Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:25 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: The War on Voting Back to Topics
sgm4law

Champion Author
Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Oct 4, 2011 10:43:52 AM

The War on Voting is being waged by the GOP at every level in every state. If they can't win by garnering the votes of the majority, they will make sure the majority cannot vote.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,811
Points:140,910
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 6:01:40 PM

There is no conspiracy for Republicans to deny voting rights. This election should have proved it.

Unfortunately, the conspiracy is now bigger?
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,540
Points:3,778,225
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 5:39:02 PM

The long term outlook for the GOP increasing their portion of the voter base is getting dimmer with each election.

The GOP received less than 35% of the 18-29 year old voters in 2008.

They did about the same this year.

By 2016, those 2008 voters will be the 29-39 age group and not voting for the GOP.

The next crop of new voters may also snub the GOP.

Unless the GOP makes some changes, that dim GOP voting light at the end of the tunnel will only be a flicker.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2012 10:02:59 AM

Success in this election does not mean that the GOP has in any way stopped its war on voting rights for minorities that it believes will not vote for GOP candidates.

Why don't they try to woo the minority voters instead of trying their best to alienate them? Why don't they understand that shifting demographics make this investment in alienation a long-term recipe for complete GOP failure?
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,552
Points:3,248,785
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2012 9:30:33 PM

"Republicans don't need a war on Democratic voters. Obama is driving them away in droves with a combination of ineptness and reality."

Oh? Seems to me that our president carried the state of Maryland last week, so it's not obvious to me where the poster believes this is happening. Perhaps that's the going line over at Fox News?
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:19,633
Points:832,130
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Oct 10, 2012 3:39:16 PM

Republicans don't need a war on Democratic voters. Obama is driving them away in droves with a combination of ineptness and reality.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Oct 10, 2012 3:09:52 PM

After you look at this can you still say we dont need to tighten up on the voting? I am sure that Repubs do it also but Dems have made it a fine art.
Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,552
Points:3,248,785
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Oct 9, 2012 10:19:33 PM

"Statements end in periods. Questions end with question marks."

Just as some folks clearly have a problem with spelling, there are a number who apparently have a weakness with capitalization as well as some who are punctuation-impaired. So, such "subtle" nuances may escape them.
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,150
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2012 4:56:57 PM

SS: "There is a War On Voting being waged by Republicans..."

How do you come up with that drivel? It's completely false on all counts!
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,591
Points:451,865
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2012 4:30:57 PM



SemiSteve, "The War on Voting is being waged by Republicans on Democrats."

nstrdnvstr: "That is just completely untrue!

A majority of people, from both sides of the aisle are in favor of voter ID."

--It is absolutely true. The photo ID thing is just one little battle in the War On Voting. The Republican bill mill ALEC has initiated a lot of stupid little State voter suppression laws:

-Why have early voting periods been shortened if not to suppress the vote?

-Why have voter registration drives been severely hampered by draconian turn-in time constraints if not to suppress the vote?

-Why have voter rolls been unConstitutionally purged in the eleventh hour if not to suppress the vote?

-Why have all of these things been done in Republican governed States if not to suppress the Democratic vote?

There is a War On Voting being waged by Republicans against Democrats. Republicans see their numbers shrinking as typically Dem populations explode across the nation. Republicans know that the only way they can continue to win elections even at a numbers disadvantage is to pull out all the stops. And that means trying to influence the elections any way they can from; voter ID, to all the other battles in the War On Voting, to gerrymandering the districts.

It is just too bad that Republicans have so little confidence in their platform and their candidates that they have to stoop to this. I gotta tell ya. It doesn't make their party look very good. Next thing ya know in a few years there will be the few rich Republicans wielding an apartheid-like control over the starving rest of the nation. They'll take away health care. They'll take away social programs. They'll take away jobs. And they'll take free speech and put it in a 'free speech zone' (where nobody can hear it) and give the loudest voice to the ones with the most money. Oh, whoops! They already did that.
Profile Pic
TAFKATP
Champion Author Denver

Posts:4,411
Points:33,720
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2012 9:33:54 AM

True, nstrdnvstr, true. But then again, I expect Liberals to be on the wrong side of every issue...

