Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

Voter ID Laws

Ultra
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:06:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I was recently in New York City, during which time I saw some of the Voter ID protests in and around Grand Central and Madison Square Garden. Honestly, these protests surprised the hell outta me... I was aware that these statutes are controversial, but I had no idea that the opposition is so large.

After speaking to some of the protesters, and even conducting some research of my own, I have drawn my conclusion. Voter ID laws are ridiculous. It is so blatant that they serve no purpose other than to undermine minorities from voting Democrat that it almost makes me sick at what the Republican party has come to. Of course, there's the argument - "Well, you need and ID to buy alcohol, so why not need one to vote?" However, the proof is in the pudding. A Florida statute, courtesy of Governor Rick "Voldemort" Scott, attempts to stop a certain kind of voter fraud by requiring IDs, but independent studies have found that you are more likely to be struck by lightning than commit that type of voter fraud. So what am I supposed to think, Governor Scott? The only explanation that I could come up with is that the Republican party is now relying on voter suppression to win elections.

Share your thoughts.
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:11:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Well it's going to be hard to get reasonable responses from Republicans after antagonizing them by aligning them with a total idiot. Seriously, I don't think that many Republicans actually support Scott. Not even in his own state. He's down to something like 30 percent approval.
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:26:44 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Both sides have their reasons, truly.
Republicans have an anti-illegal alien mentality, which I feel really has nothing to do with their status as being undocumented.
Democrats have a sense of safeguard for the more deep-rural folk, whom of which many do not possess drivers license or any other sort of government-document with a photo ID, in which a photo ID requirement would take from them their ability to vote.

I personally don't care. I think the right-wing has a bit to be ashamed of; I mean, wasn't their sort the kind that abhorred government-regulation? Either that, or this is just more platitude.
turn down for h'what
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:40:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?

How are democrats at fault here?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:42:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.
It's really mainly one...
Trying to get more people to vote is not manipulative.
3 days to vote.
Why so restrictive?
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
What do voter ID's accomplish? The RNLA and various studies have yet to find a single case in which Voter ID's prevented voter fraud. Not a single god damn vote.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).
Why special expect ions for only some demographics?
Problem solved?
No. And this problem doesn't even exist.
Sapere Aude!
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:50:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:40:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?

How are democrats at fault here?

Democrats try to enact measure to get portions of their base who, for whatever reason, can't be bothered to vote like the rest of Americans, out to the polls.

While some of the measures taken by some R's have been very bad, some are no worse than what some D's try.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:56:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:50:09 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:40:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?

How are democrats at fault here?

Democrats try to enact measure to get portions of their base who, for whatever reason, can't be bothered to vote like the rest of Americans, out to the polls.

While some of the measures taken by some R's have been very bad, some are no worse than what some D's try.

Can you be more specific? I know that Republicans are forcing voter ID laws? What exactly are the democrats doing to restrict voting?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 8:56:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:42:29 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.
It's really mainly one...
Trying to get more people to vote is not manipulative.

Trying to make special rules for people who can't be bothered to do what everyone else does, is manipulative.
3 days to vote.
Why so restrictive?

I don't think we really need any more, I would prefer simple over complicated.

ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
What do voter ID's accomplish? The RNLA and various studies have yet to find a single case in which Voter ID's prevented voter fraud. Not a single god damn vote.

1 - Just because something isn't being exploited, doesn't mean we shouldn't fix it.
2 - It's been a long time since I've looked at voter fraud, but IIRC, there have been instances of people voting who shouldn't have and wouldn't have if there were ID.

Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).
Why special expect ions for only some demographics?

I didn't say the list is all-inclusive. I'm just saying for people with valid cause that they can't be there to vote.

Problem solved?
No. And this problem doesn't even exist.

There is a problem. First, there is a potential vulnerability. Second, there is a disagreement among citizens. We could fix both of those.

I forgot to include: Testing to be able to vote.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 9:00:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:56:00 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:50:09 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:40:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?

How are democrats at fault here?

Democrats try to enact measure to get portions of their base who, for whatever reason, can't be bothered to vote like the rest of Americans, out to the polls.

While some of the measures taken by some R's have been very bad, some are no worse than what some D's try.

