Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Main discussion area is here. Reply to a message to continue a discussion thread, or create your own new Topics.
User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Kansas, and what is reasonable.

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 19 10:06

Neck, from the article:

"Those states have enacted laws requiring new voters to provide a birth certificate, passport or other proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote. People who register using the federal form only need to sign a statement, under penalty of perjury, that he or she is a U.S. citizen."

Did you know one of the "other proof(s) of U.S. citizenship" is a Kansas issued Driver's license/photo ID? The use of the words "extremely rare" or "paucity" in describing the numbers of fraudulent votes cast doesn't do much for me, given razor thin election returns. Reasonable people and the SCOTUS agree.

Neck do you?

Presenting a State Issued photo I.D. at the polls is a reasonable requirement.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 19 12:17

Crux wrote:Presenting a State Issued photo I.D. at the polls is a reasonable requirement.

No it is not. Freedom lovers resist the application of government power UNLESS it addresses a real problem that is not well handled by other means.
The "voter fraud" problem is insignificant, and is well handled by prosecuting those very very few who violate, under existing law. The sole intent and effect of a mandatory government ID requirement is to present a new barrier of cost and inconvenience to people unlikely to vote Republican.

On the other hand, the "election fraud" problem is enormous and needs better rules and enforcement. But since the weight of such actions would fall on politicians, they prefer to ignore the problem and deflect attention by passing new laws and restrictions that miss the big problem completely. They attack a non-problem in a way that will punish only the poor and powerless.

Mandatory new requirements on people who are elderly, sick and infirm, who are poverty stricken, and don't drive a car? You bet!
Mandatory new requirements on millionaires who buy votes of elected officials with campaign contributions, skew the popular will through their lackeys? Not a chance.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 19 13:04

We will have to disagree. We have gone round and round. A State issued I.D. is easily obtained, and universally necessary by ALL people. The poor need it for obtaining social services, the indulgent need it to obtain cigarettes and alcohol, the travelers need it for plane tickets, drive cars, or rent cars, parents need it for student enrollment, and the voter needs it in more than 30 some states to vote. Prospective employees need it to secure a job. Access to voting has never been easier, what with early voting, absentee voting, car pooling to vote and the voter participation numbers prove it across all demographics. The non issue is the difficulty of voting. The real issue is the manipulations and machinations the Left goes through to maintain a leaky system. I get that too...

User avatar
Kevsky
Posts: 131
Joined: 2013 Sep 24 07:32

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Kevsky » 2014 Jan 23 13:44

No it is not. Freedom lovers resist the application of government power UNLESS it addresses a real problem that is not well handled by other means.

To use your own vernacular.....bullshit! Freedom lovers desire to have election procedures that maintain a high level of integrity. Having thousands and tens of thousands of ineligible voters existing on voters roles does not maintain election integrity. Having procedures that do not ensure that a voter does not vote twice does not maintain election integrity. Just look at Mandela, he advocated for voter id.
Image
As he sings the song of "non-violence and reconciliation" "Kill the Boer,Shoot the Boer" a song about killing the Dutch South African farmers (men, women and children), no doubt advocating for the genocide of a specific ethnic group. He is well known to have sung the song at ANC political rallies. But of course, being Mandela, the only criticism our local left here would have of him is if lead bullets were to be used in the shooting.

The "voter fraud" problem is insignificant, and is well handled by prosecuting those very very few who violate, under existing law.


What is insignificant by your standards? It has been documented to occur. It has been documented to have determined elections.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots/article/2504163%20Voter%20Fraud%20Electing%20a%20Democrat
http://blog.heritage.org/2012/04/12/city-council-election-decided-by-five-voters-after-fraud-investigation/
http://blog.heritage.org/2013/05/17/voter-fraud-in-missouri-wrong-candidate-was-elected/
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/minnesota-leads-the-nation-in-voter-fraud-convictions-131782928.html

What would be necessary for you to acknowledge that rules should be in place to prevent it? I would bet it would be when a Republican wins an election through voter fraud. Than, no doubt it would become a problem, eh. Chances are slim that will occur as virtually all voter fraud has benefited Democrat candidates. A reason that the left advocates against ensuring election integrity.

