There is only one reason to be against voter ID

[Logical1]

There is actually only one reason to be against voter ID. You and your party plan to cheat.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Logical1]

Kinda looks like liberals cant prove me wrong.

 

[Evilroddy]

Voting is an inherent right of citizenship and not a privilege granted by the state to certain subjects. If a citizen cannot meet the conditions of getting a voter ID because for example they do not want to surrender information about themselves to the state or because they are homeless and do not have an address to receive such a card, then they are being deprived of their inherent right by the state. People concerned with protecting the inalienability of that right to vote for all citizens must oppose a voter identification programme. Therefore your assertion that there must be only one reason for opposing voter ID and that reason is that people and parties want to cheat has been falsified and can thus be dismissed.

If you however think that voting should not be a universal right of citizens in good standing, then you can dismiss my argument, at your peril.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[beefheart]

There is actually only one reason to be against voter ID. You and your party plan to cheat.

Prove me wrong.

Yet, you are against presidential candidates sharing their tax returns.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

There is actually only one reason to be against voter ID. You and your party plan to cheat.

Prove me wrong.

You could be against voter ID because you're afraid the government will use it for its fascist tendencies.

 

[OscarLevant]

There is actually only one reason to be against voter ID. You and your party plan to cheat.

Prove me wrong.

You are for voter ID because it prevents far more people from voting, mostly poor and poor blacks, who tend to vote for democrats.








So, I'm pulling your covers right now.

Prove me wrong !

 

[Luther]

There is actually only one reason to be against voter ID. You and your party plan to cheat.

Prove me wrong.

What if they just get a "fake" ID?

 

[jnug]

Thread title:There is only one reason to be against voter ID

And lots of reasons to be against the abuse of voter ID as a means of eliminating legitimate voters from the voter rolls.

Anybody that does not think that happens, does not know what they are talking about. These systems are easy for states to abuse and it is remarkable how much control the state can have while absolving itself of all responsibility for the consequences.

Its not necessarily what happens on election day that is at issue. Most states with voter ID laws tend to have mundane, harmless looking rules for voting though their rules for provisional voting can be cumbersome. Its the voter roll purge rules that spring from the voter ID system that are at issue and often abused with all the control going to the state and no real responsibility that any reasonable person would consider of merit. Aggressive behavior in voter purging can toss an unreasonable number of voters into the provisional status and then the state can manipulate that process by simply not being able to accommodate the eventual provisional voter traffic.

The state does have a responsibility to maintain a reasonably accurate voter roll. However states with voter ID and a desire to use it to purge the rolls aggressively tend to use that as a rational for their aggressive behavior suggesting that the entire system must bend to their responsibility to maintain reasonable accurate voter rolls. No.....WRONG. The system must bend to the desire to make sure all citizens have reasonable access to the vote....PERIOD!

Ohio's new voter roll purge rules are particularly onerous. Miss a couple of innocuous looking mailings from the state or miss only two straight elections and BANG you are now kicked off their voter rolls.

If its honestly administered it can be fine. If not, NOT FINE. Your mileage may vary. I would still suggest that there has to be some accommodation for older voters and most of these voter ID, and voter purge systems would be particularly tough on older voters.

 

[Luther]

Yet, you are against presidential candidates sharing their tax returns.

Probably because it isn't a requirement?

 

[LosAngelesAngel]

~ Very weak arguments against voter ID . Ever wonder why it's the left who always oppose voter ID ...?

 

[jnug]

~ Very weak arguments against voter ID . Ever wonder why it's the left who always oppose voter ID ...?

Easy to say if you are not under the heel of some state with an agenda. Take North Dakota for example. What they tried to pull in their voter roll purge went beyond unreasonable to disgusting.

As I states above, honestly administered voter ID can be fine. Dishonestly administered with an agenda, NOT FINE!

 

[TheParser]

It makes only common sense to verify that every single voter is eligible.

Some Americans do NOT want Scandinavian type of squeaky-clean elections because they know that their favorite candidates may not be able to win.


As everyone knows, election fraud is as American as apple pie.