Can you be more specific? I know that Republicans are forcing voter ID laws? What exactly are the democrats doing to restrict voting?

Not to restrict.

Ok, you have a voting period. R's and D's have the same opportunity to vote during this period.

Then, D's look at it and say 'Hey, if we can allow people to vote on Sunday, and then push these church-to-polls initiatives, we can get more votes!', so that's what they go for.

I honestly think it is just as wrong to try to create extra opportunity for people who wouldn't take advantage of the opportunity everyone else has, for the sole purpose of getting more votes for your base.

Obama's lawsuit in Ohio is an example... he is trying to take a justifiable reason for certain members to vote early, and extend that to members of his base who wouldn't vote unless they can vote on Sunday(under the false premise that both groups are equal, where one group can't be present to vote during normal times, and the other can).

Call me crazy, but I don't want to pander to people who won't make the 'sacrifice' to vote along with everyone else.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 9:12:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 9:00:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:56:00 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:50:09 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:40:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?

How are democrats at fault here?

Democrats try to enact measure to get portions of their base who, for whatever reason, can't be bothered to vote like the rest of Americans, out to the polls.

While some of the measures taken by some R's have been very bad, some are no worse than what some D's try.

Can you be more specific? I know that Republicans are forcing voter ID laws? What exactly are the democrats doing to restrict voting?

Not to restrict.

Ok, you have a voting period. R's and D's have the same opportunity to vote during this period.

Then, D's look at it and say 'Hey, if we can allow people to vote on Sunday, and then push these church-to-polls initiatives, we can get more votes!', so that's what they go for.

I honestly think it is just as wrong to try to create extra opportunity for people who wouldn't take advantage of the opportunity everyone else has, for the sole purpose of getting more votes for your base.

Obama's lawsuit in Ohio is an example... he is trying to take a justifiable reason for certain members to vote early, and extend that to members of his base who wouldn't vote unless they can vote on Sunday(under the false premise that both groups are equal, where one group can't be present to vote during normal times, and the other can).

Call me crazy, but I don't want to pander to people who won't make the 'sacrifice' to vote along with everyone else.

You're not being honest. So your problem is that Democrats are EXPANDING the amount of people and amount of opportunities to vote? Just because it ends in their favor doesn't make it wrong.

The problem with voter ID laws isn't that it helps the Republican base, but that its damaging the most sacred right of a Democracy.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 9:20:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 9:12:45 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 9:00:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:56:00 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:50:09 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:40:21 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:12:15 PM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
It's bad. Both parties are at fault for trying to manipulate voting laws into their favor.

3 days to vote.
ID required, provided by government, goes into effect 2016.
Early/mail-in voting allowed only with cause(military, out of state/country, infirm).

Problem solved?

How are democrats at fault here?

Democrats try to enact measure to get portions of their base who, for whatever reason, can't be bothered to vote like the rest of Americans, out to the polls.

While some of the measures taken by some R's have been very bad, some are no worse than what some D's try.

Can you be more specific? I know that Republicans are forcing voter ID laws? What exactly are the democrats doing to restrict voting?

Not to restrict.

Ok, you have a voting period. R's and D's have the same opportunity to vote during this period.

Then, D's look at it and say 'Hey, if we can allow people to vote on Sunday, and then push these church-to-polls initiatives, we can get more votes!', so that's what they go for.

I honestly think it is just as wrong to try to create extra opportunity for people who wouldn't take advantage of the opportunity everyone else has, for the sole purpose of getting more votes for your base.

Obama's lawsuit in Ohio is an example... he is trying to take a justifiable reason for certain members to vote early, and extend that to members of his base who wouldn't vote unless they can vote on Sunday(under the false premise that both groups are equal, where one group can't be present to vote during normal times, and the other can).

Call me crazy, but I don't want to pander to people who won't make the 'sacrifice' to vote along with everyone else.

You're not being honest. So your problem is that Democrats are EXPANDING the amount of people and amount of opportunities to vote? Just because it ends in their favor doesn't make it wrong.

The problem with voter ID laws isn't that it helps the Republican base, but that its damaging the most sacred right of a Democracy.

You can't bundle all voter ID laws like that... nor am I endorsing anything.

