycare before 6pm or pay a $20 late pickup? Early voting helps more people vote. It isn't that people don't want to vote or are too lazy to vote. It is that it is hard to make it to the polls for working people when there is a limited window of time. The flexibility of a 17 day early voting period encourages greater participation.

Same day registration is more about people that have moved since they last voted and need to reregister than anything else. It is done during early voting and the vote can be provisional until the address is confirmed.

(08-15-2013 02:36 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 01:56 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 12:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(08-14-2013 08:48 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Voting is a right. All of those other things are not.

Bless your heart.

I still haven't had it explained to me in any convincing way how requiring you to prove you are who you say you are is inherently racist.

It's not. It's the forms of ID which are prejudicial. College ID doesn't count? Why?

College ID doesn't work because it establishes who you are but not that you live in the precinct. There was the story of the University of Texas student complaining because he couldn't vote in Austin on his UT ID or his California driver's license. Umm, dude, if you have a California license, shouldn't you be voting in California?

Given that more whites go to university than blacks, hard to see how prohibiting a university ID is racist.

The photo ID is to show that you are who you say you are. It is a silly requirement but if we are going to require it a college ID is going to do just as good a job proving that as anything else. You establish that you live in the precinct when you register to vote.

If poll workers are going to do an in depth examination of everyone's photo ID, checking the exact name, exact address, birthdate etc. to make sure everything is exactly the same on the registration and on the photo ID we are going to be in for some crazy times. Are they going to deny the right to vote to someone that has an inconsistency between the two? What is the DL says junior and the registration doesn't or what if a computer entry error occurs and the address on one reads West instead of East Main Street. Expect extremely long lines, angry voters and frustrated poll workers.

As far as repressing the college vote you might find it interesting what the new majority Republican county board of elections are doing to reduce the Appalachian State and Elizabeth City State vote.
http://www.wral.com/nc-elections-boards-.../12776675/