Most Americans are loath to admit it. It goes against everything that we were taught in high school civics class.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

Voting is an inherent right of citizenship and not a privilege granted by the state to certain subjects. If a citizen cannot meet the conditions of getting a voter ID because for example they do not want to surrender information about themselves to the state or because they are homeless and do not have an address to receive such a card, then they are being deprived of their inherent right by the state. People concerned with protecting the inalienability of that right to vote for all citizens must oppose a voter identification programme. Therefore your assertion that there must be only one reason for opposing voter ID and that reason is that people and parties want to cheat has been falsified and can thus be dismissed.

If you however think that voting should not be a universal right of citizens in good standing, then you can dismiss my argument, at your peril.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Why should voting be kept from non-citizens or citizens who aren't in good standing. If voting were an inherent right, then why do people need to give up their information in order to register to vote? People could just be able to show up at the polls and vote and if a few happen to vote more than once, is that to you the price of the 'inherent right of citizenship?'

 

[Luther]

As everyone knows, election fraud is as American as apple pie

Yes it is.... but it is blown out way out of proportions

It's the people, our ignorant, non-American(Apathetic) citizenry that we must fear

 

[HonestJoe]

It makes only common sense to verify that every single voter is eligible.

Sure, but voter ID doesn't do that, especially not alone. All it does is prove that a someone who votes in person has ID saying they have the same name as someone on the electoral register. Pushing voter ID alone while ignoring the issues with extensive postal voting, voter registration and the partisan political involvement in the whole process less than meaningless.

The key thing the US needs to sort out it's electoral system is a properly independent electoral commission (at state or federal level) to manage the entire system from registration to result. I doubt any of the politicians (or partisan citizens) there would be willing to consider that though.

 

[jnug]

Sure, but voter ID doesn't do that, especially not alone. All it does is prove that a someone who votes in person has ID saying they have the same name as someone on the electoral register. Pushing voter ID alone while ignoring the issues with extensive postal voting, voter registration and the partisan political involvement in the whole process less than meaningless.

The key thing the US needs to sort out it's electoral system is a properly independent electoral commission (at state or federal level) to manage the entire system from registration to result. I doubt any of the politicians (or partisan citizens) there would be willing to consider that though.

Much, MUCH, M..U...C...H prefer independent commissions to the crap we have now.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

~ Very weak arguments against voter ID . Ever wonder why it's the left who always oppose voter ID ...?

You’re saying the United States Constitution is “very weak”?

As everyone knows, election fraud is as American as apple pie.

As are false claims of wide spread election and voter fraud, usually made by those who want to violate others voting rights by enacting unconstitutional laws designed to suppress voter turnout among certain groups.

 

[Evilroddy]

Why should voting be kept from non-citizens or citizens who aren't in good standing. If voting were an inherent right, then why do people need to give up their information in order to register to vote? People could just be able to show up at the polls and vote and if a few happen to vote more than once, is that to you the price of the 'inherent right of citizenship?'

AliHajjiSheik:

Those are the rules which the USA created over the last 242 years. Ask yourself why they have been designed that way. Citizens vote, non-citizens don't. As to citizens in good standing, that's a less solid legal tradition which I have never fully understood but, being an outsider to America, I will not comment upon. In Canada citizens who are convicted felons can still vote in national and provincial elections, no matter what they have done or been convicted of. Voting is one of the very few inalienable rights in my country, unlike the rights of life, free speech, the press, assembly, religion, etc. which are freedoms and not rights.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

AliHajjiSheik:

Those are the rules which the USA created over the last 242 years. Ask yourself why they have been designed that way. Citizens vote, non-citizens don't. As to citizens in good standing, that's a less solid legal tradition which I have never fully understood but, being an outsider to America, I will not comment upon. In Canada citizens who are convicted felons can still vote in national and provincial elections, no matter what they have done or been convicted of. Voting is one of the very few inalienable rights in my country, unlike the rights of life, free speech, the press, assembly, religion, etc. which are freedoms and not rights.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

Your comment was not about a specific country so I made no effort to interpret your comment in that context. I don't need to think about how something was designed because so many have been changing of late whether they were designed that way or they evolved that way. In the US, there is no explicit right to vote, there are only circumstances for which the right voting rights cannot be denied or abridged. Anyone outside those groups (race, sex, poll taxes, and over 18) so enumerated can have their voting rights denied or abridged.

Freedoms and rights are too muddled to have a clear distinction between them anymore.