There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

This. One vote per legal voter. That is all this is about. Any problems pertaining to attaining proper ID are addressable.

(08-15-2013 08:45 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 08:07 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 07:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Democrats want voter fraud. Therefore they oppose anything that makes it more difficult.

What you should have to prove to vote is 1) who you are, 2) that you are a resident of the precinct eligible to vote, and 3) that you have not already voted elsewhere. The registration process should establish 2), and a photo ID should establish 1). There are a lot of potential abuses of 3), and I'm not sure there is any valid procedure to prevent them at this point.

No we do not. We want everyone that is eligible to vote to have a fair opportunity to vote. You prove who you are and where you live during the registration process. When you vote your name is checked off as having already voted. You prevent fraudulent voting by prosecuting those that attempt to do so or do so. It is a felony and isn't taken lightly.

If someone wants to rig an election they don't attempt to bring people to the polls to vote under someone else's name. It is ineffective and the consequences if caught are severe.

No sir. That is not the reality of the situation. Democrats rely on people voting multiple times, fake people voting and illegal immigrants to win elections.

The excuses Democrats make when they try to defend their reasoning for striking down voter ID laws are laughable. It's why the Democrats do not want to secure the southern border and it is why they are adamantly against someone having to prove who they are to vote in our elections.

You forgot dead people.

(08-16-2013 12:44 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

This. One vote per legal voter. That is all this is about. Any problems pertaining to attaining proper ID are addressable.

I'm glad we finally agree on something.

(08-16-2013 09:07 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 08:53 AM)jh Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 04:53 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 11:42 PM)jh Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 07:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Democrats want voter fraud. Therefore they oppose anything that makes it more difficult.
What you should have to prove to vote is 1) who you are, 2) that you are a resident of the precinct eligible to vote, and 3) that you have not already voted elsewhere. The registration process should establish 2), and a photo ID should establish 1). There are a lot of potential abuses of 3), and I'm not sure there is any valid procedure to prevent them at this point.

What are the Republican goals for voter id laws?

I don't know. Ask a republican. My goals for voter ideas are stated in the post you quoted. It's pretty clear that democrats do not want a system that accomplishes those three goals, since they resist efforts to make it so, and there must be some reason for such opposition. What is it?
No system run by humans is going to be perfect. So let me pose it a different way. Given a choice between a system where either 1) some people who should be entitled to vote are disqualified, or 2) some people who should not be entitled to vote are allowed to vote, which way should we choose to err? And realistically, how many people would you expect to see in either category?

So you can only speak for Democrats. Interesting.

No, I don't speak for anyone but myself.

If you are looking for me to criticize republicans on this issue, here is what I see. I don't think they go far enough. My guess is that R's probably abuse the absentee balloting provisions to violate my provision number 3 above. And I don't see them proposing anything that will close that loophole. So I go further than they do.

As for the people who don't have ID's to vote. If they are too poor to afford an ID, then they should be getting welfare benefits. To get welfare benefits, they must produce ID's that are adequate to vote. So when I try to identify that subset of our population that voter ID would disenfranchise, I have a really difficult time figuring out who they would be. By definition, it must be a bunch of poor people who are so withdrawn from society that they do not take advantage of the benefits available to them. I have a hard time believing that 1) there are a lot of these people, or that 2) their exclusion from the political process is a major problem.

Why don't you start by explaining to me exactly who this person who is being disenfranchised could possibly be. And after that, why don't you explain why excluding this person is a greater problem than letting people who should not vote get to vote, or letting people vote more than once.

Actually under the voter ID law just passed in NC identification for public assistance is not acceptable at the polls.

(08-16-2013 12:46 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:44 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

This. One vote per legal voter. That is all this is about. Any problems pertaining to attaining proper ID are addressable.

I'm glad we finally agree on something.

We agree on probably 90%. That stuff is no fun to argue about.

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

You prove who you are and where you live in the registration process.

(08-15-2013 02:13 PM)Smaug 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?

