• 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!

Photo ID to vote?

Photo ID to vote?


  • Total voters
    92
Actually the story says there is no real evidence of any significant voter fraud.

I did not nor did I ever say it was significant, but it can be. Nothing about photo id's are unconstitutional as has been shown. Significant or not makes no difference, a law is being broken and photo id's will help it happen even less.

But you know that well because you have not been able to present any here as well.

I have presented it, you just think because it is not happening by the thousands we should ignore it. I can think of a few crimes in the same boat, but we still make laws and enforce them.

You lose.
 

I see the article that is completely speculation? I can make an educated guess as well, and based on my own statistics it will not happen. Just as good as that whole article based on guesses. :lol:

From your article...

These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.
The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.
Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.
- http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/many-5-million-voters-disenfranchised-voter

Starts of with "could" with no real evidence of anything. Then move on to the mystery states that have somehow bypassed the Constitution and restricted voting rights.

It is laughable at best.

What's to argue, you have already admitted the motive.

Again no argument? :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
The voter fraud problem in the US is greatly exaggerated and it will just end up being transferred to fake IDs under these conditions. Yeah, baseless or specious, more precisely.

So the answer is "they are going to do it anyway so let's make it as easy as possible for them?"

Does that make any sense to you?
 
One of my RL friends did not have a license. He was eligible to vote legally, but he was in a weird scenario where he couldn't get an ID or a license.
 
I see the article that is completely speculation? I can make an educated guess as well, and based on my own statistics it will not happen. Just as good as that whole article based on guesses.

What are you talking about? The Brennan Center is hands down the most respected experts on the political process. That isn't speculation, they did a massive study on it...
 
'Maybe not for you, however for many people it who are old and infirm it's not quite that easy. Many photo-ids require a birth certificate which might have been lost and it's costly to replace them.

Why would those pwoplw not have had an ID from before they were sick? Most people don't go through life on the fringe.
 
What are you talking about? The Brennan Center is hands down the most respected experts on the political process. That isn't speculation, they did a massive study on it...

This "study" of what? Speculation? Guesses? Because that is all it is.
 
No, I usually just have to sign something that matches my voter registration signature. I carry my ID just in case, but I've never had to show it.

I have a problem signing my signature the same every time with arthritis. I am sure I would be asked to show ID because my signautres would not match up.
 
Absolutely, you should be required to prove you're a legal U.S. citizen in order to vote.

That would require an ID would it not?
 
The point is...to stop those almost non-existent cases of voter fraud...you'd make it so that millions of Americans will have problems voting. This is why those laws are being passed...

Citizens with comparatively low incomes are less likely to possess documentation proving their citizenship. Citizens earning less than $25,000 per year are more than twice as likely to lack ready documentation of their citizenship as those earning more than $25,000.4 Indeed, the survey indicates that at least 12 percent of voting-age American citizens earning less than $25,000 per year do not have a readily available U.S. passport, naturalization document, or birth certificate

Elderly citizens are less likely to possess government-issued photo identification. Survey results indicate that seniors disproportionately lack photo identification. Eighteen percent of American citizens age 65 and above do not have current government-issued photo ID.9 Using 2005 census estimates, this amounts to more than 6 million senior citizens.

Minority citizens are less likely to possess government-issued photo identification. According to the survey, African-American citizens also disproportionately lack photo identification. Twenty-five percent of African-American voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, compared to eight percent of white voting-age citizens.10 Using 2000 census figures, this amounts to more than 5.5 million adult African-American citizens without photo identification. Our survey also indicated that sixteen percent of Hispanic voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, but due to a low sample size, the results did not achieve statistical significance

http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/d/download_file_39242.pdf

The question is why do so many people not have a valid ID. There is no discrimination preventing these groups of people from obtaining the ID so hwat personal choices have these people made to not have ID.
 
But how do they benefit from fraud of only (less than) 86 people in 5 years commit it? LOL.

That were convicted. Many more were caught and not prosecuted and many more not caught.
 
I see the article that is completely speculation? I can make an educated guess as well, and based on my own statistics it will not happen. Just as good as that whole article based on guesses. :lol:

From your article...

