Voter ID, why Democrats don't want it

[mcjo tech]

Obviously nothing since he refuses to acknowledge all of the proof that has been given already. The dishonest way for such claims to be made is by constantly adding specifics for proof. Those who use such dishonest tactics demand that specifics such as "massive fraud" rather than just "fraud" be a criteria for acceptable proof.

Again:

What proof?

Show me in this thread what PROOF you are refering to.

All you got is personal attacks and the potential of voter fraud.

Potential fraud is not fraud.

Nothing more in the form of proof that I see from you.

I have made my points and provided proof that the fact is there is no need to change voter ID laws based on actual voter fraud statistics.

Actual voter fraud is estimated at .0004 percent and most of that is simply by error of the voter and has nothing to do with voters deliberately commiting voter fraud.

You two are just too much and way over your heads on this issue.

You want a specific that will change my mind?

Specifically show me in the last ten years where you can prove that voter fraud has cost someone an election.


I have provided a link to back up my point.

Where is yours?

[Hugh B]

Again:

What proof?

Show me in this thread what PROOF you are refering to.

All you got is personal attacks and the potential of voter fraud.

Potential fraud is not fraud.

Nothing more in the form of proof that I see from you.

I have made my points and provided proof that the fact is there is no need to change voter ID laws based on actual voter fraud statistics.

Actual voter fraud is estimated at .0004 percent and most of that is simply by error of the voter and has nothing to do with voters deliberately commiting voter fraud.

You two are just too much and way over your heads on this issue.

You want a specific that will change my mind?

Specifically show me in the last ten years where you can prove that voter fraud has cost someone an election.


I have provided a link to back up my point.

Where is yours?

So, now you are saying that voter fraud is ok as long as it does not cost someone an election? That is your belief?

[mcjo tech]

So, now you are saying that voter fraud is ok as long as it does not cost someone an election? That is your belief?

Dodge,twist, slither, tap dance, do whatever

You ask the question I answer and then you twist it

And you think the readers can't figure this out.

Show me where it has effected the outcome of an election in the last ten years and then I will worry about your so called voter.
fraud.

Pathetic

[Hugh B]

Dodge,twist, slither, tap dance, do whatever

You ask the question I answer and then you twist it

And you think the readers can't figure this out.

Show me where it has effected the outcome of an election in the last ten years and then I will worry about your so called voter.
fraud.

Pathetic

Not twisting at all. A basic philosophical test for the validity of a claim is to turn it around and state the reverse and see if it still makes sense. I am simply applying this test for validity to your claim. If you don't like the result then perhaps you need to reconsider your claim. According to you crime is ok as long as nobody gets hurt. An election has to be lost or fraud is ok. I guess it is ok to run a red light as long as you don't get in an accident. Same concept. Your personal system of moral standards must be quite interesting.

Your standard for proof is absurd. As long as I am here I also want to point out that your posts indicate you do not know the difference between evidence and proof.

[jtrammel]

Again:

What proof?

Show me in this thread what PROOF you are refering to.

All you got is personal attacks and the potential of voter fraud.

Potential fraud is not fraud.

Nothing more in the form of proof that I see from you.

I have made my points and provided proof that the fact is there is no need to change voter ID laws based on actual voter fraud statistics.

Actual voter fraud is estimated at .0004 percent and most of that is simply by error of the voter and has nothing to do with voters deliberately commiting voter fraud.

You two are just too much and way over your heads on this issue.

You want a specific that will change my mind?

Specifically show me in the last ten years where you can prove that voter fraud has cost someone an election.


I have provided a link to back up my point.

Where is yours?

Pete838 posted a number of offenses in post#40 of this thread. I guess it's not excessive enough to require someone to reach all the way into their pocket to retrieve their dl and show it at the polls. I mean I can't believe anyone would require such a difficult task... Sarcasm

[hearthman]

Why is there such fascination with voter fraud needing to be proven? Is there that same level of fraud in every other facet of life that requires photo ID? How many fakers did they bust sneaking into courthouses before? How many people flying on someone else's plane ticket? You see? It isn't so much the collective totals of voter fraud and whether it is for national, state or local elections but that it is simply the feels it is the proper thing to do tp prevent fraud because without it the opportunity is certainly there. The country deserves to know that when Hearthman steps into a voting booth, I am a legal citizen and not a convicted felon so I am legally entitled to vote and vote only once-period. Anyone having a problem with that obviously is in favor of cheating the system. There can be no other motive for arguing against voter ID.