Anyway, I know people probably don't agree with me, but creating laws to specifically encourage a group of people that won't take the opportunity everyone else takes, I don't like that.

I don't like it A LOT when a group pushes those laws solely because it helps their base. I wouldn't like it just the same if the R's were doing it for the same reasons.

Basically, it feels like affirmative action to me. You are taking people who already have the same opportunities as everybody else, and giving them something more.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 9:29:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 8:06:52 PM, Ultra wrote:
I was recently in New York City, during which time I saw some of the Voter ID protests in and around Grand Central and Madison Square Garden. Honestly, these protests surprised the hell outta me... I was aware that these statutes are controversial, but I had no idea that the opposition is so large.

After speaking to some of the protesters, and even conducting some research of my own, I have drawn my conclusion. Voter ID laws are ridiculous. It is so blatant that they serve no purpose other than to undermine minorities from voting Democrat that it almost makes me sick at what the Republican party has come to. Of course, there's the argument - "Well, you need and ID to buy alcohol, so why not need one to vote?" However, the proof is in the pudding. A Florida statute, courtesy of Governor Rick "Voldemort" Scott, attempts to stop a certain kind of voter fraud by requiring IDs, but independent studies have found that you are more likely to be struck by lightning than commit that type of voter fraud. So what am I supposed to think, Governor Scott? The only explanation that I could come up with is that the Republican party is now relying on voter suppression to win elections.

Share your thoughts.

Based on referring to Rick Scott as Rick "Voldemort" Scott strongly implies that you are not speaking from anything near an unbiased viewpoint.

Anyway, you may argue against specific Voter ID laws, or against the basic concept. The two are entirely different cases. Which are you arguing?
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ultra
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 9:30:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 9:22:17 PM, 16kadams wrote:
http://www.heritage.org...

I don't really see how that is relevant to what I wrote... I was discussing the statute that has been passed in Florida, not that random and very different Georgia law...
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/18/2012 9:33:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 9:30:37 PM, Ultra wrote:
At 8/18/2012 9:22:17 PM, 16kadams wrote:
http://www.heritage.org...

I don't really see how that is relevant to what I wrote... I was discussing the statute that has been passed in Florida, not that random and very different Georgia law...

I posted that for no reason. Though I don't see how the law would act differently in Florida.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2012 12:58:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If they're so worried about voter impersonation, how about all voters must submit to a biometric/iris scan which goes into a database by 2016. No need for poor people to buy a license, and all of those horrible, horrible voter impersonators get thwarted.
Ultra
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2012 6:36:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/20/2012 12:58:45 AM, Wnope wrote:
If they're so worried about voter impersonation, how about all voters must submit to a biometric/iris scan which goes into a database by 2016. No need for poor people to buy a license, and all of those horrible, horrible voter impersonators get thwarted.

Sounds good to me.
Ultra
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2012 6:37:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/18/2012 9:29:34 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/18/2012 8:06:52 PM, Ultra wrote:
I was recently in New York City, during which time I saw some of the Voter ID protests in and around Grand Central and Madison Square Garden. Honestly, these protests surprised the hell outta me... I was aware that these statutes are controversial, but I had no idea that the opposition is so large.

After speaking to some of the protesters, and even conducting some research of my own, I have drawn my conclusion. Voter ID laws are ridiculous. It is so blatant that they serve no purpose other than to undermine minorities from voting Democrat that it almost makes me sick at what the Republican party has come to. Of course, there's the argument - "Well, you need and ID to buy alcohol, so why not need one to vote?" However, the proof is in the pudding. A Florida statute, courtesy of Governor Rick "Voldemort" Scott, attempts to stop a certain kind of voter fraud by requiring IDs, but independent studies have found that you are more likely to be struck by lightning than commit that type of voter fraud. So what am I supposed to think, Governor Scott? The only explanation that I could come up with is that the Republican party is now relying on voter suppression to win elections.

Share your thoughts.

Based on referring to Rick Scott as Rick "Voldemort" Scott strongly implies that you are not speaking from anything near an unbiased viewpoint.

Anyway, you may argue against specific Voter ID laws, or against the basic concept. The two are entirely different cases. Which are you arguing?

I was referring to the Florida statute.