Profile Pic
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:40,993
Points:4,633,950
Joined:May 2001
Message Posted: Aug 21, 2012 9:06:26 AM

A little-reported Washington Post poll Monday indicated that nearly 75% of adults in the country support laws requiring voters to show official identification before casting their ballots.

Hardly a partisan issue!
Profile Pic
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:40,993
Points:4,633,950
Joined:May 2001
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2012 4:20:22 PM

SemiSteve, "The War on Voting is being waged by Republicans on Democrats."

That is just completely untrue!

A majority of people, from both sides of the aisle are in favor of voter ID.

Why do you feel the need to lie about this, calling it a partisan issue?
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,150
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2012 3:37:43 PM

SS: "Because when voter participation is highest, Democrats tend to be the winners."

No. When *illegal" voter participation is highest, Democrats tend to be the winners." I hope that clears things up.

SS: "Republicans want to suppress the vote because they are afraid to take their chances on a level playing field!"

No Republicans that I know want to suppress the legitimate vote. You are making things up, as usual.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,591
Points:451,865
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2012 3:27:56 PM

The War on Voting is being waged by Republicans on Democrats.

Republicans don't want more people voting. They want less turn-out.

Because when voter participation is highest, Democrats tend to be the winners.

So Republicans want small voter turn-outs.

That is why Republicans are making all these laws to try to make it more difficult to register and vote.

Republicans want to suppress the vote because they are afraid to take their chances on a level playing field!
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,776
Points:1,016,695
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Aug 17, 2012 11:11:43 AM

"....In the case of Indiana, whose voter ID law was in effect for the 2008 presidential election, there is some data about participation. That was a very good year for Democrats in general, but Democratic turnout rose more in Indiana, with its ID law in force, than in any other state. Georgia, which also had a new voter ID law in place that year for the first time, also had a huge jump in turnout, almost all of it from Democratic voters."

"If, indeed, the voter ID laws inspire drives to register citizens and get them to the polls (and get them photo IDs), won’t America be better off?"
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,591
Points:451,865
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 17, 2012 11:07:01 AM

Florida has shortened the early voting time period.

This was done to reduce voter turn-out in a State where Democratic voters outnumber Republican, yet the Republicans hold a majority in State government.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 1:49:28 PM

Bit by bit reason is winning.
.
>>>Pennsylvania is on Attorney General Eric Holder's target list when it comes to challenging Voter I.D. laws but a judge has ruled that the requirement of photo identification in order to cast a ballot is valid and has refused to grant an injunction on behalf of a Civil Rights group challenging the law.


A Commonwealth Court judge denied a bid by civil rights groups to block the new voter identification law from taking effect, delivering a first-round victory to Gov. Corbett and legislative Republicans who pushed the measure through this spring saying it was needed to prevent voter fraud.<<<

Another case where it seems that asking people to show ID is not restricting anyones right to vote.

Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 11:58:09 AM

What TAFKATP said: <I was demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.>

So I responded in kind. Sorry you didn't get the full context of the conversation, flyboy.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 11:51:48 AM

SGM what I'm trying to say is that your ploy was a chaep shot. There is nothing for me to 'get over'.

You were not asking a question for any reason except to try and make an organization look bad and to try to make a political point. Now thats how the game is played much of the time but up until now you have been pretty much a straight shooter er er er honest person in discussion of topics.
Profile Pic
Bell30012
Champion Author Atlanta

Posts:4,528
Points:692,630
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 10:33:24 AM

What I cannot understand is why the Democrats are so hell bent on refusing to clean up voter registration roles and identifying the voters. Taking dead voters off the roles should be a no brainer but when a state like Texas wants to do it, the DOJ gets involved and says that they can't. The fact that dead voters have voted should be a hint we have a problem. Let's solve it before it gets totally out of hand. I don't care if its 5 dead people voting or 500 dead people voting. Even one is too many. The vote that gets canceled by that fraudulent vote could be yours.

