Photo ID to vote?

Catawba · Dec 22, 2011

TurtleDude said:
do all the libs (yes everyone voting no is a well known lefty) oppose having to show an ID to buy a gun as well?

"As a libertarian, I tend to look at cost before I look at benefits. In 2008, the Supreme Court looked at state imposed voter ID in Indiana in the case Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. In the majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens stated that voter ID was constitutional as long as the state offered the identification cards free of charge. Otherwise, voter identification cards qualify as a poll tax. If the Mississippi voter ID initiative passes in November, the physical printing and distribution of a new form of identification as well as the implementation of the new policy will end up costing the state one and a half million dollars a year. Are the benefits worth the cost?

Studies have shown that states that require photo identification in elections have little to no significant difference in voter turnout or fraud. “In [a] 2008 survey, three out of 2,564 respondents said that they tried to vote but were not allowed because of voter ID, a fraction of a percent.”[1] The only claim by either side that has any relevance is that some groups may not receive equal treatment by poll workers when asked for identification. “In the 2008 Super Tuesday primary states, 53% of whites were asked to show photo ID, compared with 58% of Hispanics and a staggering 73% of African Americans.”[2] The above data should be a warning for Mississippians to rethink their support of voter identification when they go to the polls this Tuesday. More unnecessary spending and possible discrimination at the polls makes voter identification contain more negative policy implications than positive. This is why I am voting NO on Initiative 27."

Young Americans for Liberty – Ole Miss Chapter

teamosil · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
I did not know you could read minds now? How do you know?

Because that's what the study proved... I feel like you aren't putting an honest effort into this conversation man.

Blackdog said:
I am sorry but if you need a simple photo id, get one. This is not rocket science.

The question isn't like about whether people should do this or that, it is what WILL people do. And at least a large block of them won't get IDs and hence will be prevented from voting. The result will be a much bigger skewing of election results than that caused by the seemingly extremely rare fraud that is committed by going into a polling place.

Catawba · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
It would also keep people who should not be voting from voting. Damn what a concept!

Very convenient to have a law to make it harder for those that disagree with you to vote. Most people try to hide this intent with false claims of voter fraud as you first did, till challenged. I'm glad you finally came out of the closet about it.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

teamosil said:
Because that's what the study proved... I feel like you aren't putting an honest effort into this conversation man.

No it has not in fact here...

Studies have shown that states that require photo identification in elections have little to no significant difference in voter turnout or fraud. “In [a] 2008 survey, three out of 2,564 respondents said that they tried to vote but were not allowed because of voter ID, a fraction of a percent.” - Young Americans for Liberty – Ole Miss Chapter

The study as I said from 2006 vs the info from 2008 says no.

Thanks Catwaba, always appreciate the help.

teamosil said:
The question isn't like about whether people should do this or that, it is what WILL people do. And at least a large block of them won't get IDs and hence will be prevented from voting. The result will be a much bigger skewing of election results than that caused by the seemingly extremely rare fraud that is committed by going into a polling place.

Again you are assuming things that have not happened and according to states who already require id's it is not true.

Amazing how studies from 5 years ago mean little.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

Catawba said:
Very convenient to have a law to make it harder for those that disagree with you to vote. Most people try to hide this intent with false claims of voter fraud as you first did, till challenged. I'm glad you finally came out of the closet about it.

Now you with the idiot comment. That's not what I said and you know it.

Wow.

Catawba · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
Now you with the idiot comment. That's not what I said and you know it.

Wow.

So then you didn't mean to say this?

Originally Posted by Blackdog
It would also keep people who should not be voting from voting.

Or this?

Good, maybe it will keep the apathetic morons who have no clue from voting.

teamosil · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
Again you are assuming things that have not happened and according to states who already require id's it is not true

Blackdog. Again. Those laws just require a valid ID. 99% of people have a valid photo ID, so that is exactly what you would expect- only a fraction of 1% not being able to vote. But these other laws require forms of ID that 10% of people don't have. Please, don't make me keep explaining that over and over.

Jryan · Dec 22, 2011

I find it quite disturbing that people are okay with stripping others rights as long as it secures their own.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

Catawba said:
So then you didn't mean to say this?

Or this?

Lets see, I guess you need a lesson in English?

Apathy = people who don't vote anyway. Hence the low voter turnout.

People who should not be voting = illegal aliens, convicted felons etc.

Your statements are basically what they are is because you have no real argument against a photo id, period. So you would rather attack my character by lying. Bravo! :applaud

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

teamosil said:
Blackdog. Again. Those laws just require a valid ID.

