interesting

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Cool Beans

This whole story is just B.S. to stir up the uninformed...... and to stir up racial issues.

Largely this on both sides of the aisle... Fraud vs. no I.D.

[detbuch]

If photo ID suppresses the vote, and we are concerned about the affect on "minorities" versus "whites" (which is obviously a racial comparison--so saying that one is talking about "minorities" not race is BS), and owning a car, thereby of necessity having a valid photo ID, makes it easier to get a photo ID, then, by raw number, more whites would be affected by requiring a photo ID to vote. A 2006 study by Univ. of Cal. Berkeley showed that white households were 40.6% of those without a car. Blacks were 30.5%, Hispanic were 22%, and other were 5.7%. So, though a greater percentage of whites may have owned cars than the percentage owned by other races, the actual raw number of whites not owning cars was much higher than the numbers of any of the other races.

[wdmso]

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus


Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

it was ok then but now it's not

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus


Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

it was ok then but now it's not

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

"why have the laws been changed?"

We changed laws recently on gay marriage. We learn, things change, laws change.

"what party is driving the voter ID "

The GOP, no doubt. But voter id requirements only serve to suppress Democrat turnout, if Democrats are less likely than Republicans to go get an id. You cannot make that wrong. Maybe if the Democrat motto wasn't "gimme gimme gimme", then registered Democrats would be just as likely to get the id as Republicans.

Do yoy deny that it's no harder for a Democrat to get an id, than it is for a Republican?

"VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE"

How do voter id laws infringe upon that right? I could argue that they safeguard that right, rather than infringe it, because if we have voter id laws, then no one can claim to be me and steal my vote.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus


Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

it was ok then but now it's not

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

I don't believe a Constitutional Right to Vote exists (not an enumerated fundamental right)

The "right to vote" is not explicitly stated in the U.S. Constitution except in the above referenced amendments(equal protection), and only in reference to the fact that the franchise cannot be denied or abridged based solely on the aforementioned qualifications. In other words, the "right to vote" is perhaps better understood, in layman's terms, as only prohibiting certain forms of legal discrimination in establishing qualifications for suffrage. States may deny the "right to vote" for other reasons. For example, many states require eligible citizens to register to vote a set number of days prior to the election in order to vote. More controversial restrictions include those laws that prohibit convicted felons from voting, even those who have served their sentences.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?)

pretty good article explaining the model

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...tes-in-chicago

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

pretty good article explaining the model

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...tes-in-chicago

One event in 1982 = a model

Keep rubbing.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

If you never needed them(ID's) to Vote back in the day then why have the laws been changed? ( the voter fraud that dosn't exist?) and what party is driving the voter ID bus Bus

Back in the day, women couldn't vote, blacks couldn't vote, males under the age of 21 couldn't vote . . . and a whole lot of restrictions and requirements were imposed on those (basically free, white, male, and 21) who were allowed to vote. Hey, as Jim in Ct said, laws change. And I thought you were big on the necessity of the Constitution to change to suit the times--the living breathing thing.

And both parties drove the restrictions and requirements bus, including voter ID bus, at various times.

And voter fraud does exist. And it is not insignificant.

Voter ID Laws go back to 1950 when South Carolina became the first state to start requesting identification from voters at the polls. The identification document did not have to include a picture; any document with the name of the voter sufficed

Drivers licenses did not include a photo ID back then either. Most pocket ID's back then had only verbal descriptions. Technology made it easier to place photos on the ID's in the mid to late 1960's and 1970's.

it was ok then but now it's not

Progress has made it more feasible to include a photo on pocket ID's. Which makes them a better identification than what "was ok then". I know you are a firm believer in progress. Hey, maybe you could consider ID's as living and breathing things.

VOTING IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE... and 2A guys use this argument GUN OWNERSHIP IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, NOT A PRIVILEGE.. against gun registration

Gun ownership is specifically made a fundamental, unabridgeable right in the Constitution. Voting, as scottw pointed out, is not. States cannot deny voting because of race or sex but the prohibition of those specific restrictions implies that other restrictions can be imposed.

another example of supporting the constitution when convenient

Absolutely not so. As Spence would say, apples and oranges.

and if smells like a fish swims like one its probably a fish

Different fish smell and swim in different ways. The gun owning fish are not the same as the fish who vote. It may seem very fishy to you, but that's the way it is.

