• 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
Voter registration and ID? Sure.
Photo ID? No.
 
specklebang said:
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?
Click to expand...

my boys got theirs 6-10 weeks after birth.

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.
Click to expand...

but they will always have their thumbs, unless they lose those too. then they may indeed be in for some difficulty in acquiring enough witnesses.
 
Sig said:
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!
Click to expand...

remember during Florida 2000, when they argued that their supporters were just naturally either illiterate or senile, and that therefore the ballots were unfairly tilted against them? :mrgreen:
 
cpwill said:
remember during Florida 2000, when they argued that their supporters were just naturally either illiterate or senile, and that therefore the ballots were unfairly tilted against them? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Well bad ballot lay out is one thing...Not switching the top name on a ballot does give some favor to the person who happens to be on the top line
 
You are still just a young stud but us older cows didn't get SS cards until you actually needed one - as in got a job.

I'm aware that the SS numbers are issued very early now.

I totally support the Printofathumb™ methodology you suggested. This being on file could easily resolve a request for duplicate ID.

cpwill said:
my boys got theirs 6-10 weeks after birth.



but they will always have their thumbs, unless they lose those too. then they may indeed be in for some difficulty in acquiring enough witnesses.
Click to expand...
 
MoSurveyor said:
And none of the new voter ID laws would stop that kind of abuse - assuming it's happening at all.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not. Do murder laws stop murders? We still have murders, but it's probably safe to say that some are stopped because the penalty for murder dissuades at least a few people.

Not to mention the punishment aspect for those who still choose to do what society deems unacceptable. Really, saying a law (on any subject, not just this) would not thwart people isn't really the point behind having a law. The point is, "we" deem it unacceptable and... while we hope you won't do it, should you still choose to do it anyway... then you will pay a price if you still choose to do it.
 
Sig said:
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!
Click to expand...

who are you or anyone else to say who should and shouldn't be involved in the political process. Poor people deserve a voice too, and you have no right to tell them they shouldn't.
 
OnWisconsin said:
who are you or anyone else to say who should and shouldn't be involved in the political process. Poor people deserve a voice too, and you have no right to tell them they shouldn't.
Click to expand...
Actually, he does have the right... to express his opinion. Doesn't mean he's correct, but he does have the right.
 
OnWisconsin said:
who are you or anyone else to say who should and shouldn't be involved in the political process. Poor people deserve a voice too, and you have no right to tell them they shouldn't.
Click to expand...

And they can have a voice, but a voice does not come without effort. If one cannot be bothered to make an effort, why should they have a voice?
 
radcen said:
Maybe, maybe not. Do murder laws stop murders? We still have murders, but it's probably safe to say that some are stopped because the penalty for murder dissuades at least a few people.

Not to mention the punishment aspect for those who still choose to do what society deems unacceptable. Really, saying a law (on any subject, not just this) would not thwart people isn't really the point behind having a law. The point is, "we" deem it unacceptable and... while we hope you won't do it, should you still choose to do it anyway... then you will pay a price if you still choose to do it.
Click to expand...
Photo ID voter laws will not stop voter fraud by mail. If you disagree with that you can explain how that would be accomplished.


As for voter fraud at the polls:
We already have voter fraud laws on the books. Your argument here would seem to suggest we don't need ID's at all, that the law itself should be sufficient. Even I disagree with that sentiment.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
And they can have a voice, but a voice does not come without effort. If one cannot be bothered to make an effort, why should they have a voice?
Click to expand...
I would say that they have chosen to not have a voice. Not always, but for the most part, in today's society, if you don't have a valid ID of some sort, it's because it wasn't that big of a deal to you. Even people who lose their driver's licenses for whatever reason can get valid state-issued IDs for everyday use.

As a general rule. There will, of course, be some exceptions to this general rule, but they will be just that... exceptions.
 
Cephus said:
Why not? Photo IDs ought to be legally required for everyone.
Click to expand...
I believe you've said that already. :shrug:
We have voter ID laws here and have had for a very long time but we don't require a photo ID.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Photo ID voter laws will not stop voter fraud by mail. If you disagree with that you can explain how that would be accomplished.


As for voter fraud at the polls:
We already have voter fraud laws on the books. Your argument here would seem to suggest we don't need ID's at all, that the law itself should be sufficient. Even I disagree with that sentiment.
Click to expand...
I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. In fact, mine was exactly the opposite, and was in counter to your seeming suggestion that it is unnecessary to have laws at all since laws don't always thwart undesired behavior. You post came off as, "Why have laws at all if laws do not work in every single instance, bar none?".
 
radcen said:
I have no idea how you came to that conclusion. In fact, mine was exactly the opposite, and was in counter to your seeming suggestion that it is unnecessary to have laws at all since laws don't always thwart undesired behavior. You post came off as, "Why have laws at all if laws do not work in every single instance, bar none?".
Click to expand...
Lizzie specifically mentioned fraud by mail-in ballet. My guess from your response is you didn't really read the post to which I responded before reading mine. Don't get PO'ed at me because I actually responded to her post and you misinterpreted my response.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Lizzie specifically mentioned fraud by mail-in ballet. My guess from your response is you didn't really read the post to which I responded before reading mine. Don't get PO'ed at me because I actually responded to her post and you misinterpreted my response.
Click to expand...
My point was generic in nature regarding where and why laws are enacted, and yet still square in line with your comments as a generic comment, as I clearly noted when I said, "(on any subject, not just this)".