The sole intent and effect of a mandatory government ID requirement is to present a new barrier of cost and inconvenience to people unlikely to vote Republican.


Again, to use your vernacular, Bullshit. The intent and effect of mandatory government ID requirements is to maintain or, at this point, try to regain the integrity of our voting system to ensure that only eligible voters vote and that they only vote one time. The fundamental reason there exists opposition to this is because in situations where ineligible voting has been identified, it has overwhelmingly helped the Democrat candidate. What is insignificant, is the cost and inconvenience of having to provide ID to vote. In virtually every facet of our lives including our interaction with all Government programs, we have to prove our identity. The idea, that having to show our identity to vote is somehow too much of a hardship, is ludicrous. Imagine, In South Africa, where poor is living in a Shantytown under a metal corrugated roof with no running water, the paragon of peace, wisdom, tolerance and reconciliation, Mandela promotes the idea that all voters endure the "hardship" of having voter ID. While in the United State, where poor is considered having a television, cell phone and obesity we have the twisted, warped logic where you should not have to endure the "hardship" of bringing ID to the voting polls.

Amazingly, the ACA requires proof of identity. Do you think that those voters who could not obtain ID to vote will be able to obtain ID to enroll in ACA?

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/15/obamacares-id-restrictions-and-liberal-voting-rights-hypocrisy/
Last edited by Kevsky on 2014 Jan 25 07:59, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 23 16:12

Here's what's wrong with your arguments:
  • Nobody disagrees that we need integrity in our election process, but nobody has demonstrated that there is a lack of such integrity or that it can only be cured by mandating inconvenient and expensive a new voter IDs.
  • "Thousands of ineligible voters" on the rolls? True but irrelevant because presence on the rolls does not mean they are doing anything to threaten voting integrity. Dead people do not vote. Somebody who moved away will not vote. People in jail will not vote. Rare violations are prosecuted satisfactorily under existing law. Voter rolls can be cleaned up by better IT coordination among the states, as is happening.
  • It is wrong to interpret Mandela's wearing of a T shirt it as advocacy for US-type Voter ID laws. He was running for election and, of course, wanted his supporters to vote. South African law as it existed then required an ID. His is NOT a statement of support for voter ID laws, only a request of supporters that they follow the law in order to be able to vote.
  • The examples you gave, plucked from right-wing sources, are unconvincing either because they verify the rarity of such problems, or because the specific facts are underwhelming.
For example, I don't give a damn if some felons, by mistake, voted because the DMV/voter registrar made a mistake and registered him and neglected to tell him he could not vote. Furthermore, such few votes are probably split among all candidates. Finally, I personally believe it is a gross error to deny the vote to felons after release because we have in interest in re-integrating them positively into society. Continued mean-spirited discrimination against them as voters, after sentence has been served, is exactly the wrong policy and the law should be changed where it is flawed.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Dear Mr. Bullturds:

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 23 18:41

Wise One wrote:Nobody disagrees that we need integrity in our election process, but nobody has demonstrated that...it can only be cured by mandating inconvenient and expensive a new voter IDs.


My MY! The LEFT is UNHINGED!!

In VIRGINIA for example:

Payment

An ID card costs $10.00. You may pay your fees with cash, money order, check, check card or major credit card.


ALSO in Virginia:

Acceptable forms of identification for in-person voting include the following:

Virginia voter registration card
Valid Virginia driver's license
Military ID
Any Federal, Virginia state or local government-issued ID
Employer issued photo ID card
Concealed handgun permit
Valid student ID issued by any institution of higher education located in the Commonwealth of Virginia
Current utility bill, bank statement, government check or paycheck indicating the name and address of the voter
Social Security card

A voter who does not bring an acceptable ID to the polls will be offered a provisional ballot.

____________________________________________

Now this varies by State. Maryland for example:
____________________________________________

MD Identification Card Fees

The fees for new, renewed or duplicate Maryland ID cards vary.

