The Republican War on Voting

[VanceMack]

It is laughable that people actually believe 1-Obtaining ID and 2-presenting ID to vote is a restriction. Beyond ****ing words.

Whats even more comical is watching democrats who just went through an entire primary screaming wailing and moaning about a rigged primary election process and votes being denied BY one of their own now shifting right back to their all too familiar race baiting tactics. Race baiting, the war on women, and class warfare. It is LITERALLY all they have.

 

[Fletch]

I don't know. Is it a good idea to restrict voting to just those who meet a dozen different criteria: permanent address, legitimate birth certificate, state issued ID, etc.?

I'm actually torn on this myself. In my universe, I'd prefer only college educated people with legitimate jobs who own a home and participate in political discussion groups be allowed to vote. :roll:

A photo ID cant be considered a true obstacle in 21st Century America. If liberals are so concerned about the 9% who don't have ID's, they have two years between election cycles to help those people get them. This is a silly, non issue and the complaining by the left about it can only mean that they think it will hinder their attempts to commit fraud. A fair, honest election where legitimate votes aren't disenfranchised by illegitimate ones should be the ultimate goal. A photo Id at a polling place is a reasonable requirement.

 

[eohrnberger]

A photo ID cant be considered a true obstacle in 21st Century America. If liberals are so concerned about the 9% who don't have ID's, they have two years between election cycles to help those people get them. This is a silly, non issue and the complaining by the left about it can only mean that they think it will hinder their attempts to commit fraud. A fair, honest election where legitimate votes aren't disenfranchised by illegitimate ones should be the ultimate goal. A photo Id at a polling place is a reasonable requirement.

Agreed.

Claiming that requiring photo ID to vote is just so much BS. Without a photo ID to conduct all the transactions necessary in and for day to day life, it is reasonably arguable that anyone without a photo ID really isn't part of the society in which they want to vote anyway.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

not this again...

Yes... that again. if you are going to accuse republicans of restricting voting rights, the democrat party's history is fair game.

 

[calamity]

Yes... that again. if you are going to accuse republicans of restricting voting rights, the democrat party's history is fair game.

The Conservative Fantasy History of Civil Rights -- NYMag

The mainstream, and correct, history of the politics of civil rights is as follows. Southern white supremacy operated out of the Democratic Party beginning in the nineteenth century, but the party began attracting northern liberals, including African-Americans, into an ideologically cumbersome coalition. Over time the liberals prevailed, forcing the Democratic Party to support civil rights, and driving conservative (and especially southern) whites out, where they realigned with the Republican Party.

 

[Fruityfact]

As Wisconsin student, my student ID should count as "voter ID", but your **** face hero Scott **** Walker has made it not possible to do so. To be replaced instead with an almost identical ID that I had to show my student ID to get. I don't mind waiting and wading through bull****, but don't ****ing tell me this is about the sanctity of the vote, cause it ****ing isn't.

 

[dnsmith]

It's starting to get ridiculous. What used to be a Southern thing, making voting more difficult is now seen in places as far north as Wisconsin.



What gives? Do Republicans really want to be known as the party that restricts voting rights? I'm sure that will bite them back in due time.

No one wants to restrict voting. That is an absolutely incorrect statement. What people want to do is provide honesty in our elections, to prevent such things as the 600 dead people who "voted" in the 2000 Florida presidential election. The claims anyone, including republicans, wants to restrict voting is a left wing lie.

 

[calamity]

No one wants to restrict voting. That is an absolutely incorrect statement. What people want to do is provide honesty in our elections, to prevent such things as the 600 dead people who "voted" in the 2000 Florida presidential election. The claims anyone, including republicans, wants to restrict voting is a left wing lie.

THe lie is the Right Wing myth that this is all about preventing voter fraud.

Voting Restrictions Are Impacting Elections | US News

 

[Patrickt]

THe lie is the Right Wing myth that this is all about preventing voter fraud.

Voting Restrictions Are Impacting Elections | US News

Sorry, that's exactly what it's about. The Republicans get laws passed and have a public support for Voter ID.
"Rasmussen found that 76 percent of respondents favor voter ID laws and even a majority of Democrats, 58 percent, agree that voter ID is a good idea.

The new poll hews closely to last year’s findings that fully 78 percent favored proof of citizenship before being allowed to vote.

Voter ID laws have been a particular target of derision among Democrats and liberals, but with numbers like this it appears that they have not yet won over the American populace to rejecting Voter ID laws."
Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Support Voter ID Laws

To fight voter ID laws, the Democrats go against the people and try to find a liberal judge who will allow their lawsuits. Liberals know whether it's gun control, abortion, or corrupt elections that they don't have public support so they don't even try.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

The Conservative Fantasy History of Civil Rights -- NYMag

Nice try. However the truth is that only three of those democrats switched to the republican party to 16 that remained in the democrat party.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Sorry, that's exactly what it's about. The Republicans get laws passed and have a public support for Voter ID.
"Rasmussen found that 76 percent of respondents favor voter ID laws and even a majority of Democrats, 58 percent, agree that voter ID is a good idea.

The new poll hews closely to last year’s findings that fully 78 percent favored proof of citizenship before being allowed to vote.

Voter ID laws have been a particular target of derision among Democrats and liberals, but with numbers like this it appears that they have not yet won over the American populace to rejecting Voter ID laws."
Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Support Voter ID Laws

To fight voter ID laws, the Democrats go against the people and try to find a liberal judge who will allow their lawsuits. Liberals know whether it's gun control, abortion, or corrupt elections that they don't have public support so they don't even try.