[scottw]

seems like a disproportionate number of democrats not only struggle to obtain something as simple as an id...a disproportionate number of democrats struggle to obtain a copy of the US Constitution for reference as well ..neither is a very high bar

not surprising that the no borders, citizens of the world, undocumented democrats crowd fight tooth and nail to ensure that everyone dead or alive, legal or illegal, registered or unregistered have the ability to cast a ballot

the slump in democrat turnout is likely a result of years of democrats registering anyone and everyone that they can shake out of the bushes, probably multiple times in multiple districts in order to swell the voter rolls......many of these folks may have found their way to the polls in recent years having been promised lots of free stuff and better lives in exchange for doing so......

this year I'm guessing they are realizing that despite dutifully electing and reelecting the givers of great things to the downtrodden....they've gotten nothing....their lives are no better....

and now they will be asked to go through the trouble of voting for one of the Democrat Walking Dead options of old white lunatics....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

..

and now they will be asked to go through the trouble of voting for one of the Democrat Walking Dead options of old white lunatics....

Oh that's poetry, thanks!

[The Dad Fisherman]

I'm not sure because it was a while ago, but do you need to show ID when you register to vote? If you have to show it when you register.....why is it all of a sudden a burden to show it when you show up on Election Day
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Well I looked up the answer to my own question.....pretty much every state requires your drivers license or SSN to register, which serves as your voter ID number. If you do not have one of those they will issue you a unique voter ID number.

Maybe if you go that route, the state sends you a card with your voter ID number on it and you bring it to the polls when you vote.

Nobody gets to vote without a unique voter ID number anyways so this wouldn't be singling anybody out...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Nobody gets to vote without a unique voter ID number anyways so this wouldn't be singling anybody out...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Racist! Hate crime! Intolerant!

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Well I looked up the answer to my own question.....pretty much every state requires your drivers license or SSN to register, which serves as your voter ID number. If you do not have one of those they will issue you a unique voter ID number.

Maybe if you go that route, the state sends you a card with your voter ID number on it and you bring it to the polls when you vote.

Nobody gets to vote without a unique voter ID number anyways so this wouldn't be singling anybody out...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Problem is that if there isn't a photo ID to go along with the ID number, then someone other than you can use your number. Using other people's (even dead ones) registration is one of the types of voter fraud.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Problem is that if there isn't a photo ID to go along with the ID number, then someone other than you can use your number. Using other people's (even dead ones) registration is one of the types of voter fraud.

I didn't think you would fall into the Voter fraud is real camp ? you seem well informed on most topics


Exaggerated or unfounded allegations of fraud by dead voters include the following:
• In Georgia in 2000, 5,412 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters over the past 20
years.91 The allegations were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up
report clarified that only one instance had been substantiated, and this single instance was later
found to have been an error: the example above, in which Alan J. Mandel was confused with Alan
J. Mandell.92 No other evidence of fraudulent votes was reported.
• In Michigan in 2005, 132 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters.93 The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up investigation
by the Secretary of State revealed that these alleged dead voters were actually absentee ballots
mailed to voters who died before Election Day; 97 of these ballots were never voted, and 27
15
were voted before the voter passed away.94 Even if the remaining eight cases all revealed substantiated
fraud, that would amount to a rate of at most 0.0027%.95
• In New Jersey in 2004, 4,755 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot. The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. No follow-up investigation publicly
documented any substantiated cases of fraud of which we are aware, and there were no reports
that any of these allegedly deceased voters voted in 2005.96
• In New York in 2002 and 2004, 2,600 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot, again
based on a match of voter rolls to death lists. Journalists following up on seven cases found clerical
errors and mistakes but no fraud, and no other evidence of fraud was reported.97

So statistically you have a better chance of getting struck by lighting than Voter fraud ... if and when it happens

Just 23 people died as a direct result from lightning strikes in 2013, according to figures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). or voted fraudulently out of 316.5 million not all of voting age statistically speaking

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/up...idespread.html

[spence]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I didn't think you would fall into the Voter fraud is real camp ? you seem well informed on most topics

It's great isn't it? Voter fraud is an existential threat to our way of life but racism and climate change are non issues.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

It's great isn't it? Voter fraud is an existential threat to our way of life but racism and climate change are non issues.

Maybe if people could actually stick to the definition of racism instead of throwing it out willy nilly we might be able to do something about.

I don't think voter fraud is a big deal....but I also don't think it's a big deal to show some ID either. It really can't be seen both ways?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by spence

It's great isn't it? Voter fraud is an existential threat to our way of life but racism and climate change are non issues.