Every citizen in the United States should have some sort of ID. If they are receiving Social Security, how are they getting the money out of the bank with no ID? How do they cash the checks, with no ID? If they have Medicare, how do they go to the doctor? If they have a prescription, how do they pick it up? I'm not buying this crock of crap.

Another great solution would be to allow anyone to cast a ballot. However, first the penalty for a single fraudulent vote should be very stiff with no probated sentences. After all it is our most sacred right. Then anyone that doesn't have an ID puts a fingerprint on the ballot, form or machine. If it turns out you aren't who you say you are, you serve time.

I'm not believing that Democrats are too stupid, too lazy or too disinterested to bother to get IDs in a disproportionate number to Republicans.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,776
Points:1,016,695
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 9:44:01 AM

In answer to her question?

Yep.
Profile Pic
airfresh
Champion Author Massachusetts

Posts:17,776
Points:1,016,695
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 9:19:02 AM

Voter ID laws BOOST Democracy

Written by a Vice Chairwoman of the US Commission on Civil Rights...

"Without a personal identification card issued by some level of government, you are a second-class citizen.

You cannot board an airplane, ride an Amtrak train, buy a six-pack of beer or a pack of cigarettes, open a checking account, enter many public and some private office buildings or even attend an NAACP convention without proving that you are who you say you are. You cannot even qualify for means-tested public support programs such as Medicaid without valid identification.

These requirements have provoked strikingly little objection from the American public. No one argues that it is grossly discriminatory to deprive people without picture IDs access to this wide range of places, programs and activities.

But when it comes to voting, that is exactly the argument. The Democratic Party, the attorney general of the United States and a vocal chorus from THE CIVIL RIGHTS COMMUNITY ARE WAGING WAR ON VOTER ID LAWS ENACTED RECENTLY IN 10 STATES,(capitals are my emphasis-airfresh) laws they see as part of a new voter suppression movement."

"....In the case of Indiana, whose voter ID law was in effect for the 2008 presidential election, there is some data about participation. That was a very good year for Democrats in general, but Democratic turnout rose more in Indiana, with its ID law in force, than in any other state. Georgia, which also had a new voter ID law in place that year for the first time, also had a huge jump in turnout, almost all of it from Democratic voters."

"If, indeed, the voter ID laws inspire drives to register citizens and get them to the polls (and get them photo IDs), won’t America be better off?"
Profile Pic
TAFKATP
Champion Author Denver

Posts:4,411
Points:33,720
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2012 2:40:07 AM

That's because restrictions on guns DON'T WORK!

I'm not sure why that's so difficult to comprehend.

Can you find me ANY evidence WHATSOEVER that the 10 year Assault Weapons Ban stopped even one crime?

I'll be waiting...
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 11:38:48 PM

Get over yourself.

If I wanted to know the specific stance of the NRA, I could go look it up. I just don't care. Their objections to any new legislation on any kind of firearms have been made for as long as I've been paying attention, and if they've ever, ever supported any kind of a restriction at all other than by lip service, I have yet to hear it.

(I should mention that my dad was a member of the NRA while I was growing up and I used to read their magazine in the bathroom. I always enjoyed the section on armed citizens defending themselves from intruders.)

[Edited by: sgm4law at 8/14/2012 11:45:37 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 10:31:33 PM

So Marty you think one shouldnt make unsupported accusations in the form of a 'question'?

Ok then you might tell SGM to stop doing it. Hey I know she learned it from Reid.

SGM are you going to fess up or not?

[Edited by: flyboyUT at 8/14/2012 10:31:58 PM EST]
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 10:05:00 PM

"Isn't that the stance of the NRA? Just curious."

