| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mrgybe, I'm still waiting for your response about fairness with regard to registered voters that vote in person versus via absentee ballot. Maybe you don't support fairness and equality, so a response would be telling and uncomfortable to own up to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Speaking of sweeping generalizations and cherry-picked facts:
| Quote: | | You clearly enjoy sweeping assertions. We have established that poor people require ID to collect welfare benefits. The same ID could be used for voting. |
Mrgybe does not seem to have any understanding of poverty in America, and how it is manifest. He does, however, faithfully parrot the claims of Republican political operatives that we need "a voting system which people take seriously and has rigor in it." His example of showing up as Eric Holder is, as many of mrgybe's sweeping assertions, a debating trick. In order for anyone to vote as someone else, they would need to know the name--and generally the address--of the person that are impersonating. That is the only way that they could show up at the correct precinct. They would then need a reasonable facsimile of that person's signature. This rigor might prevent the 31 examples of mistaken voting, out of billions--and would have the highly desirable effect of discouraging many of the poor from voting.
Mrgybe's claims about welfare are similar debating tricks. Not everyone who is below the poverty level collects welfare. Insinuating such is, no surprise for the spinmeister, patronizing and offensive. Further, the ID systems necessary to collect welfare are fundamentally different than those set up in Republican-controlled states that are intended to discourage voting.
Mrgybe's claims about Carter's task force is another debating trick. Under existing law, State's control the systems for voting. Creating a national identification would be fought by conservatives and state's rights advocates as an intrusion into State authority.
The nature of poverty, for people who are young and people of color, is that they move more frequently, often work more than one job, and maybe even aren't as well organized as the 1% with their multiple homes and servants. If conservatives limit the hours that polls are open, limit the hours when it is possible to get an identification for voting, and require re-registration long before the date of voting, they target poor voters. But don't take my word for it, or a liberal rag like the New York Times. Take the stodgiest newspaper in the Country, USA Today:
Too much of this is deliberate. Republican legislatures have enacted all sorts of thinly disguised ways to suppress the vote of people who don't typically vote GOP, including minorities, the poor, the elderly and college students. Ohio and North Carolina have cut back early voting, for example, making it tougher for working people to vote.
The most offensive restrictions, though, are tough photo ID requirements, which have spread to at least 16 Republican-dominated states — a number that fluctuates as courts strike down or uphold the laws. On Saturday, the Supreme Court upheld the Texas ID law, widely regarded as the nation's most punitive.
In theory, there's nothing wrong with requiring voters to prove they are who they say they are. A commission headed by former president Jimmy Carter and former secretary of State James Baker backed photo ID. It's a reasonable idea — as long as states make it easy and free to get IDs.
But the evidence is overwhelming that the states with tough photo ID laws have little interest in making IDs easily available to the roughly 10% of people who don't have one. People have to travel hours to ID offices that are open for limited hours. Obtaining the documents necessary to get a photo ID can be difficult and expensive.
Unsurprisingly, this can suppress the vote. In a study last month, the Government Accountability Office found that strict photo ID laws in Kansas and Tennessee lowered voter participation in the 2012 elections by roughly 2 to 3 percentage points from 2008.
The excuse for all this is that photo ID is necessary to stop in-person voter fraud at the polls, something that exists almost entirely in the imagination of backers of ID laws. Vote fraud occurs — but it's overwhelmingly through means photo ID doesn't touch, such as absentee voting, mail-in voting, multiple registrations and ballot-box stuffing.
An official in the Texas attorney general's office testified during a federal trial last month that in 10 years, only two instances of in-person vote fraud had been found in the state.
Partisan attempts to suppress the vote are bad enough. What's just as disappointing is how the U.S. vote gets suppressed by voters themselves.
While the rest of the world's established democracies typically see 70% or more of their eligible voters go to the polls, the USA typically sees just 60% in presidential elections and an abysmal 40% in midterm elections like the one coming up next month.
The problem in places such as Ferguson, Mo. — where a registration drive after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown yielded just 128 new voters — isn't that too many people are voting. It's that too few are.
USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff. Most editorials are coupled with an opposing view — a unique USA TODAY feature.
Last edited by mac on Sat Oct 25, 2014 1:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| USAToday wrote: | | Partisan attempts to suppress the vote are bad enough. What's just as disappointing is how the U.S. vote gets suppressed by voters themselves. The problem in places such as Ferguson, Mo. — where a registration drive after the fatal shooting of Michael Brown yielded just 128 new voters. |
At last! The real issue is that many millions won't get off their backsides to vote. An ID requirement is just another excuse. If obtaining a voter ID was a real impediment to those that want to vote, Democrat operatives would be driving people to the ID issuing locations just like they drive massive numbers to the polls at every election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The real issue is depressing the vote, just a little more, by any trick possible, in Democratic leaning districts. Brought to you by Republicans, rationalized by mrgybe. What a patriot! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keycocker
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3598
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The real issue is that many things are being done to make it difficult to vote.
Gybe is a big supporter of that.
He and guys like him are the enemies of democracy.
They are trying to steal the election and justifying it with lies about a problem of voter impersonation.
I could be mistaken. Gybe has always had a hard time following the issues. He may be supporting stealing the election, because he gets so confused sometimes.
I get confused,too and have to correct myself. Gybe doesn't ever do that, he just doubles down when he is shown to be misinformed.
All the arrogant folks I have known had a tough time shaking it off. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
windward1
Joined: 18 Jun 2000
Posts: 1400
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting survey published in the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/
Apparently illegal voters may be the reason that we have the Affordable Care Act passed.
However, many of the non-citizen, illegal voters do not know that they ARE NOT ALLOWED to vote anymore. Most have picture IDs and are registered.
80% vote Democrat.
The conclusions I see:
1. Yes, there is voter wrongdoing, although it may not be fraud it they do not know they are being fraudulent since they do not know they are not allowed to vote.
2. The Voter ID, while it may eliminate some of the fraud, by itself, it is a small percentage of the wrong that is occurring.
3. Not in this article, but the bigger danger are those voting machines that change one's vote from the one made. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2014 11:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| swchandler wrote: | | mrgybe, I'm still waiting for your response about fairness with regard to registered voters that vote in person versus via absentee ballot. Maybe you don't support fairness and equality, so a response would be telling and uncomfortable to own up to. |
I didn't respond because your earlier remarks were so lacking in understanding that I chose not to embarrass you. However, if you insist. You said....."mrgybe, assuming what you say is true, once you sign up for an absentee ballot, you never again have to prove who you are.".........and then equated that with the one time registration to vote. Your glaring omission is that one is required to provide information for verification, and to attest to its truth under the threat of criminal penalties, every time you opt to vote absentee. See the difference?
Your silly accusations about what I do, or do not support do you no credit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| windward1 wrote: | Interesting survey published in the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/
Apparently illegal voters may be the reason that we have the Affordable Care Act passed.
However, many of the non-citizen, illegal voters do not know that they ARE NOT ALLOWED to vote anymore. Most have picture IDs and are registered.
80% vote Democrat.
The conclusions I see:
1. Yes, there is voter wrongdoing, although it may not be fraud it they do not know they are being fraudulent since they do not know they are not allowed to vote.
2. The Voter ID, while it may eliminate some of the fraud, by itself, it is a small percentage of the wrong that is occurring.
3. Not in this article, but the bigger danger are those voting machines that change one's vote from the one made. |
All very good points W1. I find it hard to believe that non citizens don't know they're not supposed to vote though.
I wonder how our founding fathers got to the polls? Walking, horseback, crawling? Today there are free vans and buses for the asking if you vote D. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 2:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pardon me, I guess I forgot that some of us aren't fortunate enough to live in a great state like California. In California one can permanently elect to vote via an absentee ballot. The Republican party here just doesn't have the power and control to make restrictive regulations to disenfranchise voters.
Nevertheless, for the sake of our discussion here, let's assume that you're living in a state like California where you can permanently choose to vote via an absentee ballot. That means that once a person formally registers to vote and chooses to use the absentee ballot election, they will receive it by mail and can cast it without a photo ID. Do you believe that a formally registered voter who elects to vote in person should have the same right?
Lastly, let me ask you, in your home state, do you have show your photo ID each time you physically pick up your absentee ballot? If you receive it by mail without showing your photo ID, it means that the rules aren't uniformly fair to all parties. Just for the record, I think that all voters who formally register need to provide information for verification, and also attest to its truth under the threat of criminal penalties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 25, 2014 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| swchandler wrote: | | Pardon me, I guess I forgot that some of us aren't fortunate enough to live in a great state like California. In California one can permanently elect to vote via an absentee ballot. |
What an absolutely awful idea. A bureaucratic nightmare handled by incompetent bureaucrats, and rife with opportunities for abuse. No wonder this country is in decline. Many have fought and died for the right to vote but now it's just too much trouble to even fill out a form to obtain a ballot. What's next? Someone else fills out the ballot for you? Oh wait, that's probably happening already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