Because the last 2 haven't affected not affected GOP voters or the party in America

but losing elections have .. it's as Basic as that

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I didn't think you would fall into the Voter fraud is real camp ? you seem well informed on most topics


Exaggerated or unfounded allegations of fraud by dead voters include the following:
• In Georgia in 2000, 5,412 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters over the past 20
years.91 The allegations were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up
report clarified that only one instance had been substantiated, and this single instance was later
found to have been an error: the example above, in which Alan J. Mandel was confused with Alan
J. Mandell.92 No other evidence of fraudulent votes was reported.
• In Michigan in 2005, 132 votes were alleged to have been cast by deceased voters.93 The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. A follow-up investigation
by the Secretary of State revealed that these alleged dead voters were actually absentee ballots
mailed to voters who died before Election Day; 97 of these ballots were never voted, and 27
15
were voted before the voter passed away.94 Even if the remaining eight cases all revealed substantiated
fraud, that would amount to a rate of at most 0.0027%.95
• In New Jersey in 2004, 4,755 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot. The allegations
were premised on a flawed match of voter rolls to death lists. No follow-up investigation publicly
documented any substantiated cases of fraud of which we are aware, and there were no reports
that any of these allegedly deceased voters voted in 2005.96
• In New York in 2002 and 2004, 2,600 deceased voters were alleged to have cast a ballot, again
based on a match of voter rolls to death lists. Journalists following up on seven cases found clerical
errors and mistakes but no fraud, and no other evidence of fraud was reported.97

So statistically you have a better chance of getting struck by lighting than Voter fraud ... if and when it happens

Just 23 people died as a direct result from lightning strikes in 2013, according to figures from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). or voted fraudulently out of 316.5 million not all of voting age statistically speaking

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/up...idespread.html

Arguments on both sides can be found on the net. If you choose to believe one over the other, so be it. You can find other statistics if you choose to. But even that would be argumentative. Their are many problems in trying to discover and prove what is before your eyes. One problem is relying only on what is "reported." And related to that problem is what the Justice Dept. wishes to investigate and prosecute. Ignoring a problem is one way of saying it doesn't exist. Politics plays a role on both sides. Voter registration mischief exists by Republicans as well as Democrats. And saying that it is "rare" does not make it insignificant. Murder is rare when considering how many murders occur in relation to the number of people in our country. There is something called the butterfly effect. The idea that the flapping of a butterfly's wings can create the motion that can eventually evolve into a hurricane. Small, "rare" things can lead to large events. Ignoring small problems can invite the problems to grow.

I like this more "thoughtful" rather than "statistical" analysis:

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...ete_idiot.html

I found many articles on the net which differ than yours. But

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Arguments on both sides can be found on the net. If you choose to believe one over the other, so be it. You can find other statistics if you choose to. But even that would be argumentative. Their are many problems in trying to discover and prove what is before your eyes. One problem is relying only on what is "reported." And related to that problem is what the Justice Dept. wishes to investigate and prosecute. Ignoring a problem is one way of saying it doesn't exist. Politics plays a role on both sides. Voter registration mischief exists by Republicans as well as Democrats. And saying that it is "rare" does not make it insignificant. Murder is rare when considering how many murders occur in relation to the number of people in our country. There is something called the butterfly effect. The idea that the flapping of a butterfly's wings can create the motion that can eventually evolve into a hurricane. Small, "rare" things can lead to large events. Ignoring small problems can invite the problems to grow.

I like this more "thoughtful" rather than "statistical" analysis:

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...ete_idiot.html

I found many articles on the net which differ than yours. But

Yours studys come from Articles & Blog Posts Jon N. Hall is a programmer/analyst from Kansas City.


Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook



My studys : The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School is a nonpartisan, left-leaning law and public policy institute kinda like 300



Detbuch: I see I was wrong to expect Sparta's commitment to at least match our own.
wdmso: Doesn't it?
[points to Arcadian soldier behind Daxos]
wdmso: You there, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I am a blogger ... sir.
wdmso: [points to another soldier] And you, Arcadian, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I write articles , sir.
wdmso: writer.


wdmso: [turns back shouting] Brennan center for Justice What is YOUR profession?
Lawers: HA-OOH! HA-OOH! HA-OOH!
wdmso: [turning to Detbuch] You see, old friend? I brought more lawyers and facts than you did!