<No. It is not.>

Thanks, TAFKATP. That was easy.
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,391
Points:325,825
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 8:01:50 PM

I dont know. Why dont you dig the information out and report back to us - with a link of course.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 7:50:17 PM

Marty did you stop shoplifting candy bars yet? Just asking a question.
Profile Pic
TAFKATP
Champion Author Denver

Posts:4,411
Points:33,720
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 7:00:53 PM

"Isn't that the stance of the NRA? Just curious."

No. It is not.

I was demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.

The claim that "poor" people and "homeless" people won't be able to vote because they can't obtain photo ID's is ridiculous and absurd.

Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,391
Points:325,825
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 6:50:42 PM

"I propose an IMMEDIATE ban on the requirement that any individual be required to present a valid photo ID to purchase a firearm."

"Isn't that the stance of the NRA? Just curious."



That's not a claim; that's a question.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 6:28:05 PM

SGM - "This is an irritating response to a QUESTION I asked. I did not make a claim; I did not make a statement. Statements end in periods. Questions end with question marks."You tell me what you meant by the whole post you made. What information or idea were you trying to impart?

Regardless of what you thought you were saying what came out was you are saying that you think the NRA's official position is they support that no ID be needed to purchase a firearm.

Now do you wish to clarify just what you thought you were trying to say?

I kind of flat out said what information I received. Is that what you intended to transmit?

If I am right in what you intended to say - I am disappointed in you. If I am in error I will say I'm sorry for not understanding you.


[Edited by: flyboyUT at 8/14/2012 6:31:35 PM EST]
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 2:39:58 PM

<<sgm are you going to try and back up your claim of the position of the NRA or are you going to just say you made an error?>>

<<You made a statement - with no backing that can be seen. Is this another one of those 'he didnt pay taxes for ten years' claims?>>

This is an irritating response to a QUESTION I asked. I did not make a claim; I did not make a statement. Statements end in periods. Questions end with question marks.

Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 1:52:11 PM


sgm are you going to try and back up your claim of the position of the NRA or are you going to just say you made an error?

You made a statement - with no backing that can be seen. Is this another one of those 'he didnt pay taxes for ten years' claims?

AS far as being shot at - let us know the last time it happened. For many of us here it was years ago - when we were defending your right to make comments like you just did.

I propose that we make a subtle change in voting - after a suitable period where people could obtain the qualifications to be eligible it will be required to bring a certifed copy of your DD-214 showing an honorable discharge or a Military ID card showing active duty status. This must also be accompanied by a certifed copy of your 1040 form from last year showing that you actually paid federal income tax.

Lets not make voting easier - lets make it harder. Lets make it so that only those who have3 proven that they are willing to defend the country and pay for its operations can vote. We dont need or want a bunch of people who wont be good citizens trying to tell others how to run the country.
Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:17,844
Points:2,159,800
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 12:54:10 PM

they will make sure the majority cannot vote
--------------------------------------
Majority? HA!
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 11:56:58 AM

"But a similar policy reagarding voting is the stance of most lefties here!"

Hmm, would I rather get shot at or voted at? Hmmm.
Profile Pic
nstrdnvstr
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:40,993
Points:4,633,950
Joined:May 2001
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 8:18:59 AM

sgm4law, ""I propose an IMMEDIATE ban on the requirement that any individual be required to present a valid photo ID to purchase a firearm."

Isn't that the stance of the NRA? Just curious."

No, it is not. But why don't you try to back up that claim.

But a similar policy reagarding voting is the stance of most lefties here!

But you lefties don't want to be consistent on requirements for one's Constitutional rights, do you?
Profile Pic
LTVibe
Champion Author Orlando

Posts:6,701
Points:523,620
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Aug 14, 2012 7:51:39 AM

From flyboy's link: "...felons, when they do vote, strongly favor Democrats..."

Felons favor Democrats. In other words, crooks favor crooks.

