• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court strikes down Arizona voter ID citizenship law

For those who claim that we need to do things to crack down on the problem of voter election fraud, please present your evidence that there is a signficant or widespread problem of voter election fraud that would require a different approach than the current laws which deal with voter fraud. .

I would love to see the verifiable statistics quantifying the "problem".
 
For those who claim that we need to do things to crack down on the problem of voter election fraud, please present your evidence that there is a signficant or widespread problem of voter election fraud that would require a different approach than the current laws which deal with voter fraud. .

I would love to see the verifiable statistics quantifying the "problem".

The "problem" is that minorities and poor people vote.

That's the "problem" they are trying to solve.
 
The "problem" is that minorities and poor people vote.

That's the "problem" they are trying to solve.

grand slam home run out of the park..... well said.
 
Last edited:
Sure, if you're a mindless extremist.

That makes no sense. A republican high ranking state official basically admitted his partisan motivation for changing voter laws in his own state.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/10/02/the-pennsylvania-voter-id-fight-explained/

June 25, 2012: Video surfaces of state House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R) saying, at a gathering of Pennsylvania Republicans the previous weekend, that the law would help them carry the state at the presidential level. “Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: done,” Turzai said while listing his party’s accomplishments. This was a problem because the GOP says they are necessary to prevent voter fraud — not for partisan political gain. Democrats pounce on Turzai’s comment as proof of the actual motivation behind the law.

The cat is long ago out of the bag on this issue. Do you really believe that the Justices are not aware of the true motivations for these restrictive voting laws? They can watch the news and read just like the rest of us.

But feel free to stop attacking and start debating by providing the statistical evidence that there even is a significant or widespread problem that we even need to worry about.

Any time you are ready I will be glad to read your verifiable evidence.
 
Last edited:
The "problem" is that minorities and poor people vote.

That's the "problem" they are trying to solve.

To be more accurate:
The "problem" is that minorities and poor people tend to vote for Democrats.

That's the "problem" they are trying to solve.
 
Absolutely absurd. I don't understand how making somebody prove they are a citizen is unconstitutional.
 
For those who claim that we need to do things to crack down on the problem of voter election fraud, please present your evidence that there is a signficant or widespread problem of voter election fraud that would require a different approach than the current laws which deal with voter fraud. .

I would love to see the verifiable statistics quantifying the "problem".

Do you accept that there is any fraud at all? People voting who shouldnt be able to, voting for other people, voting more than once?
 
Very very little. The very minimal gain (one vote of millions) is not worth the penalty.
Do you accept that there is any fraud at all?
 
Very very little. The very minimal gain (one vote of millions) is not worth the penalty.

What about for that one person whose vote was stolen? Or the person who lost an election on just a few votes? What harm is there in simply requiring people to prove they are eligible to vote? Or that they are the person who registered to vote?
 
Research commissioned by the Pew Center on the States highlights the extent of the challenge:
Approximately 24 million—one of every eight—voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.
More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.
Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.

Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient: Evidence That America

We arent talking about one in a million here, but a million in millions. We dont know the extent of the problem because no one is investigating.
 
Do you have any evidence there has ever been an election swayed by fraudlent voters?

By the way, I have no problem with requiring ID to vote. But the default position should be to allow the person to vote and investigate later if anything is fishy. If someone did fraudlently vote prosecute them to the max, and make sure it is on the News big time. The next election no one would cheat, if anyone does.
What about for that one person whose vote was stolen? Or the person who lost an election on just a few votes? What harm is there in simply requiring people to prove they are eligible to vote? Or that they are the person who registered to vote?
 
Why not? Are the Republicans so inept they cannot investigate something they know exists? A million voters, the Repubs ought to be able to nab thousands. What was there last election? 13 in Ohio?
We arent talking about one in a million here, but a million in millions. We dont know the extent of the problem because no one is investigating.
 
Make people have valid photo ID/Birth certificates to get their public benefits and make them re-enroll at least once every 4 years. There is more than 1 way to skin a cat.
 
Sure, if you're a mindless extremist.

Which you must be since Konstantine actually supports requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote based on sincere arguments, not the bogus "code" of the GOP.
 
Our last election proves that a majority of voters were on drugs. :)

Yeah, the House remained in the hands of the tea party freaks. It makes no sense given their failed policies caused the Bush Meltdown. Go figure.
 
Absolutely absurd. I don't understand how making somebody prove they are a citizen is unconstitutional.

Pssst: because the state law violated the federal law, and we have a federal system -- under our Constitution.
 
They had no damn legal premise to even vote on such a law.... What they did was basically vote their opinion.

This ruling only shows the SCOTUS supports voter fraud and that they know the democratic party would NOT survive without voter fraud.

This has now set precedent for carding individuals who want to buy tobacco or liquor - it also sets precedence for individuals to refuse to show their ID to cops....

Prove that there was voter fraud in Arizona. Arizona couln't show ONE instance of it, when asked by SCOTUS.
 
Last edited:
Prove that there was voter fraud in Arizona. Arizona couln't prove ONE instance of it, when asked by SCOTUS.

We don't need I stink'in proof!

It's been a lot of money spent on something they can't prove. It's just good business to tackle problems that have plenty of evidence they need fixing than to tackle issues you can't show are actually a problem. People should be upset over the waste of time and money on this.
 
Yeah, the House remained in the hands of the tea party freaks. It makes no sense given their failed policies caused the Bush Meltdown. Go figure.

Swing and a miss.
 
Yeah, the House remained in the hands of the tea party freaks. It makes no sense given their failed policies caused the Bush Meltdown. Go figure.

Actually, the Tea Party didn't even exist until towards the end of Bush's second term in office, and it was quite small until Obama took office. You can make fun of them over Obama's birth certificate, FEMA death camps, and other conspiracy theories they have, but you can't blame Bush's policies on them. The Tea Party didn't exist when Bush crafted those policies.
 
They have to pretend they got beat for some reason other than they are hopelessly out of touch. So fraudlent voters and lazy people wanting free stuff is why Romney lost.
We don't need I stink'in proof!

It's been a lot of money spent on something they can't prove. It's just good business to tackle problems that have plenty of evidence they need fixing than to tackle issues you can't show are actually a problem. People should be upset over the waste of time and money on this.
 
Pssst: because the state law violated the federal law, and we have a federal system -- under our Constitution.

Fair enough. Unfortunately there needs to be a change in the federal law.
 
Actually, the Tea Party didn't even exist until towards the end of Bush's second term in office, and it was quite small until Obama took office. You can make fun of them over Obama's birth certificate, FEMA death camps, and other conspiracy theories they have, but you can't blame Bush's policies on them. The Tea Party didn't exist when Bush crafted those policies.

Different name, same people: knownothings, the GOP base.
 
Back
Top Bottom