• 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!

You’ll Need an ID to Prove You’re a Democrat but Not to Vote

Cons are just mad that they can't go to the Dem covention and throw things at cameramen. You know, like the liberal plants at the Repub convention (the Con Con?)


Nah.....their not mad. But they are laughing with the Occupy people razzing the Dems Convention as well as Vandalizing one of Obama's Campaign headquarters.
evil6.gif
 
Oh, boo hoo hoo. I "know" no such thing; I do know you're crafting a silly tale of woe where they can somehow manage to vote, but they're too helpless to obtain an ID, even with assistance. "What if the DMV is further away than the voting booth," you said. Well, what if it's NOT?

You clearly don't understand how logic works. "What if it's not" is not a valid objection, as this law will affect millions of INDIVIDUAL people. Presumably some of them will be able to get the voter ID and others will not, meaning that some people are disenfranchised as a result.

That's funny; what I said was that they got started long ago, and obviously, they did. Now that the card is available, sixty days strikes me as an eminently reasonable period of time to get it done, if you want to.

Well let's do the math here: Many DMVs aren't even open every day of the week, so it's really more like 40 days. The BCJ has estimated that in places like Philadelphia, the proportion of voters without a valid ID is about 20%. In 2008, there were 717,329 votes cast in Philadelphia County. So that means that approximately 143,000 people will need to go through the process over the course of 40 days...or roughly 3,500 per day. It looks to me that the county has 7 facilities which can process photo IDs, which means that EACH FACILITY will need to process 500 voter ID forms every single day until the election (on top of their regular workload). Of course, that assumes that the process is so easy that everyone actually does it, which the good people who support this law assure me that they will. :roll:

Does 500 voter ID forms per DMV per day (in addition to regular work) still sound eminently reasonable to you? Have you ever been to a DMV? :roll:

I don't know if you're doing this on purpose, but that's not what I asked. You said the state offices don't have the capacity to process all of these new voter IDs in time for the election. Where's your evidence of this?

See above.

Nice race-card vomit you spew there.

Laws that specifically aim to disenfranchise minority voters, BECAUSE they are minority voters, without actually mentioning race = Jim Crow Laws.
This is absolutely a fair description of these voter ID laws. And anyone who supports them is absolutely supporting Jim Crow Laws. Your views on this are reprehensible and disgusting.
 
Income.. income for the love of god. 25 bucks is a lot of money for a huge portion of the American population. It is the difference between feeding your children or not. And like it or not, most "poor" city people vote Democratic.. and you try to deny that.. then forget this discussion because then you are not living on planet earth.

You are talking silly now. I've been poor. I've always had identification too. My grandmother is 90 years old. She has identification too. That is a cop-out. The only people who would TRULY be affected "negatively" by this would be illegal immigrants.
 
Whatever do you mean? That 13-second clip didn't convince you that requiring voter identification is all part of some evil plot?

US-haters also do it a lot.
 
Heh.

Apparently you can't conceive of someone merely having a different view without it being for nefarious reasons.

No, you can have a different view on many issues without it being for nefarious reasons...social security, abortion, tax policy, etc. But when you specifically support a law that will disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters, and you do it without even PRETENDING like you have evidence of a problem that this will solve, then it is absolutely for nefarious reasons. Civil rights laws are a completely different animal than, say, what the marginal tax rate should be.
 
Poor people can also get identification. They should have identification too. Everybody SHOULD. It's only common sense and not an outrageous request.

Guess what.. I agree! However what the GOP is doing in many states is an outrageous request for some. A 80+ year old that was born during a time where getting a birth certificate was not a standard thing.. how on earth can he or she get a voter ID when one of the requirements is to present your birth certificate? I understand fully the wish to prevent the very very little voter fraud that there is, but there must be a way to do it so it impacts as little as possible and makes it possible for everyone regardless of race, sex, age and income to get such a voter ID so that they can vote in elections.
 
It's not a barrier at all. You cannot cash a check without identification.

Cashing a check is not a constitutional right.

In some counties, you can be arrested for vagrancy if you have no ID.

I've never heard of any such laws. If they exist, they are most likely unconstitutional and just haven't been challenged yet.

It is not in any way unreasonable to expect voters to have an identification.

Then surely you can present some solid evidence that 1) the problem that these laws purport to solve actually exists, and 2) the laws will actually solve it.
 
Actions of the GOP in individual states. They could implement these ID programs for free.. but they have not. Instead they have put in road blocks that have made getting an ID cost money or you have to jump through more loopholes than Romney uses to get his 13% tax rate.

Point is, it is not so "simple" to get such IDs that are accepted during voting and those that will get hurt by such laws are more than often... democratic voters.



Hows that working out in Chicago, Illinois? How about California? What about NY, Det, Cincinatti, oh and Masterchoosits. ;)
 
You are talking silly now. I've been poor. I've always had identification too. My grandmother is 90 years old. She has identification too. That is a cop-out. The only people who would TRULY be affected "negatively" by this would be illegal immigrants.