;-)
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 8:45:23 PM

SGM I dont know what the policy of the NRA is - why dont you dig the information out and report back to us - with a link of course.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,498
Points:1,565,780
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 8:44:34 PM

When this kind of stuff crops up maybe we might consider tightening up the voter ID stuff.
.
>>>In the eyes of the Obama administration, most Democratic lawmakers and left-leaning editorial pages across the country, voter fraud is a problem that doesn't exist. Allegations of fraud, they say, are little more than pretexts conjured up by Republicans to justify voter ID laws designed to suppress Democratic turnout.
That argument becomes much harder to make after reading a discussion of the 2008 Minnesota Senate race in "Who's Counting?", a new book by conservative journalist John Fund and former Bush Justice Department official Hans von Spakovsky. Although the authors cover the whole range of voter fraud issues, their chapter on Minnesota is enough to convince any skeptic that there are times when voter fraud not only exists but can be critical to the outcome of an important race.

In the '08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close; on the morning after the election, after 2.9 million people had voted, Coleman led Franken by 725 votes.

Franken and his Democratic allies dispatched an army of lawyers to challenge the results. After the first canvass, Coleman's lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election.

During the controversy, a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons -- all ineligible to vote -- who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.

Minnesota Majority took the information to prosecutors across the state, many of whom showed no interest in pursuing it. But Minnesota law requires authorities to investigate such leads. And so far, Fund and von Spakovsky report, 177 people have been convicted -- not just accused, but convicted -- of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial. "The numbers aren't greater," the authors say, "because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and 'knowingly' voted unlawfully." The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.<<<
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 5:55:41 PM

"I propose an IMMEDIATE ban on the requirement that any individual be required to present a valid photo ID to purchase a firearm."

Isn't that the stance of the NRA? Just curious.
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,150
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 4:49:52 PM

SS: "The problem with the fraud argument is there is so little fraud it is almost negligible."

You're only talking about the fraud that we know about. That's probably the lower limit, at best. We have a voting system that is rigged for cheating. Absentee voting is a goldmine for cheating and there is no serious policing for fraud at the poll. On top of that there is no effort to discover fraud after the fact. Only a moron could be caught for voter fraud in our system. So, the published numbers for voter fraud only count the morons who are caught. The sky is the limit for actual fraud.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,591
Points:451,865
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 3:21:42 PM

jacka: "They [liberals] also like to go out and have a homeless person vote for them, by offering them a pack of cigarettes."

--LOL! My, some of the statements around here certainly are entertaining.

I won't embarrass you by asking for a link to support that wild accusation but I would like to know how the hypothetical fraudster controls who the homeless person votes for; since they can not accompany someone into the booth?

Like, how do they even know the homeless person even voted at all instead of simply walking in the entrance and then walking out the exit?
Profile Pic
TAFKATP
Champion Author Denver

Posts:4,411
Points:33,720
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 3:03:50 PM

"Can homeless people get ID?"

Of course they can.

So, MM, SS, and sgm.

I propose an IMMEDIATE ban on the requirement that any individual be required to present a valid photo ID to purchase a firearm.

After all, the right to keep and bear arms is also a Constitutional guarantee...
Profile Pic
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:22,391
Points:325,825
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 2:51:18 PM

"<<They also like to go out and have a homeless person vote for them, by offering them a pack of cigarettes.>>

How's voter id going to stop that, again?"


Can homeless people get ID? Clearly we know who doesn't want the homeless to vote.

[Edited by: MiddletownMarty at 8/13/2012 2:51:53 PM EST]
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,811
Points:140,910
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 2:45:15 PM

Nobody can deny there has been cases of electioneering fraud on both sides.

We can argue who gets caught more often -- who cares. Liberals are big proponents of closing every unfair "doughnut hole" in society. Yet this one they want left wide open -- and deregulated further to the point of "don't ask don't tell" installing an express lane to open unregistered voting (just walk in).