A valid id means the information IS up to date etc. This does not make an id law unconstitutional as in Indianan it must be up to date as well.

teamosil said:
99% of people have a valid photo ID, so that is exactly what you would expect- only a fraction of 1% not being able to vote. But these other laws require forms of ID that 10% of people don't have. Please, don't make me keep explaining that over and over.

No proof exists that 10% of anyone will be unable to vote, none. Here let me post it again since you cut it out....

Studies have shown that states that require photo identification in elections have little to no significant difference in voter turnout or fraud. “In [a] 2008 survey, three out of 2,564 respondents said that they tried to vote but were not allowed because of voter ID, a fraction of a percent.”

Here lets repeat that....

have little to no significant difference in voter turnout

Does it need to be any clearer? The study from 2006 was talking about the 15 states AT THE TIME that now have SCOTUS approved voter id laws, period. I don't know what these "new" voter id laws coming into affect you are talking about.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

Jryan said:
I find it quite disturbing that people are okay with stripping others rights as long as it secures their own.

I find it disturbing people want illegals etc to vote with impunity.

Then again we all know who the majority of voter fraud charges have been leveled against.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the radical left-wing activist group, was convicted in a massive voter-fraud conspiracy. It has been committing identify theft for decades. VADUM: Obama's favorite gangsters convicted again - Washington Times

The plea offer made to McInerney, a Democrat, is based, in part, on information compiled by State Police showing McInerney may have helped forge absentee ballots in previous campaigns dating to at least 2007.

McInerney, 47, is a former state Assembly worker who has been a Democratic committeeman in Troy for years. He was appointed to the clerk’s position by the City Council when Democrats took control of the Troy council in January 2008. Dem official pleads guilty in NY election fraud investigation | RedState

about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year. Most of those charged have been Democrats, voting records show. In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - New York Times

Sorry, no dice.

Catawba · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
Lets see, I guess you need a lesson in English?

Apathy = people who don't vote anyway. Hence the low voter turnout.

People who should not be voting = illegal aliens, convicted felons etc.

Your statements are basically what they are is because you have no real argument against a photo id, period. So you would rather attack my character by lying. Bravo! :applaud

You've admitted your reason for wanting the new voter regulatory requirements. No point in trying go back in the closet now.

Where are all the cases of voter fraud by illegal aliens and convicted felons??? We keep asking you and you keep coming up with nothing!

All we have are your statements that it would limit the people from voting that disagree with you.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

Catawba said:
You've admitted your reason for wanting the new voter regulatory requirements. No point in trying go back in the closet now.

This is exactly what I mean. You are basically lying because I said no such thing you are accusing me of and ignoring the actual subject to basically call names.

Catawba said:
Where are all the cases of voter fraud by illegal aliens and convicted felons??? We keep asking you and you keep coming up with nothing!

No you don't. I have posted plenty of proof as have others of fraud and yet you keep asking.

You are done here.

Catawba said:
All we have are your statements that it would limit the people from voting that disagree with you.

No another lie. I would limit people who legally cannot vote to begin with. Like dead people, people voting more than one time. People illegally registered etc.

You don't like that though because it would limit the liberal vote fraud machine.

PS more evidence you will ignore...

McInerney, 47, is a former state Assembly worker who has been a Democratic committeeman in Troy for years. He was appointed to the clerk’s position by the City Council when Democrats took control of the Troy council in January 2008. Dem official pleads guilty in NY election fraud investigation | RedState

haymarket · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog - do you realize that the NY TImes article you have in your posts paints the exact opposite picture that you are attempting to use it for? The article shows that a miniscule number of people are convicted for voter fraud and most who commit it did so because they did not understand the law. Please read your own article.

Many of those charged by the Justice Department appear to have mistakenly filled out registration forms or misunderstood eligibility rules, a review of court records and interviews with prosecutors and defense lawyers show. In Miami, an assistant United States attorney said many cases there involved what were apparently mistakes by immigrants, not fraud.
In Wisconsin, where prosecutors have lost almost twice as many cases as they won, charges were brought against voters who filled out more than one registration form and felons seemingly unaware that they were barred from voting.
One ex-convict was so unfamiliar with the rules that he provided his prison-issued identification card, stamped “Offender,” when he registered just before voting

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

haymarket said:
Blackdog - do you realize that the NY TImes article you have in your posts paints the exact opposite picture that you are attempting to use it for? The article shows that a miniscule number of people are convicted for voter fraud and most who commit it did so because they did not understand the law. Please read your own article.

Please point out where I said it is rampant? You are assuming I said something based on the fact I support photo id's. I know what the article says and it says the majority of those charged were democrats out of 120 arrested. THAT was my point which you and others are trying to ignore.