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

These laws aren't all about race(though many are). It is about keeping Democrats from voting.

(08-16-2013 01:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

You prove who you are and where you live in the registration process.

How does the person that gives you the ballot know who you are? Granted in my small town...they know me..but..that is not the case in Urban areas and large precincts.

All I see going on at my precinct is people stating their name and being given a ballot. Hell..you don't even have to show a registration card. I doubt that it happens much at all...but...this process can be easily defrauded by someone not a registered voter or even legal citizen. ID eliminates that entirely. I don't see the problem with it. Hell...we could have our voter info incorporated into the ID if we wanted to.

(08-16-2013 01:33 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 02:13 PM)Smaug 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?

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

These laws aren't all about race(though many are). It is about keeping Democrats from voting.

yep..that's it. God forbid some dimwit Democrat can't find a way to get a proper ID. I can't think of a single instance in which someone would not be able to obtain an ID. For every excuse...there is a reasonable solution that can be found. This is not rocket science.

The more Democrats make this silly assertion? The more suspicious I become of them. You say it is about stopping them Democrats from voting? I say it is about allowing ones not legally qualified to vote for Democrats is the point.

(08-16-2013 01:55 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 01:33 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 02:13 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

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

(08-15-2013 12:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  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.

These laws aren't all about race(though many are). It is about keeping Democrats from voting.

yep..that's it. God forbid some dimwit Democrat can't find a way to get a proper ID. I can't think of a single instance in which someone would not be able to obtain an ID. For every excuse...there is a reasonable solution that can be found. This is not rocket science.

The more Democrats make this silly assertion? The more suspicious I become of them. You say it is about stopping them Democrats from voting? I say it is about allowing ones not legally qualified to vote for Democrats is the point.

That is because you have been brainwashed into believing the BS coming out of the Repealican'ts talking points that voter fraud is an epidemic.

Sounds to me like Democrats are calling their fellow Democrats stupid or lazy.

(08-16-2013 01:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 01:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

You prove who you are and where you live in the registration process.

How does the person that gives you the ballot know who you are? Granted in my small town...they know me..but..that is not the case in Urban areas and large precincts.

All I see going on at my precinct is people stating their name and being given a ballot. Hell..you don't even have to show a registration card. I doubt that it happens much at all...but...this process can be easily defrauded by someone not a registered voter or even legal citizen. ID eliminates that entirely. I don't see the problem with it. Hell...we could have our voter info incorporated into the ID if we wanted to.

Actually you state your name and address. This is cross checked with the registration on file. Coming to the polls and claiming to be someone else in order to cast a vote just plain isn't how you cheat. It doesn't produce significant results to warrant the risk. It isn't practical. But if it were utilized as a way to cheat how the heck is an ID card going to prevent it? How hard does anyone think it is to print a fake ID in the name of the dead person who's name is still on the books, or the elderly person that hasn't voted in ten year? Does anyone really think that a volunteer poll worker or even an employee of the board of elections has the expertise or time when the line to vote is two hours long, to identify a forged ID?

Voter ID is a political strategy not a good faith effort to prevent fraud. If it were then the first place they would be cracking down would be in absentee voting. It is the easiest way to vote fraudulently but it is also a type of voting that is more often utilized by those that vote Republican.

(08-16-2013 02:59 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Sounds to me like Democrats are calling their fellow Democrats stupid or lazy.

Both.

(08-16-2013 07:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 01:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 01:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

You prove who you are and where you live in the registration process.

How does the person that gives you the ballot know who you are? Granted in my small town...they know me..but..that is not the case in Urban areas and large precincts.

All I see going on at my precinct is people stating their name and being given a ballot. Hell..you don't even have to show a registration card. I doubt that it happens much at all...but...this process can be easily defrauded by someone not a registered voter or even legal citizen. ID eliminates that entirely. I don't see the problem with it. Hell...we could have our voter info incorporated into the ID if we wanted to.