These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.
The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.
Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.
- As Many As 5 Million Voters Disenfranchised By Voter ID Laws | Crooks and Liars

Starts of with "could" with no real evidence of anything. Then move on to the mystery states that have somehow bypassed the Constitution and restricted voting rights.

It is laughable at best.

So you could find nothing to refute the study. Just as I suspected.
 
So you could find nothing to refute the study. Just as I suspected.

Do I really have to? Their own words are better than anything anyone else could say. :mrgreen:
 
What are you talking about? It's a study, not speculation. Those are opposites.

You can study and then speculate on what you find. The problem is their is nothing to study here. The few states that so far have photo id laws have no problems with people voting, none. This is backed up by the Federal courts, only in one state was it so restrictive to voting that is was overturned.

SO I know what I am talking about, do you?
 
You can study and then speculate on what you find. The problem is their is nothing to study here. The few states that so far have photo id laws have no problems with people voting, none. This is backed up by the Federal courts, only in one state was it so restrictive to voting that is was overturned.

SO I know what I am talking about, do you?

You should just read the study instead of just making things up.
 
You should just read the study instead of just making things up.

I did read it! It is just "guesses" about what "mite" happen and they immediately jump to "worse case scenario." Sorry, no moderate view, nothing reasonable about it. It is a left wing hack job at best.

Here from the link...

States have changed their laws so rapidly that no single analysis has assessed the overall impact of such moves. Although it is too early to quantify how the changes will impact voter turnout, they will be a hindrance to many voters at a time when the United States continues to turn out less than two thirds of its eligible citizens in presidential elections and less than half in midterm elections.

Now they start of with "Although it is too early to quantify how the changes will impact voter turnout" OK I agree. Then they move on to " they will be a hindrance to many voters at a time when the United States continues to turn out less than two thirds of its eligible citizens in presidential elections and less than half in midterm elections." WTF?

First they say how it will affect voter turn out is unknown and they follow up by saying as a fact no less "They will be a hindrance to many voters." Based on what????????

This is a partisan hack job.
 
Last edited:
Do I really have to? Their own words are better than anything anyone else could say. :mrgreen:

Do whatever you want. So far we have a study by experts who say 5 million voters could be disenfranchised vs. nothing from you to refute it.
 
Do whatever you want. So far we have a study by experts who say 5 million voters could be disenfranchised vs. nothing from you to refute it.

So far you have a study based on speculation and it even contradicts itself. What more do you need?
 
So far you have a study based on speculation and it even contradicts itself. What more do you need?

How about a clear record of significant voter fraud which merits this sort of big government statist action to infringe upon persons Constitutional rights? That would be good for a start which establishes a reason for these actions in the first place.
 
So far you have a study based on speculation and it even contradicts itself. What more do you need?

What do you need to counter a solid study from what is probably the most respected non-partisan political procedure analysis organization in the world? I dunno... A lot... So far, you haven't come up with any evidence at all for your side of the issue....
 
How about a clear record of significant voter fraud which merits this sort of big government statist action to infringe upon persons Constitutional rights? That would be good for a start which establishes a reason for these actions in the first place.

How about 86 convictions in 5 years? So we know it is happening? And requiring an id is about as statist as requiring id to buy smokes. Nice try again at the "your a conservative and should believe this." Another lame attempt because the "study" as you want to call it is partisan crap and highly flawed, contradictory speculation at best.
 
No one should be allowed to vote unless they possess photo I.D. proclaiming:

"I acknowledge that I am yet another pathetic dupe of a small minority of upper class nabobs who control both the Democratic and Republican parties and who direct the elected public officials of either party to serve upper class nabob interests over the interests of the vast majority of middle class citizens who voted said public officials into office. Like some duckspeaking twit out of Orwell's 1984, I willfully engage in the reflexive doublethink exercise of recognizing that I live in a one-party plutocracy masquerading as a two-party republic, while at the same time denying it. Then I step into the voting booth and pretend that things are not really the way they are."
 
Back
Top Bottom