Absolutely right. Honest voters simply do not want their vote to be canceled out by someone not legally entitled to vote. we want fair elections where win or lose, the vote is valid. No honest citizen should have any objections to voter ID. I would be disappointed if they did not ask for valid ID when I go to vote/

 

[calamity]

Nice try. However the truth is that only three of those democrats switched to the republican party to 16 that remained in the democrat party.

You'd maybe have a leg to stand on if Black voters didn't reject the Republican Party nearly 10:1. Maybe they are too stupid to see what you do. :roll:

 

[Cephus]

The article in the OP states 9% of eligible voters in Wisconsin lack proper ID and will be forced to jump through hoops, like the US army veteran who relocated to the cheese state from Illinois. It's not felons, foreigners, dead people or old ladies with dementia who are affected.

Then they should! If you lack legitimate identification to prove you are legally allowed to vote, you shouldn't be able to vote. ID is easy to get. If you're too stupid or lazy to go get proper ID, you shouldn't be able to vote, you're not bright enough. And since you need legal ID to work, there's no excuse not to have it in the first place.

 

[Cephus]

I changed states about six times. Also never had a problem. But, I was never homeless or couch surfing, and I have a valid Birth Certificate. I believe the article talks about people who are less stable and lack a BC.

And whose problem is that? If you're so unstable that you can't even send away for a copy of your birth certificate, are we really supposed to believe you're going to take the time to vote?

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

You'd maybe have a leg to stand on if Black voters didn't reject the Republican Party nearly 10:1. Maybe they are too stupid to see what you do. :roll:

Leg to stand on? You posted an opinion piece that in effect claimed that the segregationists were basically conservatives who later switched to the republican party. What I posted is actual history. And that actual history shows that only three of them switched to the republican party while 16 remained in the democrat party, including the only one known to have held high ranking in the KKK. If you would like, I can post the actual names of those 16 who remained in the democrat party and those three who switched to the republican party. As for the alleged 10 to 1 margin, I suppose that it is more due to the efforts of democrats to pander to minorities with entitlement handouts. They plan the same for the millions of illegal immigrants they intend to legalize. Point is that it's not about democrat party compassion for minorities. They simply see them with a virtual "V" for voter stamped on their foreheads. If they leave the democrat party plantation and become republicans, they are called "uncle toms", Aunt Jemimas", "Oreos", "Strawberries", etc. The point I am making is that if minorities as a group, break out of the poverty cycle, they become less vulnerable to entitlement pandering.

 

[calamity]

Leg to stand on? You posted an opinion piece that in effect claimed that the segregationists were basically conservatives who later switched to the republican party. What I posted is actual history. And that actual history shows that only three of them switched to the republican party while 16 remained in the democrat party, including the only one known to have held high ranking in the KKK. If you would like, I can post the actual names of those 16 who remained in the democrat party and those three who switched to the republican party. As for the alleged 10 to 1 margin, I suppose that it is more due to the efforts of democrats to pander to minorities with entitlement handouts. They plan the same for the millions of illegal immigrants they intend to legalize. Point is that it's not about democrat party compassion for minorities. They simply see them with a virtual "V" for voter stamped on their foreheads. If they leave the democrat party plantation and become republicans, they are called "uncle toms", Aunt Jemimas", "Oreos", "Strawberries", etc. The point I am making is that if minorities as a group, break out of the poverty cycle, they become less vulnerable to entitlement pandering.

It doesn't matter which pols switched, not when we see that all the racist voters did.

 

[calamity]

And whose problem is that? If you're so unstable that you can't even send away for a copy of your birth certificate, are we really supposed to believe you're going to take the time to vote?

Does it matter? If they want to vote, they should not be denied.

 

[274ina]

Only CITIZENS can vote.

That is the law, and it will be enforced.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

It doesn't matter which pols switched, not when we see that all the racist voters did.

It certainly matters that the majority of them remained in the democrat party. And the worst of them, Byrd was welcomed into high leadership positions in the democrat party. At one time, he was senate pro temp, which put him about 4th in line of succession to the president. It kind of shoots down the democrat party myth that the segregationists switched to republican en masse. As for racist voters switching, that's another myth. Not that it matters as the pols are the ones that write the laws.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Does it matter? If they want to vote, they should not be denied.

Only if they obtain proper ID.

 

[calamity]

It certainly matters that the majority of them remained in the democrat party. And the worst of them, Byrd was welcomed into high leadership positions in the democrat party. At one time, he was senate pro temp, which put him about 4th in line of succession to the president. It kind of shoots down the democrat party myth that the segregationists switched to republican en masse. As for racist voters switching, that's another myth. Not that it matters as the pols are the ones that write the laws.

I guess that he renounced his KKK ties matters not at all to you. :shrug:

 

[calamity]

Only if they obtain proper ID.

Funny is seeing Republicans all worried about the integrity of the vote, when they are the ones who voted to OK the concept of buying politicians.

 

[Cephus]

Does it matter? If they want to vote, they should not be denied.

Why the hell not? If they don't care enough to get the proper documentation, they don't deserve it. Only legal citizens are allowed to vote. Anyone who cannot prove they are a legal citizen, screw 'em.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I guess that he renounced his KKK ties matters not at all to you. :shrug:

No, actually it does not. Anyone who rose to the rank of grand cyclops and kleagle in that evil racist organization is beyond redemption. Not to mention the fact that his racism continued well into the 1990s. He only renounced the KKK for the sake of political expediancy. You should also keep in mind, he led the longer filibuster against the civil rights act.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Funny is seeing Republicans all worried about the integrity of the vote, when they are the ones who voted to OK the concept of buying politicians.

What in the blazes are you talking about??? And btw, I am not a republican.