Actually you state your name and address. This is cross checked with the registration on file. Coming to the polls and claiming to be someone else in order to cast a vote just plain isn't how you cheat. It doesn't produce significant results to warrant the risk. It isn't practical. But if it were utilized as a way to cheat how the heck is an ID card going to prevent it? How hard does anyone think it is to print a fake ID in the name of the dead person who's name is still on the books, or the elderly person that hasn't voted in ten year? Does anyone really think that a volunteer poll worker or even an employee of the board of elections has the expertise or time when the line to vote is two hours long, to identify a forged ID?

Voter ID is a political strategy not a good faith effort to prevent fraud. If it were then the first place they would be cracking down would be in absentee voting. It is the easiest way to vote fraudulently but it is also a type of voting that is more often utilized by those that vote Republican.

Now that was a valid argument against voter ID. I am glad to see at least one Liberal here can state his or her case and back it up with a solid argument. Thank you.

(08-16-2013 07:31 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 01:49 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 01:30 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(08-16-2013 12:39 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  There is no valid argument against voter ID laws. To be against proving who you are to vote in an election that impacts everyone is the true definition of corruption. You show an ID to buy alcohol. You show an ID to purchase cigarettes. In that case you are only hurting yourself. When people who are not qualified to vote do so, they hurt everyone.

You prove who you are and where you live in the registration process.

How does the person that gives you the ballot know who you are? Granted in my small town...they know me..but..that is not the case in Urban areas and large precincts.

All I see going on at my precinct is people stating their name and being given a ballot. Hell..you don't even have to show a registration card. I doubt that it happens much at all...but...this process can be easily defrauded by someone not a registered voter or even legal citizen. ID eliminates that entirely. I don't see the problem with it. Hell...we could have our voter info incorporated into the ID if we wanted to.

Actually you state your name and address. This is cross checked with the registration on file. Coming to the polls and claiming to be someone else in order to cast a vote just plain isn't how you cheat. It doesn't produce significant results to warrant the risk. It isn't practical. But if it were utilized as a way to cheat how the heck is an ID card going to prevent it? How hard does anyone think it is to print a fake ID in the name of the dead person who's name is still on the books, or the elderly person that hasn't voted in ten year? Does anyone really think that a volunteer poll worker or even an employee of the board of elections has the expertise or time when the line to vote is two hours long, to identify a forged ID?

Voter ID is a political strategy not a good faith effort to prevent fraud. If it were then the first place they would be cracking down would be in absentee voting. It is the easiest way to vote fraudulently but it is also a type of voting that is more often utilized by those that vote Republican.

You almost had it right until your last sentence. I read where you got that claim and you are using Florida's 2008 data and a handful of other blue states. That is not true on a national level or constant. Also Absentee ballots are not the main source of voter fraud. Rigging ballots, multiple voting, votes from non citizens and registering people who do not exist lead the charge.

http://thegazette.com/2012/09/13/most-ar...democrats/

http://go.bloomberg.com/political-capita...l-ballots/

(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.

In HBG, we are going to have a special election to decide the mayoral race based on a court ruling.

I registered and voted for the first time in my life b/c I thought it would make a difference (and it did).

When I showed the poll worker my ID, he looked at me like I was crazy. I had no idea it wasn't required.

I am going to have so much fun voting at every precinct the next go round.

Not having to show ID is a fkn joke. ....my turn now

NSA is getting so good, all we need to do to vote is walk out our front door listening to the radio.
When you want to vote for a candidate just raise your hand. Herr Obama and the NSA gestapo will
have votes totaled within seconds. Bet all votes go their way.

The fact of the matter is that voter ID's make it less likely that certain segments of the population will vote. Those segments of society tend to vote Democrat.

Anyone attempting to give another reason is just spinning.

(08-17-2013 10:01 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  The fact of the matter is that voter ID's make it less likely that certain segments of the population will vote. Those segments of society tend to vote Democrat.

Anyone attempting to give another reason is just spinning.

What fact(s) support that?

"fact of the matter" and "less likely" in the same sentence is a pathetic troll attempt.

You're response is pure spin.

Loser.