So you got that ID when you were poor, or after or before?

And your grandmother, was she born in the deep south or backwards areas of the US? You do realize that birth certificates were not the norm at the beginning of the last century and before, in very rural poor areas right?

There is an easy solution to this all... a personal ID system given to you at birth/citizenship... it is simple and easy, but as I stated.. wont happen.
 
Does it need to be Nationwide? What about in Key-States only?

Evidence from key states (or non-key states) is fine too. Really I'm looking for *any* evidence of voter fraud from *anywhere* in the country, as I have seen absolutely none.

What happened with Minnesota and Franken and having Convicted Ex Felons voting for him while being locked up?

OK, now we're getting somewhere. This is at least an attempt at some evidence of voter fraud, which is more than the proponents of voter ID are usually willing to do. So I'll hear you out: How many ineligible voters voted for Al Franken? And what was the circumstances of their vote? What I mean by this is...was their name simply not purged from the voter rolls as it should have been, or did they vote in someone else's name? If it's the former, then a voter ID will not solve this problem.
 
Guess what.. I agree! However what the GOP is doing in many states is an outrageous request for some. A 80+ year old that was born during a time where getting a birth certificate was not a standard thing.. how on earth can he or she get a voter ID when one of the requirements is to present your birth certificate? I understand fully the wish to prevent the very very little voter fraud that there is, but there must be a way to do it so it impacts as little as possible and makes it possible for everyone regardless of race, sex, age and income to get such a voter ID so that they can vote in elections.

If for some reason a person cannot access a birth certificate but can prove they are a legal citizen, then I'm sure accommodations could be made, and that would also be a very limited number of people.
 
Yes, how will those rednecks figure out how to obtain an identification? It's just a completely ridiculous argument.

Kinda like Street People and Bangers in Chicago, NY, and L. A......Huh?
geez.gif
smiley_ROFLMAO.gif
 
So you got that ID when you were poor, or after or before?

And your grandmother, was she born in the deep south or backwards areas of the US? You do realize that birth certificates were not the norm at the beginning of the last century and before, in very rural poor areas right?

There is an easy solution to this all... a personal ID system given to you at birth/citizenship... it is simple and easy, but as I stated.. wont happen.

Actually, my grandmother was born in a very rural area in Maine. I've had identification since I was 15 years old when I got my first job. It was very easy to obtain and did not break the bank, as ID only cost like $15 to $20 at that time. Like I said, if someone had to pay for this every week or month, I could see your gripe, but this is ridiculous. It could easily be a one-time fee of $20 and then like a $5 renewal fee every few years. If someone is too poor (homeless or what not) or cannot access their birth certificate, appropriate accommodations could be made for those FEW people.

Oh, and I like the last idea. Maybe someday it will be instituted. There could be MANY reasons why it hasn't been, such as not being cost effective. It doesn't mean that there is a plot to take over the world you know. :roll:
 
You clearly don't understand how logic works. "What if it's not" is not a valid objection

Yes, as I pointed out by discounting your own "what if?" -- which was the point of my own. I thought that was clear. I guess not. Do you think that yours are valid and mine are not?


Does 500 voter ID forms per DMV per day (in addition to regular work) still sound eminently reasonable to you? Have you ever been to a DMV? :roll:

Funny, here are the acceptable forms of ID under the PA law:

What kind of IDs should I bring to the polls in November?

Starting on November 6, you must prove your identity by showing one of the following photo IDs issued by:

The United States government, e.g., a U.S. passport
The Commonwealth of PA, e.g., a driver’s license (NOTE: An expired driver’s license is okay as long as it is within 12 months after the expiration date)
A PA municipality (e.g., city, county, borough, incorporated town) to municipal employees
An accredited PA public or private institution of higher learning, e.g., a student card
A PA care facility, which includes a long‐term care nursing facility, an assisted living residence or a personal care home
U.S. Armed Forces branches or their reserves, including the PA National Guard (NOTE: The ID holder can be a veteran or current member; the expiration date can be indefinite.)

Did you not know this, or are you purposely falsely implying that acceptable IDs can come ONLY from DOT locations?

And besides, nice confinement to a single example of one jurisdiction.



Laws that specifically aim to disenfranchise minority voters, BECAUSE they are minority voters, without actually mentioning race = Jim Crow Laws.
This is absolutely a fair description of these voter ID laws. And anyone who supports them is absolutely supporting Jim Crow Laws. Your views on this are reprehensible and disgusting.

No, it's delusional race-card mental vomit.
 
It's not a barrier at all. You cannot cash a check without identification. In some counties, you can be arrested for vagrancy if you have no ID. It is not in any way unreasonable to expect voters to have an identification.

