• 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!

Are you for or against vote ID to vote?

Are you for or against vote ID to vote?


  • Total voters
    79
Did you read any of those studies?

Again most of those studies are most likely done by those against voter ID requirements and seeing how ballots are anonymous there is no way to tell which ballots were cast by actual voters or fraudulent voters.

The majority of charges in voter fraud are of those who were felons and were not aware of the eligibility. Very few who have been found guilty are actually people posing as other people.



1000 people was simply put up as a number. The whole point of that statement is that you are not going to find 1000 people to pose as someone else because there is not 1000 people who are willing to risk being caught. The reward is not even remotely worth the risk.



Minimum penalty for voter fraud is $500 fine and one year in prison along with disenfranchisement. Name one poor liberal who is willing to risk that for the sake of adding one extra vote to the ballot.

In states that do not require IDs to vote the poll workers do not ask for ID. So how would those fraudulent voters be caught? What if the person claims that the person who came in before him was the fraud?After all the poll workers don't ask for ID so they can't prove if the guy in front of them is the real voter of if the guy whom came in prior is the actual voter. Is the poll worker going to chase down the fraudulent voter? Are there cameras in voting booths so they can track down fraudulent voters? Are poll worker going to call every registered voter in their polling district to see if the registered voter voted? So odds of someone getting caught for voting fraud is extremely low.
 
There's no reason not to have it, it's something we should have always had in this country. Voter discrimination is a Democratic boogieman.

Oh, really? Voter discrimination has NEVER happened before? :lol:
 
If there were any conceivable reason for voter IDs to even exist, then I'd support them. There is currently none. It is just an interfering extra step. Poor people focus more on their blue collar lives than on things like this.

Voter fraud is virtually nonexistent. I think that with only 10 cases of voter fraud over the last decade, there are two possible scenarios: our justice system is terrible at finding voter fraudsters, or that voter fraud is an insignificant problem.
 
Oh, really? Voter discrimination has NEVER happened before? :lol:

Not any time recently or significantly. The Democrats are whining that it'll disenfranchise people who are likely not voting in the first place. It's just a ruse.
 
I'm against another ID I'd have to dig up only a couple times a year. The cost of a voter ID would be high. If I have to go get one I'd spend at least $100 worth of my time doing it. We have so many other IDs that would be acceptable.
If someone needs an ID and has none but has been voting correctly, any new ID requirement should be provided without cost to the voter. This should include going to the voters home to provide the ID and to insure that it is not being obtained falsely. If ilegal voting is a problem it is at least worth doing that.
 
I'm against another ID I'd have to dig up only a couple times a year. The cost of a voter ID would be high. If I have to go get one I'd spend at least $100 worth of my time doing it. We have so many other IDs that would be acceptable.
If someone needs an ID and has none but has been voting correctly, any new ID requirement should be provided without cost to the voter. This should include going to the voters home to provide the ID and to insure that it is not being obtained falsely. If ilegal voting is a problem it is at least worth doing that.

But, your existing driver's license would count as voter ID, so what extra ID would you need to get and dig through?

And, voter IDs are being provided for free to people who say they can't afford an ID. Should the gubment also bring the voting booth to their homes so that they don't have to be bothered to go anywhere to vote?
 
Last edited:
John, does your library card have your picture on it, name, and any other identifiable information (address, date of birth, etc.)? Mine does not. It is just a number and a picture of my library.

No but normally to have one in that area you have to live in that area. For example, if your id was expired and this has happened to me when buying beer, they then wouldn't be able to refuse you.
 
If it stops even one person from voting illegally, it's worth it.

Isn't that the same line they use for drug laws, that if it stops one person from using drugs it's worth it? Funny how the same logic from the other side is suddenly bogus.
 
It's a Social Security card, not valid as ID. ID has description and photos. The SS card is just a number, anybody could show you my SS card and you wouldn't have a clue it wasn't me.

Gosh if only there was something we could put on an SS card for children... like some kind of "imprint"... of a piece of their hand, or something... that would allow them to get picture-versions when they became older, but still with that fundamental nigh-impossible-to-commit-fraud-with-mark.....

like a imprint of something unique, that could only be you... like i don't know, a palm or a thumb or something. we could call it a "printofathumb"...


:)





Look, you already have to register. Simply do away with same-day registry and make ID-check and/or issuance part of the registration process. Oh Mrs Smith, you do not have a picture ID, but you are here to register with your birth certificate and SS card? Could you step in front of the camera here, please, and press your thumb on this pad? Thank you, that will be 10 minutes and your card will be ready.... NEXT!
 
Gosh if only there was something we could put on an SS card for children... like some kind of "imprint"... of a piece of their hand, or something... that would allow them to get picture-versions when they became older, but still with that fundamental nigh-impossible-to-commit-fraud-with-mark.....

like a imprint of something unique, that could only be you... like i don't know, a palm or a thumb or something. we could call it a "printofathumb"...

Thumbprints are hideously insecure when used for such a purpose. All you need to fake them is a copy of your thumbprint and a modified printer and some jello. Not only do you leave your thumbprint on everything you touch, but there also would be a million copies of it stored on a every computer used to validate them. Thumbprint scanning is also not terribly accurate, meaning with a 300 million person sample you will have huge amounts of false positives and errors. There are also massive privacy implications with requiring every person to but their biometric data in a government database from birth.

Real security requires public key cryptography and smart cards.
 
But, your existing driver's license would count as voter ID, so what extra ID would you need to get and dig through?

