How is citizenship confirmed? I don't know.
But I'm sure its done. Otherwise we would have millions of tourists every year flooding to the USA in November voting in our elections.
Dont say that, the Republicans think we do already.
In reality, a six-month statewide recount conducted by a consortium of leading newspapers, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, concluded that George Bush almost certainly won Florida in 2000.
Well, Bush did cheat, but guess what? So did Gore, by attempting to cherry pick Democratic counties for the recount. That's what led to the Supreme Court decision.
In the end, Bush was just a better cheater than Gore was. LOL.
In reality, a six-month statewide recount conducted by a consortium of leading newspapers, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, concluded that George Bush almost certainly won Florida in 2000.
You're only talking about the study that addressed hanging chads/dimples/whatever else they were talking about. Using the "strict" standard, where only fully removed "chads" were counted, Gore would have won by three votes. Any other form of counting would have led Bush to win.
But if you take into consideration all of the other issues argued, it's not clear at all who would have won. Unfortunately, a hand recount was blocked by Bush's lawyers, the most striking modern evidence we've ever seen of a candidate literally not caring about the will of the people.
He also has the largest number of unelected 'Czars' in US history.
I agree the GOP is where the dems were in the early 2000s, but this old sod about gerrymandering is getting lame. Gerrymandering is a legal tactic used by both parties. Charges of "voter oppression" are silly and baseless. I for one feel oppressed as a voter over the latest indignity heaped upon us by the SCOTUS. They just decided the vote of American citizens just doesn't matter, that instead we must protect the illegal's right to vote.
But the pendulum-like nature of politics in America is still active. Today the dems ride ascendent, tomorrow they'll be in the dust moaning about how they might not survive. Rinse, repeat. Meanwhile, while you play cheerleader for one side or the other, the court shapes our county through absolute fiat. They are what the founders warned us they would be if they were allowed the power. In short, the SCOTUS have become our Ayatollahs, our ruling council - with lifetime appointments.
Gerrymandering is illegal when used to disenfranchise a particular ethnic group. Although generally legal, gerrymandering is sleazy and immoral and should be eliminated. Ending gerrymandering will require action by the public since it benefits incumbent politicians.
The Arizona law with proof of birth requirement was intentionally created to disenfranchise poor people, elderly people and Native Americans and legal immigrant citizens, not just illegal immigrants. The court ruled correctly when it rejected the law as unconstitutional, which it has not done with every state voter ID law.
Look, substantively, they could just as well have tossed a coin. The results were way too close to ever derive an unambiguous conclusion.
That's absurd. A hand recount, with officials from both sides observing, is much more accurate than any other method. We've seen this to be the case in the past, so why would a person argue against the most accurate possible measure? Look, pertaining to this issue, I'm certainly not against requiring proof of citizenship during registration (I don't like the way that Arizona did it, but I digress) because it ensures legitimacy. If you're interested in accuracy, then look at proof. Count the ballots.
This whole "who knows?" business is just an attempt to rationalize not doing the only logical thing to do when you have an election result with less than .1 percent difference between the 2 sides. If Bush had lost by 10 votes in Florida, you would have the exact opposite thing to say as you do right now.
Let me remind you that Algore didn't go to court demanding a statewide recount, he went to court demanding a recount in four heavily Democratic counties.
Nothing has been gutted.
What do you mean? Are you still claiming that the applicant's citizenship status is checked? It isn't, because in the absence of paper evidence it can't be.
When we fill out the standard voter registration form, our citizenship is confirmed by the voter registration people.
No need to provide photo ID, BC, Passport, or whatever at the time of registration.
No foreigner can register to vote using the standard form.
Asking for proof of citizenship disenfranchises aliens, that's it.
States issue birth certificates. Feds issue passports. Are their methods insufficient? Do you think they keep no records of any of it?
They have records somewhere.
Its clear that the purpose of this law in AZ was simply to keep people from registering to vote.
Nope.
Here's a link to the form and instructions - http://www.eac.gov/assets/1/Documents/Federal%20Voter%20Registration_1209_en9242012.pdf
If you look at box 6 it refers you to the instructions and the instructions indicate that if you don't have an AZ issued ID or an SSN you just write "NONE" in the box and the Sec State has to issue you a voter number. You're still registered. You still get a ballot. You can still vote. All of that can happen as long as you signed off that you're a citizen.
And then they take your information and verify it. If you are doing this on Election Day, you cast a provisional ballot which isn't counted until registration is verified.
Hey, perhaps you can find out at Algore.com!
And then they take your information and verify it. If you are doing this on Election Day, you cast a provisional ballot which isn't counted until registration is verified.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?