Michigan is relatively new to the ID requirement. I thanked my polling worker last week for doing the extra step. Ironically, she told me that it has actually made her job easier. Swipe your DL and are verified instantly. No more stapled together paper list and highlighter.

Libs are 100% against this -- why? The highlighter lobbyists?

SS: "...But the new laws have the potential to keep infinitely more currently legal voters from voting than fraud cases"

If you are a legal voter, you are registered to your area of residence.

If you are too lazy to update your residential status to vote, you are thus not qualified to vote, even if a citizen.

I hope to never witness the day when Libs implement an open voting system.


[Edited by: e_jeepin at 8/13/2012 2:52:48 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,591
Points:451,865
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 1:13:44 PM

The problem with the fraud argument is there is so little fraud it is almost negligible.

But the new laws have the potential to keep infinitely more currently legal voters from voting than fraud cases.

The result would have a greater negative impact on elections than positive.

One Pennsylvania Republican already admitted it was all to rig the elections in their favor anyway. I guess he didn't know the mic was on.

Profile Pic
TAFKATP
Champion Author Denver

Posts:4,411
Points:33,720
Joined:Sep 2011
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 12:19:04 PM

So, since we can't stop EVERYTHING, we shouldn't do ANYTHING?

Fine. Let's legalize rape and murder.

Or better yet, simply rename this topic to The War on Illegal Voting. Which is really what it is.

Or The War for Democrat Voter Fraud.

Which is just as accurate.

It's obvious that the Democrats' problem with requiring ID to vote is that it makes it even harder to cheat. If they can't win by garnering the votes of the majority, they will make sure the majority can vote several times.
Profile Pic
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:23,364
Points:3,031,070
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 12:14:55 PM

<<They also like to go out and have a homeless person vote for them, by offering them a pack of cigarettes.>>

How's voter id going to stop that, again?
Profile Pic
LTVibe
Champion Author Orlando

Posts:6,701
Points:523,620
Joined:Mar 2010
Message Posted: Aug 13, 2012 9:44:05 AM

>>>Topic: The War on Voting<<<

In this case, the 'war' is justified

"Senator Scott Brown is right. For the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to be mailing voter-registration forms to nearly 480,000 welfare recipients — at a cost to taxpayers of more than $275,000 — is indeed "outrageous," as the Republican incumbent declared last week. The vast get-out-the-welfare-vote campaign "smells wrong," he says. So it does, but not for the reason he claims."

"The key problem with the mass-mailing nudging everyone on the state's welfare rolls to register to vote isn't that it was prompted by a lawsuit filed by several left-wing advocacy groups, one of which -- Demos -- is chaired by the daughter of Brown's leading challenger, Elizabeth Warren. It isn't that public funds and records are being deployed to drum up votes among people considerably more likely to support Democrats instead of Republicans. And it isn't that state officials agreed to settle the activists' lawsuit so quickly as to suggest the whole thing was choreographed in advance — a ploy to benefit the party that dominates Bay State politics and already controls the rest of the congressional delegation."

"What's truly objectionable here is the goal that supposedly justifies the whole operation: the idea that states should do all they can to make registering to vote and casting a ballot as easy as possible."

Profile Pic
KatmanDo
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:15,552
Points:3,248,785
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 11, 2012 12:27:06 PM

"My relatives you played in the Civil War thought they were fighting for their country. My grandfather who fought in WW I was under the impression he was doing it."

Fighting FOR their country? Certainly. "Defending their country"? Hardly. The two aren't necessarily the same. Gang members who visit violence upon any "unauthorized" people who enter "their" territory undoubtedly feel they're defending their territory, too. Police officers who go rogue and brutalize citizens in their communities very likely feel they are defending the good citizens of their community as well as their brothers-in-arms. Believing something doesn't necessarily make it so. When I was a child I sincerely believed that I had Santa Claus to thank for all of the presents which "magically" appeared under our Christmas tree. It turned out that I simply had been misinformed.
Post a reply Back to Topics