Notice it said the MAJORITY OF THOSE CHARGED WERE DEMOCRATS

Now obviously Republicans are also to blame but Democrats seem to have a much LARGER interest in voting fraud, I wonder why?

haymarket · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
Please point out where I said it is rampant? You are assuming I said something based on the fact I support photo id's. I know what the article says and it says the majority of those convicted were democrats out of 120 arrested. THAT was my point which you and others are trying to ignore.

rampant? You reproduced my post and I do not find the word RAMPANT in it.

Do you even understand the mathematical relationship between the numbers 86 and 196,000,000?

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

haymarket said:
rampant? You reproduced my post and I do not find the word RAMPANT in it.

Do you even understand the mathematical relationship between the numbers 86 and 196,000,000?

Now you are trying to play semantics? :roll:

Sorry not going to play your silly game. It's not like ACORN got caught illegally registering 400,000 names, or anything like that, right?

I am done with you and your partisan hackery.

haymarket · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
Now you are trying to play semantics? :roll:

Sorry not going to play your silly game. It's not like ACORN got caught illegally registering 400,000 names, or anything like that, right?

I am done with you and your partisan hackery.

What are you talking about? YOU used the word rampant and it was not in my post.

You seem to be frustrated because you are impotent to point out any significant voter fraud which would justify this sort of state action.

Again I ask you, do you understand the mathematical relationship between the numbers 86 and 196,000,000?

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

haymarket said:
What are you talking about? YOU used the word rampant and it was not in my post.

So what? I used the word "rampant" instead of something like wide spread or epidemic even. My point remains the same.

haymarket said:
You seem to be frustrated because you are impotent to point out any significant voter fraud which would justify this sort of state action.

Not really. I feel impotent against the liberal partisan duchebaggery presented by dishonest opponents who reject the evidence and use nothing but fallacy.

haymarket said:
Again I ask you, do you understand the mathematical relationship between the numbers 86 and 196,000,000?

As I have said over and over already... Does not matter, it happens.

Perfect example post #416 you completely ignore my point and go off on some stupid fallacy about the word "rampant"

Just wow. At least be honest with yourself.

earthworm · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
I find it disturbing people want illegals etc to vote with impunity.

Then again we all know who the majority of voter fraud charges have been leveled against.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the radical left-wing activist group, was convicted in a massive voter-fraud conspiracy. It has been committing identify theft for decades. VADUM: Obama's favorite gangsters convicted again - Washington Times

The plea offer made to McInerney, a Democrat, is based, in part, on information compiled by State Police showing McInerney may have helped forge absentee ballots in previous campaigns dating to at least 2007.

McInerney, 47, is a former state Assembly worker who has been a Democratic committeeman in Troy for years. He was appointed to the clerk’s position by the City Council when Democrats took control of the Troy council in January 2008. Dem official pleads guilty in NY election fraud investigation | RedState

about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year. Most of those charged have been Democrats, voting records show. In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - New York Times

Sorry, no dice.

Interesting..
So, Blackdog, are you trying to say that the liberals are committing all the crimes, and the conservatives, none ?
And you want people to believe this ?
IMO, "illegals" should not exist, this problem should have been rectified a century ago....
I say, make them all "legal"....they are here and here to stay....
This is what I consider to be reality..

Dittohead not! · Dec 22, 2011

It was not a "liberal" who signed amnesty into law in '86.

Boo Radley · Dec 22, 2011

Dittohead not! said:
It was not a "liberal" who signed amnesty into law in '86.

That's true. You'd be hard pressed to find evidence that either side really wants to stop this type of immigration.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

earthworm said:
Interesting..
So, Blackdog, are you trying to say that the liberals are committing all the crimes, and the conservatives, none ?
And you want people to believe this ?

Yep that's exactly what I said, lol...

Then again we all know who the majority of voter fraud charges have been leveled against. - Blackdog

Reading is fundamental.

earthworm said:
IMO, "illegals" should not exist, this problem should have been rectified a century ago....
I say, make them all "legal"....they are here and here to stay....

I say throw them out, period. They are criminals and came here illegally. I wish I could just ignore the law, but it does not work that way.

earthworm said:
This is what I consider to be reality..

Well I hope it works for you.

Black Dog · Dec 22, 2011

Boo Radley said:
That's true. You'd be hard pressed to find evidence that either side really wants to stop this type of immigration.

Sad but true. Why I am not a member of either party, they both suck.

Boo Radley · Dec 22, 2011

Blackdog said:
Sad but true. Why I am not a member of either party, they both suck.

True enough, but it might be helpfup to ask why neither will address this?

Photo ID to vote?

Photo ID to vote?

Yes

No

Disappointed Evolutionist

Disappointed Evolutionist

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

Disappointed Evolutionist

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

Disappointed Evolutionist

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound

master political analyst

King Of The Dog Pound

King Of The Dog Pound