As we can see on internet forums such as this, the general public is often insufficiently informed to make a reasoned decision on weighty issues, and tends to fall back on "common sense"; something which once told the majority that the world was flat, then that the Sun orbited the Earth. This is one reason the founders steered clear of a direct democracy and instead went with a representative version.
By my count, the fallacies of the right wing argument are multiplying. So far we have:
1. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove citizenship, when such an ID -- as a drivers license, for example -- is no guarantee of proof of citizenship.
2. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove identity, when other forms of ID -- such as a credit card or even a utility bill -- would, in essentially all cases, prove the same thing.
3. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove identity, when a simple signature -- if compared to the signature on file from the registration process -- would, unless the imposter had been practicing the victim's signature, prove the same thing.
In light of all that, does the quest for photo ID -- and
only photo ID -- at the polls really make 'common sense'?
And if it can be shown that the vast majority of those currently lacking govt issued photo ID are likely Democratic voters, does it also not make 'common sense' that something more nefarious may be lurking behind the Republican agenda? Especially given that, over the past few decades, the Democratic agenda has been to get as many people to vote as possible, while the Republican plan is to prevent as many people voting as possible (specifically, the 'lower' classes) with
caging lists and the like. One would have to be obtuse to not see at least the possibility that the Republican goal is disenfranchisement; either that, or a supporter of it.