[corny]

Pete838 posted a number of offenses in post#40 of this thread. I guess it's not excessive enough to require someone to reach all the way into their pocket to retrieve their dl and show it at the polls. I mean I can't believe anyone would require such a difficult task... Sarcasm

It becomes difficult on the elderly who normally dont need a photo ID after the age of 65 or so..... or the elderly who no longer drive and must burden someone to take them to the dmv to get one of those state ids with a photo on it.

Because not all oldsters and disabled have a way to the dmv or they dont have relatives who will come and get them and spend the day at the dmv with them getting their photo id made.

Not all american kids will drop their normal routine to help their elderly parents or disabled relations... its easier to just forget them....

If you are going to have photo id requirements then you should make that photo id easily accessible to all..... it disenfranchises the elderly and disabled who may not have the means to get their ID made.....and this is exactly what the people after these laws want.

I could not care less about the poor folks having access........they dont tend to vote and if any of them care enough to vote....Im sure they can bum a ride down to the dmv and spend half a day or more of their free time their getting their id made.

[Hugh B]

It becomes difficult on the elderly who normally dont need a photo ID after the age of 65 or so..... or the elderly who no longer drive and must burden someone to take them to the dmv to get one of those state ids with a photo on it.

Because not all oldsters and disabled have a way to the dmv or they dont have relatives who will come and get them and spend the day at the dmv with them getting their photo id made.

Not all american kids will drop their normal routine to help their elderly parents or disabled relations... its easier to just forget them....

If you are going to have photo id requirements then you should make that photo id easily accessible to all..... it disenfranchises the elderly and disabled who may not have the means to get their ID made.....and this is exactly what the people after these laws want.

I could not care less about the poor folks having access........they dont tend to vote and if any of them care enough to vote....Im sure they can bum a ride down to the dmv and spend half a day or more of their free time their getting their id made.

Nonsense! Given that my family regularly visits relatives and former neighbors who are now in nursing homes and assisted living quarters I decided to ask about how they vote. And, I live in a state requiring voter ID to vote. It turns out that not a single individual in one of these homes is without a current valid ID and the facility provides a choice of making sure the residents either have an absentee ballot or a group ride to the polling place.

Hell, ya can't even purchase prescription medicine for them without a current valid ID. The homes require a current ID just so they can show who they are getting drugs for. Not having a current ID is a lame excuse now days.

[Hugh B]

Nursing homes and assisted living facilities make a big event out of going to vote. It is one of the things that can break the boredom. You should listen to some of them argue politics. One would think it was a meeting of ARP. Voting is actually a big deal to these people and rightly so.

[netsalt]

The question remains. Why is this sooooooo important right now? Voter fraud is so miniscule and the costs for implementation are high since we must count legislature time, court time and the citizens time. One would think these fiscal conservatives would be foaming at the mouth over all the wasted money chasing unicorns. But since it is regulation for the citizens anything goes, regulation for the "job creators" is strictly out of bounds and a waste of money.

[Hugh B]

Really, how much does it cost for the voter to simply pull out a current ID and show it to the voting official who is already there? My wife is a local poll worker. All the voter does is flash an ID and she checks off their name from the registry, they sign for a ballot and it is over. What cost? None whatsoever!

[mcjo tech]

Pete838 posted a number of offenses in post#40 of this thread. I guess it's not excessive enough to require someone to reach all the way into their pocket to retrieve their dl and show it at the polls. I mean I can't believe anyone would require such a difficult task... Sarcasm

No references to where this material came from. Acorn is addressed in the report I linked if you want to read it.

Simply right wing propoganda.

You want us to believe that you guys are only concerned about this issue because you are so moral that you are here to protect the integrity of the system from anyone voting who is not legal to do so.

That is just a bunch of bull$hit and is obvious that your real agenda is to suppress voting for minorities, students, and the elderly for Obama.

At least have the Ba!!s that if that is what you really want then just say so.

Stop hiding behind your moral false outrage of "I only want legal voters to vote" Bull$hit

[netsalt]

Really, how much does it cost for the voter to simply pull out a current ID and show it to the voting official who is already there? My wife is a local poll worker. All the voter does is flash an ID and she checks off their name from the registry, they sign for a ballot and it is over. What cost? None whatsoever!

That explains it! Your congresscritter's time is worth nothing and the court system runs for free.