Younger than 18 years old: $15 (new/renewals).
Older than 18 years old: $24 (new/renewals).
Duplicate Maryland ID cards: $20.
Older than 65 years old: FREE.
Disabled (limited mobility): FREE.


(I think it interesting to note that the ELDERLY, should they
NOT ALREADY have an ID, don't even have to PAY for one AO)

ALSO in Maryland in order to cast a vote:

ID Requirements: You must provide one of the following:
-Driver's license;
-MVA ID Card number; or
-Last four digits of your social security number



votesmart.org

Votesmart is where I obtained the above information,
as well as the Virgina and Maryland DMVs.

I think it is also telling that in Democrat MARYLAND,
an I.D. cost 24 bucks compared to Virginia's TEN.

As well, in EVIL VIRGINIA, there are far more acceptable forms of I.D.
that allow a citizen to cast a vote in person at the polls.

Interesting...

Thanks Kevsky for taking time. We fight the good fight not to change the minds of folks like AO, fangz, clown, Auntie, Little Brother, Hates, and P., but rather to test and educate ourselves, and provide the other cheek.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 23 21:18

A listing of facts/prices/procedures etc. for voter ID systems misses the point.

Which is ... it is a solution in search of a problem. We don't need it.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Voter I.D.

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 23 21:55

http://www.rnla.org/survey.asp

A wee list, hardly comprehensive, of 46 States, and VOTE FRAUD.


http://www.rnla.org/votefraud.asp

Voter Fraud, vote fraud, multiple votes, RAZOR THIN ELECTIONS, etc.

You lose. There is a problem. The solution is constitutional, cheap, and already employed by Maryland, Virginia and MOST EVERY State. The NON issue is the whine, and feigned paternalistic outrage by silly Demoncat Activists!

:salut:

Voter I.D. "It's The Law!"

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 23 22:37

You prove my point with your own 1st reference. It cites 3, count 'em, 3 cases of "voter fraud" in Virginia from 2000 to 2011. Big deal.

  • The first was a hapless candidate for Sheriff who voted once and only once in a situation where it was unclear which of two properties he should use as his residence. The charges were so insubstantial that they were dropped. Existing law was perfectly adequate to deal with the "offense."
  • One mayoral candidate committed election fraud, not voter fraud, was charged and convicted under existing law that was perfectly adequate to deal with the offense.
  • The third was election fraud, only incidentally involving voter registration. She gave an address that would meet a residence requirement for eligibility for her run for office, and was caught and disqualified as a candidate. She was charged and convicted, under existing law that was perfectly adequate to deal with the offense, and her appeal failed.
I checked your 2nd reference for Virginia, and the examples are laughably insubstantial. 0ne hapless druggie; election (not voter) fraud; confusion over which residence to use; false statement on registration form; and a false allegation aimed at a nursing home of something later proved not to be illegal. Existing law was perfectly adequate to deal with all cases and voter ID laws would have changed nothing.

Really, you ought to give up on this silly issue. There is no problem, and when rare violations occur existing law handles them. Everybody knows the purpose of "Voter ID laws" is to shrink the electorate as much as possible, except for affluent middle-aged white Republicans.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Kevsky
Posts: 131
Joined: 2013 Sep 24 07:32

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Kevsky » 2014 Jan 24 07:14

Crux has made excellent points regarding voter fraud. He has shown, that the argument that voter ID is costly, does not hold merit. Obtaining voter ID is inexpensive and easy. Crux has shown that voter fraud occurs often and is a problem.

What one has to consider is that the list of voter fraud convictions is only the tip of the iceberg. As with every crime, only a small portion of cases that go to court get convictions. Also, as is typical with all crimes, the number of cases that actually go to court is a small portion of the crimes actually committed. To get a conviction, the prosecutor has to show that not only did the defendant commit the crime but that he had intent to commit the crime. So, the number of convicted cases of voter fraud will always be numerically much smaller than the actual occurrences of voter fraud itself. But it will not matter if it could be shown there were one thousand, ten thousand or one hundred thousand cases of voter fraud, the case made by the left will always be same. For them, voter fraud will be irrelevant as long as it benefits the Democrat party. This is a Democrat voter strategy and the electorate they get from voter fraud is a demographic they depend on.