Yet again 2a Supports state we need to enforce the gun laws we have now not enact new ones making it harder for law abiding people to buy a Gun .... But have no issues making more laws to address an issues to restrict law abiding people to vote .??. seems some think fraud has effected a recent election I cant make this stuff up

http://townhall.com/columnists/rache...raud/page/full

[The Dad Fisherman]

Listen here ya Crazy Cracka!!!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

I know it doesn't cure all the ills, but if you show up with a card, that has a voter ID number on it......at least your not just throwing out a name and using it to vote.

.....and maybe they should start putting your picture on your voting ID card when you register......it's still not singling people out when they register.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

.....and maybe they should start putting your picture on your voting ID card when you register......it's still not singling people out when they register.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sounds like a plan.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Yours studys come from Articles & Blog Posts Jon N. Hall is a programmer/analyst from Kansas City.

Are you saying bloggers can't do "studys"? That programmer/analysts can't do studies? Isn't the objective of a liberal education to learn how to think for yourself? How to study? How not to be left in the helpless position of having to depend on others, especially so-called "experts" to tell you how to think?

My studys : The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School is a nonpartisan, left-leaning law and public policy institute kinda like 300

Oh good, a "left leaning" nonpartisan institute. Isn't "nonpartisan left leaning" an oxymoron?

Detbuch: I see I was wrong to expect Sparta's commitment to at least match our own.
wdmso: Doesn't it?
[points to Arcadian soldier behind Daxos]
wdmso: You there, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I am a blogger ... sir.
wdmso: [points to another soldier] And you, Arcadian, what is your profession?
Free Greek-: I write articles , sir.
wdmso: writer.

Nice, the really rational "might makes right" argument. The Persians won that battle, because they had the far greater numbers, but as a "statistical" aside, the Greeks killed a much higher number of Persians than vice versa. The Greeks put up a heroic, magnificent fight, and are remembered with favor and affection, as the more valorous, and victors in the war of being most admired. And, anyway, even though the Persians won that battle by the "statistic" of killing all but one of the Greeks, while, statistically, the Persians had many warriors remaining, the Greeks eventually won the war.

wdmso: [turns back shouting] Brennan center for Justice What is YOUR profession?
Lawers: HA-OOH! HA-OOH! HA-OOH!
wdmso: [turning to Detbuch] You see, old friend? I brought more lawyers and facts than you did!

Yes, let us put our faith in lawyers, not on those who can think for themselves. And FACTS? What facts? A left leaning group selected a set of variables out of a larger landscape of variables and from that compiled some statistics? Rather than arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, let me try to get at what I think is the heart of the matter. If those who argue that requiring a type of ID to vote is undemocratic also argue against and deny the majority's desire and strike down the majority's vote to require that ID, is that Democratic? Is it Democratic when the majority's vote to define marriage as between a man and a woman is struck down in favor of a minority's choice of definition?

Do those who insist that requiring a type of ID to vote suppresses the right to vote also believe that requiring such ID to drive suppresses the right to drive? Isn't it rational to require the ID if it is mandatory to have a license to drive? And isn't it rational to require that those who wish to drive learn how and what the rules are? Who is suppressed from driving when such requirements are made. Apply that as an analogy to the right to vote.

We have become a society which requires, more and more, the need for education and qualification to do "important" things in order to "suppress" participation of those who we deem not prepared to do those things. Yet, those on the left who demand stricter qualifications and more education in order to participate in so many of those "important" things, they, on the other hand, believe that even those who are most ignorant of our constitutional system, of what the civic responsibility is to protect and defend our system of government and how it is supposed to work, and for what purpose it was conceived . . . they, on the other hand, feel that even the most ignorant of all of that should be allowed to cast their vote (which is more powerful and potentially harmful than shooting a gun) to impose laws and obligations on the rest of society. And even that we should make it easier for them to do so.

Yet again 2a Supports state we need to enforce the gun laws we have now not enact new ones making it harder for law abiding people to buy a Gun .... But have no issues making more laws to address an issues to restrict law abiding people to vote .??. seems some think fraud has effected a recent election I cant make this stuff up

http://townhall.com/columnists/rache...raud/page/full

Again, you skirt the issue of the second amendment being an unalienable right not to be abridged, but voting is not. But, OK, let's use your non-constitutional argument. Let's make as a requirement to vote all the same kinds of laws we have now re owning a gun. You know, needing the proper ID, background checks, etc., etc. Then all will be equal and we won't have to impose any more restrictions on either gun ownership or voting. Would that be OK with you?