Also just how does one get a passport without an ID? A MAJOR credit card? How does one claim property that has been stolen and recovered without an ID? Checks, money orders, the same.

Also most high schools give out a student ID. Also I believe Identification is needed to access a Library. Not to mention College Universites Give out ID's.

Concerning some voter Fraud thats has been going on for quite some time. Is due to college kids voting at the Universities which they attend even in other states. Plus Still voting in their own home state.
 
No, you can have a different view on many issues without it being for nefarious reasons...social security, abortion, tax policy, etc. But when you specifically support a law that will disproportionately disenfranchise minority voters, and you do it without even PRETENDING like you have evidence of a problem that this will solve, then it is absolutely for nefarious reasons. Civil rights laws are a completely different animal than, say, what the marginal tax rate should be.

Great how that works. "I characterize things in such a way where you can have only one viewpoint, and any other viewpoint is evil."

:roll: It must be quite a thing to view the world through such "evil" filters all the time. No penetrating such a wall of self-assuredness, though.
 
Republicans who support such voter suppression legislation have not hidden their true agenda

Mike Turzai, Pennsylvania GOP House Majority Leader: Voter ID Will Allow Mitt Romney To Win State

Pennsylvania House leader Mike Turzai came out and said the law would deliver Pennsylvania to the GOP.

Mike Turzai, the Pennsylvania GOP House majority leader, said that a strict new voter ID law will help Republicans win the state for the first time since 1988.

"Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it’s done. First pro-life legislation -- abortion facility regulations -- in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done," he said to applause at a Republican State Committee this weekend, according to PoliticsPa.com.

The comment contradicted the usual Republican line that voter ID laws are for guarding against voter fraud -- which is extremely rare if not nonexistent in practice -- and not to help elect Republicans. Pennsylvania passed a new law in March through a GOP-led legislature requiring voters to show a driver's license or government issued photo ID before voting.

So lets stop pretending that this issue is about something else other than gaining a partisan advantage to help the GOP win elections it cannot now win.
 
Also just how does one get a passport without an ID? A MAJOR credit card? How does one claim property that has been stolen and recovered without an ID? Checks, money orders, the same.

Also most high schools give out a student ID. Also I believe Identification is needed to access a Library. Not to mention College Universites Give out ID's.

Concerning some voter Fraud thats has been going on for quite some time. Is due to college kids voting at the Universities which they attend even in other states. Plus Still voting in their own home state.

That's right! The world is much more complicated now than it was 50 or 100 years ago. Today, having proper identification is a necessity.
 
Republicans who support such voter suppression legislation have not hidden their true agenda

Mike Turzai, Pennsylvania GOP House Majority Leader: Voter ID Will Allow Mitt Romney To Win State

Pennsylvania House leader Mike Turzai came out and said the law would deliver Pennsylvania to the GOP.



So lets stop pretending that this issue is about something else other than gaining a partisan advantage to help the GOP win elections it cannot now win.

To me, this is about preventing illegal immigrants from voting in OUR elections. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with one party or another. I couldn't care less about that garbage.
 
Does it need to be Nationwide? What about in Key-States only? What happened with Minnesota and Franken and having Convicted Ex Felons voting for him while being locked up?

What all 13 of them? The first of them got up in court and said under oath that he voted for Norm Coleman? Do some homework.
 
Evidence from key states (or non-key states) is fine too. Really I'm looking for *any* evidence of voter fraud from *anywhere* in the country, as I have seen absolutely none.



OK, now we're getting somewhere. This is at least an attempt at some evidence of voter fraud, which is more than the proponents of voter ID are usually willing to do. So I'll hear you out: How many ineligible voters voted for Al Franken? And what was the circumstances of their vote? What I mean by this is...was their name simply not purged from the voter rolls as it should have been, or did they vote in someone else's name? If it's the former, then a voter ID will not solve this problem.

Perhaps this will answer your question.....

In the '08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close; on the morning after the election, after 2.9 million people had voted, Coleman led Franken by 725 votes.

Franken and his Democratic allies dispatched an army of lawyers to challenge the results. After the first canvass, Coleman's lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election.

During the controversy, a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons -- all ineligible to vote -- who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.

When 1,099 Felons Vote In A Race Won By 312 Ballots - Byron York - Page 1
 
That's right! The world is much more complicated now than it was 50 or 100 years ago. Today, having proper identification is a necessity.

The fact is there is no reason to be required to have an ID just like there was no reason to have it in the past. Countries require it, but its not necessary for it to exist.
 
They should also be checked. I think it is prudent to use every measure that is not unreasonable at our disposable to prevent any occurrence of fraud. Requiring certain identification to cast a ballot is not unreasonable.

How are you going to check ID on absentee ballots? Send government agents to everyone's house? If they live overseas, but are citizens, does their DL from that country count?

There's no way to check it for absentee ballots, which is why that's how fraud is committed. It's too easy.
 
Back
Top Bottom