Proof that the voter is who he says he is when he votes is universal. Virtually all democracies in the world and throughout history have required the voter to prove his identity.

For example, I don't give a damn if some felons, by mistake, voted because the DMV/voter registrar made a mistake and registered him and neglected to tell him he could not vote. Furthermore, such few votes are probably split among all candidates. Finally, I personally believe it is a gross error to deny the vote to felons after release because we have in interest in re-integrating them positively into society. Continued mean-spirited discrimination against them as voters, after sentence has been served, is exactly the wrong policy and the law should be changed where it is flawed.

Does not matter what you believe. Your statement just proves my point that you do not care about laws and rules but merely what benefits the agenda of your political affiliation. There are laws and rules in place that allow a felon to regain his voting privilege. These should be followed. You do not get to pick and choose which laws to follow.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 24 17:55

You are wrong, Crux is wrong.
I've explained carefully with solid references that voter fraud incidence is TINY and is dealt with adequately under existing law. (From Crux's references perhaps 3 very shaky cases of voter fraud in 11 years in all of Virginia). Conservatives conflate "election fraud" with "voter fraud." They are different.

Voter ID would address only "voter fraud", an imaginary problem, and yet Republicans want to bring out a sledgehammer "cure."
Government power should be applied 1) only to real problems that need solving, and 2) if that solution will deliver a benefit that is in the public interest.

Voter ID fails both.

We don't demand all citizens get a card certifying they do not have a nuclear materials in their house before they can move in. Why not?
1) Such cases, admittedly very dangerous, are rare. 2) existing law already covers this, with adequate penalties. 3) Issuing such cards to everybody would be inconvenient and expensive and would deny many innocent people the use of their houses while they are trying to get cards. 4) Demanding that people get such cards would do nothing to cure the hazard.

Voter ID is the same.

Everybody knows the real purpose of "Voter ID laws" is to shrink the electorate as much as possible, except for affluent middle-aged white Republicans.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

What a waste of time...

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 24 18:00

I can only imagine the financial cost to taxpayers to
prosecute these hundreds of cases across the Nation.


The stakes are SO high. We need to have free and fair elections.
It is troubling to witness the efforts undertaken to thwart this...

crux-"The Left is UNHINGED"
:dontknow:
________________________________________

kevsky makes the lucid point. This SAMPLE is just that.
Every effort of Law enforcement is to MANAGE CRIME.
To keep THE LID ON crime. To TAMP DOWN criminality.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 24 18:12

But there is simply no criminality that needs further tamping down. 3 weak cases in over a decade in all of Virginia? With the "lid off"?

There are genuine crime problems that need solving, but voter fraud is not among them.

Why is it that Republicans insist in solving only nonexistent problems, always turning a blind eye to real problems?

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Those EVIL democrats on the BIG ISLAND

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 24 18:54

Wise One wrote:
Everybody knows the real purpose of "Voter ID laws" is to shrink the electorate as much as possible, except for affluent middle-aged white Republicans.

:coffee:


Shrink the electorate? "EVERYBODY KNOWS"? Affluent WHITE REPUBLICANS?

My goodness Man, do you HEAR YOURSELF? :tongue3:

Hawaii "In order to vote, voters must present valid photo ID with a signature. Additionally, voters will be asked to sign a poll book to record that they voted at the polling place. Voter Registration Notice is NOT an acceptable form of identification."

...hardly a bastion of AFFLUENT WHITE REPUBLICANDOM...

Nutty Man, just NUTTY.

No, it is to thwart fools like Jim Moran's (D) son. Remember him???

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/congressman ... aud-video/
_____________________________________________________________________

Besides which, AO, your analogies are REGULARLY just RIDICULOUS!

PERMITS FOR NUCLEAR MATERIAL? The cost to have everyone get one?
The incidence of folks storing nuclear materials? This junk is so far off
the mark relative to voter/vote fraud. You really are better than this.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Those EVIL democrats on the BIG ISLAND

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 24 21:39

Crux wrote:Hawaii: "In order to vote, voters must present valid photo ID with a signature. Additionally, voters will be asked to sign a poll book to record that they voted at the polling place. Voter Registration Notice is NOT an acceptable form of identification.

While I am no longer surprised that EVERYTHING you quote is wrong, it is amazing that you continue to do it after getting slapped down by the Truth time after time.

Your devotion to The Lie is astounding.

The truth about Hawaii.

Is the Truth really so uncomfortable to you? Why, at every fork in the road presenting a choice between Truth and Fantasy do you choose the latter?

REFERENCE: Present Voter ID requirements in every state.

:coffee:

PS. The Moran incident was NOT an example of voter fraud. No voter fraud occurred. The incident concerned Election Fraud, conspiracy by a campaign official to violate election law. Again, no actual violation of law occurred because the guilty campaign official resigned in disgrace before anything happened.
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Listen to you Chief

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 24 23:20

How about THIS reference: http://hawaii.gov/elections/voters/votehi.htm

"Be sure to have your picture ID with a signature on it for verification of your identity. You will be asked to sign a poll book to record that you voted at that polling place. Your Voter Registration Notice is NOT an acceptable form of identification."

AO, you can reference "headcount dot o r g".

I simply posted from Hawaii.gov official website my friend. The point is, that Hawaii, a BLUE state run largely by BLUE people not largely,
"affluent white republicans" REQUIRE PHOTO ID to vote.


It is clear, be it a FIRST TIME voter, WHATEVER...
_____________________________________________

Your real problem is that on this issue, your words and position are weak...

Everything I quote is not wrong, clearly. Don't demonize me. I have given you good argument and rational sport. Don't be such a ninny about all this STUFF.

AO, we'll simply have to, disagree. We get to this place now and again, friend.
I'm not sure why you are the way you are. It is your prerogative. Peace to you.

crux

:sleepy:

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jan 25 00:38

You are right, that seems to be way they mostly do it, verified by a Hawaiian friend of mine.
The law only requires a "valid identification" which is broad. I read the actual law (large document, slow to load) which does not specify a picture ID. They ask for it but are apparently soft if you don't have it.
If a voter is denied an opportunity to cast a regular ballot he is ALWAYS allowed to cast a provisional ballot.
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Juggler
Posts: 710
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:51

Re: Suppress the Vote (unless they'll vote Republican)

Postby Juggler » 2014 Jan 30 10:46

Image

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

The Face of The Left?

Postby Crux » 2014 Jan 30 18:28

Kindhearted? Respectful?
Little Brother, I know you do not like conservatives or have any tolerance for conservatism. Way back in the day, when I heard other kids using the epithet "DOUCHBAG!!" against someone they thought to be a loser, jerk, or just not as COOL as they were, and I found out what a douche was, I thought it to be
really very debased, and disgusting. It immediately made me think so little of the name-caller. I can't tell you how disappointed I am in you. On this Forum
there have been some very disturbing examples of name-calling by the folks on your team. AO, coondog, red-neck, and fangst... Now YOU. It would pain
mother to know you were so lost. I would like to challenge you to consider:
Do you really think this is FUNNY? Clever? Do you DO this to try to get in with your "tribe"? Have you considered that this attempted slight is demeaning to
women and their bodies? I would ask you to think of your own mother, sister, or daughter and consider how very CRUDE, and demeaning this language is to
not only women in general, but what it says about YOU... FOR SHAME.

Sincerely, Your BigBroCrux

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Leftists March against Evil Voter I.D. Laws

Postby Crux » 2014 Feb 09 10:27

Recently in North Carolina, "The Moral March on Raleigh" was held by the NAACP.
I am linking you to a Do's and Don'ts list given to the protestors of the EVIL right:


http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/na ... 1390857331

You might take note to one particular "DO" #9 down the list. Shall I quote it for you?

"DO bring photo identification (driver's license, passport, or other valid photo I.D.) with you and keep it on your person at all times."


:shakeh:

crux "Just helping you to understand..."