And, voter IDs are being provided for free to people who say they can't afford an ID. Should the gubment also bring the voting booth to their homes so that they don't have to be bothered to go anywhere to vote?
When did the rules on Voter ID equate to the rules for a drivers license? This thread is about a Voter ID specifically. Note that I can get a driver’s license in two states; not legal, but easy. If I only use one for voting where my winter home is I’ll never be caught.
Then there is an absentee ballot so you don’t have to leave your home to vote. So that’s the voter booth you are talking about. Right?
Personally I think a drivers license is more than adaquate ID to vote. Just having my name on a list is sufficient.
 
Last edited:
The point you guys seem to miss here, Why in the hell would someone risk fines and jailtime just to vote more than once? It doesn't happen people.
 
Very, very good.:2razz: printofathumb

In my eara, you didn't get an SS card until you needed one (like your first job). Now, they are issued immediately, is that correct?

I suppose that the ones who don't have ID lost it so they'll lose their social security card as well. Then they won't have ID to get ID.

Sometimes, you just can't defeat stupid.



Gosh if only there was something we could put on an SS card for children... like some kind of "imprint"... of a piece of their hand, or something... that would allow them to get picture-versions when they became older, but still with that fundamental nigh-impossible-to-commit-fraud-with-mark.....

like a imprint of something unique, that could only be you... like i don't know, a palm or a thumb or something. we could call it a "printofathumb"...


:)





Look, you already have to register. Simply do away with same-day registry and make ID-check and/or issuance part of the registration process. Oh Mrs Smith, you do not have a picture ID, but you are here to register with your birth certificate and SS card? Could you step in front of the camera here, please, and press your thumb on this pad? Thank you, that will be 10 minutes and your card will be ready.... NEXT!
 
Last edited:
Isn't that the same line they use for drug laws, that if it stops one person from using drugs it's worth it? Funny how the same logic from the other side is suddenly bogus.

I'm not against drug laws though, personally I don't think they go nearly far enough. Your point?
 
A mistake and... oh wait, it was caught and corrected! They were not purposely stopping specific people or groups of people from voting.

Try again.

Mistake? I don't buy that for one second. There were multiple representatives from Florida that sent Scott letters demanding that he stop purging voters from the registry, and he continued. Doesn't sound like an accident to me, sounds pretty deliberate.

Oh wait, then there's the whole 2000 election thing, down in Florida. Oh yeah, seems Florida republicans have a thing with "suppressing" the vote.
 
Mistake? I don't buy that for one second. There were multiple representatives from Florida that sent Scott letters demanding that he stop purging voters from the registry, and he continued. Doesn't sound like an accident to me, sounds pretty deliberate.

The purge was deliberate and should have been. It took over 175,000 people off the list that should have been removed. It also caught around 2000 people that shouldn't have been. That part was a mistake. Those people have been re-added. Are you honestly arguing that we should let 175,000 people who are ineligible to vote do so for fear of catching less than 2% error rate?

Seriously?
 
I'm not against drug laws though, personally I don't think they go nearly far enough. Your point?

The same people (as a rule) who would tell you that any law that stops at least one person from using drugs is a good thing will then use the opposite logic and say that any law that stops at least one person from fraudulently voting is a bad thing.

When did the rules on Voter ID equate to the rules for a drivers license? This thread is about a Voter ID specifically. Note that I can get a driver’s license in two states; not legal, but easy. If I only use one for voting where my winter home is I’ll never be caught.
Then there is an absentee ballot so you don’t have to leave your home to vote. So that’s the voter booth you are talking about. Right?
Personally I think a drivers license is more than adaquate ID to vote. Just having my name on a list is sufficient.

The thread is on ID'ing voters not on a specific separate ID for voting. That's why people keep bringing up all the various Photo ID's that are out there that would be sufficient for use. As to the absentee ballot, a sufficient voting ID system would have to include comparing absentee ballots with a list of those registered voters who showed up to vote.
 
IMO, anyone who cannot pull themselves together enough to obtain the necessary ID is not a responsible citizen. I simply do not trust such a person and I do not want them engaged in a political process which they obviously do not take very seriously.

For cripes sake! What sort of ne'er-do-well assh#le cannot produce a valid form of identification? Not only should such a person not be allowed to vote, but they should get a swift kick in the groin to boot!
 
Totally for it. We need ID for everything else.
 
It is an infringement of liberty that serves no practical purpose, and disenfranchises a lot of poor people, students, and the elderly. We all know it's a politically calculated move to prevent Democratic voters from casting their ballots. Can we please stop pretending it's anything else?

Why in the world should Democrat voters be any more likely to lack identification than Republican voters, be they poor, students or the elderly? Is it your contention that Democrat voters are much more likely to be ass-backward social retards than Republican voters? Say it isn't so!
 
The same people (as a rule) who would tell you that any law that stops at least one person from using drugs is a good thing will then use the opposite logic and say that any law that stops at least one person from fraudulently voting is a bad thing.

That made no sense. Let's make it simple. Anything that we can do to enforce the rule of law is, in general, a good thing, and leave it at that.
 
I live near a relatively small town, and the place to go to vote is just about 1/4 mile up the road from me, and serves just a small precinct of the county. Last time I voted, just during the 15 or so minutes I was in the building, there were two different elderly ladies who went to vote, but were told they had already voted. Neither of these women appeared to have any cognitive deficits. I strongly suspect that they had ballots mailed to them, for early voting purposes, and someone else kindly "voted for them", then sent the ballots in. I have no proof that there was fraud, but I find it a little more than coincidental that two elderly ladies, in my small precinct, who just happened to go vote at the same time I was there, incidentally forgot that they had already voted.
And none of the new voter ID laws would stop that kind of abuse - assuming it's happening at all.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom