Illegal aliens caught voting

No, everyone does not agree with that, which is the only reason the photo ID requirement is controversial.

What problems does a photo ID requirement cause for those without criminal intent? Hmmmmm?

 

And you think turnout among illegally registered voters would be higher.... why?

The story did not say 100 people voted. It said it found 100 illegal registrations out of Florida's 12 million registered voters. Apples to apples.

I have not mentioned race, and I notice you can't or won't address the math.

#1, I'm glad to know you can see into alternative timelines.

#2, so what? Does that make stupid outrage less stupid?

 

That's because this country is broke. The same reason we aren't deporting illegals, why we are letting drug users and criminals out of prison early, etc.etc. Still Libs wants government to fund more and more stuff. More and more give aways.

- - - Updated - - -

Do you really think they went through the whole twelve million?

 

The Photo ID requirement, as envisioned and implemented by Republicans, is not reasonable: it's a blunt club to disenfranchise the poor, minorities and youth.

I've said I would support a Photo ID requirement if the proof-of-citizenship requirements were reasonable, and the burden were on the state to get you an ID: you could call them, and a truck would come to your house within a day or two, with the paperwork and a portable ID maker to make you an ID card on the spot.

But the current rules -- which require very specific forms of ID that many people simply don't have, or can only obtain by traveling to a government office and waiting in line -- are designed to increase registration hurdles for the most vulnerable voters: the elderly, those without reliable transportation, those who work multiple low-wage jobs and don't have time to go stand in line, etc. That's wrong.

Never mind the documented cases where elderly people can't prove they are citizens because they don't have a copy of their birth certificate, either because they were born at a time when birth certificates weren't always created, or because flood or fire destroyed the records in the county of their birth.

See above. Lots.

My favorite was the Texas Voter ID law that in some cases would have required people to travel up to 200 miles to the nearest site where they could obtain an ID -- an obvious problem for people without reliable transportation, or money, or time, or mobility.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/08/texas-voter-id-law-cant-take-effect/


The judges said there was clear evidence in the record that, at least in Texas, the law is so restrictive that many individuals among the “working poor” would not be able to obtain an acceptable ID, or could not afford to do so....

The court said that Texas’s law may require people to travel perhaps 150 to 200 miles and pay as much as $22 to get a substitute ID if they don’t have one of the specific kinds demanded by the state law. Many counties, the court said, do not have offices where such a substitute ID can be obtained, or such offices have only limited open hours.


Such laws are not about protecting the voter rolls -- they're about keeping political opponents from voting.

 

​

Quite frankly, I don't understand how any Democrat could be stupid enough to believe that enacting voter ID laws is racist. Fake IDs are as common in this country as unprotected sex. Just because voter fraud is a relatively small problem in the U.S. doesn't mean that it isn't a problem that can get a whole hell of a lot bigger someday.

 

Then the cure for sending 200+ heavily armed troops with the intent of killing the Bundy family for something that is a civil matter at the level of J-walking should be considered excessive to you?

The voting illegally is only those that are caught, having voter ID is not and should not be considered excessive, especially since every state is wanting to do it at no cost. As it was said earlier in this thread, why is it the illegal voting only comes from the democrats, at least it does overwhelmingly.

I too want sensible laws enforced, not excessive, and anyone claiming voter ID is racist, well I guess then Bill Clinton should be considered a racist because he advocates a social security card having a photo ID. This argument by liberals is pathetically weak, and their pathetic accusations of throw the race card only weakens the real racists, but that is the pathetic narrative fed to liberals, which they continue to regurgitate

 

Do you want everyone who drives on our highways and roads to be licensed drivers? Or do you believe that it also causing more problems than it solves? After all, they have to go take a test, pass it, and provide information about themselves in order to get a picture license. This Drivers' License enables the rest of society to KNOW that they at least meet the requirements to drive....and that's a good thing. I don't know why voting should be any different really.

 

What the heck does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Never mind that the comparison is daft. Was the BLM throwing legitimate users off the land in order to prevent Bundy from using it? No. They were enforcing a court order against a "sovereign citizen" freeloader who thinks it's okay to use taxpayer land for his own personal profit, without permission or paying the required fees.

Want to argue that the BLM overreacted? Fine. It doesn't mean Bundy is right, or some sort of patriot freedom-fighter.

And it has zero bearing on voter ID.

There are always costs, and the devil is in the particular rules being imposed. What counts as proof of citizenship? What recourse does a citizen without such proof have? Where does this proof need to be presented? Where can the ID be obtained? All of these things come with costs, both financial and resource-wise. If I don't have reliable transportation, it's hard to travel to a distant government office. If I'm working three low-wage jobs, I can't take time off of work to go stand in line.

Propose a reasonable law where the burden of providing an ID falls on the state, and I'll support it.

 

Driving is not the basis for our form of government, and the licensing requirement is to ensure you know the rules of the road so you are not a danger to other drivers.

By contrast, there is no "knowledge" requirement to cast a vote.

While voting is a "privilege" in the sense that states can decide who is eligible to vote, there should be as few barriers as possible between eligible voters and the ability to cast a vote.

 

Insisting that they be citizens is a barrier I approve of.

 

Par for the course.In fact,it happens to be Obama's speciality.That being to mount
petition drives as Community organizer to help complicate or invalidate any
person running against him in a Chicago race.Plus use of the major newspaper
to run stories about any challenger and private,classified material,such as
divorce proceeding.The same tactic used by a Chicago newsrag to smear and
tarnish Herman Cain.
The Democrat Party is in fact banking on their titular head { Obama } and his
expertise in fraudulently amassing votes.As if ACORN wasn't guilty enough.
Or the bully tactics of SEIU.
Obama even had the unmitigated gall to keep in Place his Organizing for
America campaign { arm of Obama for America }after his victory.Just remaming it :
Organizing for Action .Never before in History has a Presidential campaign pulled
that crap.

 

Why should I have to do that? Or expend the effort required to mark the ballot? Or the effort required to read it? Hmmmm?

More accurately, the opposition to such requirements is intended to facilitate electoral fraud so as to achieve Democrat hegemony.

For every such unfortunate there are likely at least ten US citizens who will be effectively disenfranchised by voter fraud thanks to people who think like you.

Surely our hearts must bleed for all those 19th century Americans who were "disenfranchised" by the fact that the only ride they could hitch to the voting booth was on a stagecoach.

Have you never heard it said that necessity is the mother of invention?

 

I wonder which party they voted for?

 

Just more brazen absurdity from lefties.One has to show an Picture ID to
get on an airplane.Go inside many a Washington D.C. Government bldg.
Cash a check at a bank { especially if no account at that bank }
Purchase cigarettes and alcohol if not middle age.
Take out a loan.
Sign a mortage.
get a Passport.
Collect Social Security.
Rent a car.
Rent a movie.
Set up a doctor's appt. { for new patients }
It's all part of the vast Left wing agenda of Dumbing Down Americans.
Where Common Core actually teaches kids that 2 + 2 = 5.
That's it's absurd this notion that a President be a Natural Born Citizen.
Whatever the commies dictate.That returning Vets should be considered potential
domestic terrorists.
Complete reversal of what Once was.WWII vets were treated honorably and given parades.
This new Transformation of America and Americans.
Like the transformation scene in - An American Werewolf in London -.

 

You mean your all for voter ID as long as the citizens don't have to do anything on their own to help. One has to wonder how they get to a doctor, how they pay their bills, how do they cash a check and a million other things people do every day. Over a short time, it can cost more not to have an ID than to pay for one. If you can't figure that out, I'll explain it. Without an ID, so many doors are closed for the young, old and poor.

No one is this country has to travel any farther than their mailbox to vote. Your listening to a bunch of garbage put out by your Party.

 

But you see voting is a "right" and driving isn't....blah, blah, blah...Liberal talking point #2374302. Poor white somehow(can't pinpoint it) are able to obtain ID while poor minorities can't...according to Liberals. WHY? Explain why please. SOMEONE. Anyone. Explain why poor white people are more capable than poor minorities of doing something essentially extremely easy. Still don't understand how a citizen is able to function in society without any form of photo ID....unless they're living under a bridge.

The answer is Liberals don't want responsible people voting because responsibility means knowledge and having knowledge about what you're voting about is NOT something Liberals want. The more in the dark the voting populace is the easier they are to manipulate and lie to. Just look at nearly every piece of info released from the WH since 08. Lie after lie after lie. Or, 1/2 truth after 1/2 truth after misleading, manipulated "fact" after "fact". Every Liberals seems to think they'll be at the top of the food chain once the fit hits the shan. There just isn't enough room up there for you...sorry. You'll reap what you sow, esspecially if you expect the govt to take care of you.

 

Nice to know that integrity is not top priority in our political system, but then that's no surprise either.

 

all you have is pathetic excuse after pathetic excuse. Just come out already and tell everyone that you support voter fraud as long as it supports your politicians. COME ON ALREADY!

 

Not a single verifiable case of voter fraud exists. Didn't you get the memo?

How many? They are undocumented, so that pretty much means that nobody knows.

 

What I have a problem with is disingenuous arguments to make a point.

There would be no "disenfranchisement".

It's funny how the left argues this position: "adopting laws that will disenfranchise thousands upon thousands of legitimate voters in order to prevent a handful of improper votes."

but...will turn right around in the entirely opposite direction when it comes to guns and want to hinder millions with something along the lines of "if it saves just one child"

That's what you get when "thoughts" and "ideas" are built on emotion and "feelings" instead of consistency and logic.

Still waiting for anyone to demonstrate how anyone would be "disenfranchised" by being required to have ID to vote.

 

But according to the constitution, it is only a right if you are a citizen, a resident in the area you are voting in, and of the appropriate age, AND it is the governments responsibility to make sure that only qualified individuals participate.

How this escapes anybody is beyond rationality.

 

It would seem that "disenfranchise" has become the new race card...

- - - Updated - - -

Or, better yet, why the (*)(*)(*)(*) are the illegals even still here to begin with...

 

They don't seem to have a problem picking up welfare checks, or getting over to Best Buy to grab up a new big screen TV...

If getting an ID is "too difficult" for them, sounds more like they're just too lazy to do it (or don't qualify)....

- - - Updated - - -

and I think the entire premise that anyone would be "disenfranchised" is complete and utter bunk.

 

If the state wants to impose an ID requirement, it is incumbent on the state to make that ID as easy to obtain as possible. Otherwise it is imposing unnecessary barriers between the people it has defined as eligible to vote, and the actual ability to vote.

If the Voter ID law said IDs could only be obtained between the hours of 1 a.m. and 1:01 a.m. on the night of March 25th at a single office in northern Minnesota, that would clearly be unreasonable, yes?

So when does it stop being unreasonable? To me, it's unreasonable if it will obviously keep thousands of eligible voters from exercising their franchise, in order to prevent a handful of possibly illegal votes.

Note that I'm not focused on *who* is being disenfranchised. I recognize that every illegal vote cancels a legal one (although that analysis is facile, because opposing illegal votes cancel each other out, and only the leftovers cancel legal votes). I'm just looking at the numbers. If a given solution disenfranchises more people than the status quo, it's a bad solution.

You don't need a photo ID to do most things, like pay bills. Shut-ins get home-health visits, plus there are services to take you to the doctor. Plus a lot of people go years without seeing a doctor.

More relevantly, study after study shows a lot of people don't have photo IDs, and getting one is significantly more involved than getting to your local precinct to vote. So apparently your opinion is not fact.

#1, we're talking about registering to vote and obtaining a valid ID, which does, in fact, require going farther than the mailbox.

#2, you can't get that absentee ballot without having first done #1.