Let it go. You made your point, I made mine. Anything further is just arguing for pride's sake.
 
I have no problem showing my I.D., however, let's not kid ourselves about what this voter I.D. "law" is all about. It is clearly an effort by the American Taliban to suppress votes from democrat constituants.

I found this YouTube clip that pretty much sums up my viewpoint on the whole "non-problem."

 
MoSurveyor said:
I believe you've said that already. :shrug:
We have voter ID laws here and have had for a very long time but we don't require a photo ID.
Click to expand...

Why not? I get tired of asking the same questions and getting no answers.

Just because it's always been done that way doesn't mean it should be that way.
 
Captain America said:
I have no problem showing my I.D., however, let's not kid ourselves about what this voter I.D. "law" is all about. It is clearly an effort by the American Taliban to suppress votes from democrat constituants.

I found this YouTube clip that pretty much sums up my viewpoint on the whole "non-problem."

Click to expand...

Tea Party being the "American Taliban". Ya know... I can't really argue against that. :neutral:
 
Cephus said:
Why not? I get tired of asking the same questions and getting no answers.

Just because it's always been done that way doesn't mean it should be that way.
Click to expand...
I agree with your second statement but would also add that change is not necessarily better, either. I simply see no good reason to insist on photo ID at this late stage. As a long-term, as in a couple of years, goal I have no problem with it. What I have a problem with is politicians pushing something through then insisting it be implemented in a few, short months.

Why did they wait until 2012 to get these laws passed?
Why must they be enforced without a reasonable grace period for people to conform to the new laws?

- and I don't mean reasonable to those who already have or could easily get an ID. I mean to those who don't have ID"s and can't easily get them for various reasons. If voter fraud was such a HUGE problem then these laws should have been passed in 2009 or 2010 and there would have been two years or more for people with problems to figure out how to get ID's. Since everything had to be rush-rush at the last minute the only assumption I can make is that there is a political agenda here that's using voter fraud as a convenient excuse to leave a group of legit voters out in the cold.
 
MoSurveyor said:
I agree with your second statement but would also add that change is not necessarily better, either. I simply see no good reason to insist on photo ID at this late stage. As a long-term, as in a couple of years, goal I have no problem with it. What I have a problem with is politicians pushing something through then insisting it be implemented in a few, short months.
Click to expand...

Using it for this election, I agree, it's unlikely that any state would be able to pass a law that would apply in November and pass any kind of legal muster. As a law that needs to be instituted nation-wide though, it's absolutely essential. Of course, the liberals aren't complaining that these laws shouldn't be passed for this election, they're arguing they shouldn't be passed at all, ever.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Why did they wait until 2012 to get these laws passed?
Why must they be enforced without a reasonable grace period for people to conform to the new laws?

- and I don't mean reasonable to those who already have or could easily get an ID. I mean to those who don't have ID"s and can't easily get them for various reasons. If voter fraud was such a HUGE problem then these laws should have been passed in 2009 or 2010 and there would have been two years or more for people with problems to figure out how to get ID's. Since everything had to be rush-rush at the last minute the only assumption I can make is that there is a political agenda here that's using voter fraud as a convenient excuse to leave a group of legit voters out in the cold.
Click to expand...

The move to try to have voter ID has been an ongoing issue for at least 4 election periods as a major push and for even longer before not as controversial. 2000 seems to be the real beginning of the push with the Bush FL issue. Many laws seem to be awaiting pre-clearence under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act or have only recently received it. So this isn't a new issue or even a rush job for this election.

While I won't comment on the rest of the site (because I have not looked it over) this page seems to be made of purely factual information regarding voter ID laws, with no bias in either direction. Wikipedia also has a page with some history on the issue but it's Wikipedia so take with a grain of salt and check the references.
 
Requiring voter ID is simply repression of a constitutional right that has been brought into the election process by the right for the purposes of control within a timeframe that will make difficult for everyone to get an ID before the election.

It's cheating.
 
It is of dire importance to the survival of the GOP to make all attempts to stifle any and all votes they can from their detractors. They must, whenever the oppertunity presents itself, redraw district lines, use false information and suppress minority voters any way they can. Dire measures are required in dire situations.

You do notice how many states have this issue on their agendas that are dominated by the GOP powers that be right? You DO know that voter fraud actually only makes up for less than a few thousandths of 1%, right? And we do know that the only people who would be affected and oppressed would be the ones most likely to vote democrat. Do the math.

The GOP should just man up and say it.
 
Cephus said:
Using it for this election, I agree, it's unlikely that any state would be able to pass a law that would apply in November and pass any kind of legal muster. As a law that needs to be instituted nation-wide though, it's absolutely essential. Of course, the liberals aren't complaining that these laws shouldn't be passed for this election, they're arguing they shouldn't be passed at all, ever.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that's true. Some few may say that but overall I think a lot of concerns are the same concerns I've expressed. Once it was established that ID's would be free many people said "OK" because that addressed their concern. In addition to cost my hang-up has been the time-frame and once we get past that I'll say "OK", as will many others. By the time these concerns are actually addressed instead of just laughed at as "excuses" I think you'll find most will be in agreement and there won't be an issue.

The only real concern left after those is the government tracking people, which many see as a step closer to Big Brother - and that concern comes from both sides of the aisle. Personally, I think those people are behind the times or, in their view, already too late. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom