Originally Posted By RoadTrip I should have put a winkie after the last sentence. I had to throw it in because it is such a common conservative catch phrase.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox Why is it so difficult for some citizens to admit that the true purpose behind the voter I.D. laws is to restrict voting in specific demographics? Namely, poor minorities who tend to vote for Democrats. If this issue were actually about voter fraud and false voter identity... then the conservative politicians would be screaming for a national database of citizens and national I.D. cards. Period. But these voter I.D. laws have been carefully crafted -- by Republican-led state legislatures with the help of ALEC -- to insure that poor minorities without private transportation and/or enough disposable cash for a copy of their birth certificates cannot obtain them. The Heritage-loving conservatives don't believe in the Goo-Goo Syndrome, i.e., "Good Government." They don't want everyone voting. They can't win when everyone votes. They have openly admitted this time and time again. So if the GOP operatives like Paul Weyrich can admit that they don't want the entire country voting... why can't the GOP voters? If you as a GOP supporter have no problem with your party cheating their way through each and every election in order to win, you should at least be adult enough to admit it, instead of hiding behind a bunch of false Faux News Republican talking points insisting that voter fraud is a genuine problem that affects election outcomes.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I have only voted Republican three times in my life. I am a MODERATE Democrat, not a Republican. I never said voter fraud was a major issue. And I realize political parties will engage in shenanigans to influence elections. If Blacks tended to vote Republican instead of Democratic, it would be the Democrats calling for voter ID and we both know that. It has little to do with race and everything to do with maximizing turnout for your side. But why not support my idea? It seems to me that it should be as easy as humanly possible for anyone to receive needed government ids. To make it difficult for poor people to receive something that is required for so many things is FAR more racist than Voter ID laws are.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox First off, RT, I wasn't singling you out. I know you're a centrist Dem. I was referring to conservatives who support voter I.D. in general who've been posting on the boards. Second, I do not believe the Dems would want to exclude minorities from voting if those minorities truly wanted to cast ballots for the Republicans. All of the Dem-controlled state legislatures have made it easier for their counties to incorporate provisions to make voting easier, through increased early voting, encouraging vote-by-mail/absentee voting, and sponsoring get-out-the-vote drives with the co-operation of organizations like League of Women Voters. States like California have large counties that are dominated by the GOP, yet all counties get equal support from the state to make voting as simple as possible. And as far as supporting your idea for government-issued voter I.D. cards at the national level... I didn't say I was against it. I would be in favor of a national database provided the following conditions were met: 1) The Federal government provides simple and free means for any citizen to obtain his/her birth certificate when those citizens cannot easily do so themselves. That means providing easy access to a Federal agency which can contact local county records offices and obtain a copy of the birth certificate to place in the registry. 2) The issuing of the national voter I.D. card is done through several different branches of the Federal government and participating state agencies such as the DMV, as well as the USPS and SSA offices. The main Federal agency controls the collection of the necessary information to obtain the I.D. while local offices take the photos and distribute the cards with one-stop shopping. 3) Provisions are made for those individuals who have proof of long-time residency in this country but who lack the necessary documents in order to obtain the I.D. card. We shouldn't be throwing our seniors under the bus and tell them they can no longer vote simply because they don't have birth certificates. (Yes, it does happen: <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/10/10/3578451/meet-joy-voter-id-arkansas/">http://thinkprogress.org/elect...rkansas/</a>) That is shamefully immoral and should not be tolerated at any cost.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <But why not support my idea? It seems to me that it should be as easy as humanly possible for anyone to receive needed government ids.> I'm fine with that per se. But neither party is calling for that. The GOP isn't because they want to make it harder for certain people to vote. The Democrats aren't because they (rightly) don't see a voter fraud problem that needs to be solved, and getting people ID's for other reasons just isn't on their radar screens, like a lot of issues that might be but just aren't.
Originally Posted By EighthDwarf I'm on board with the argument that Voter ID laws are politically motivated and are directed toward a nonexistent problem. I get it. But the argument that it's financially burdensome to get an ID seems ridiculous to me. The requirements to get many government services such as Social Security, Disability, Medicare, Food Stamps, etc., require some sort of government ID to prove citizenship or an in-person interview at a government office. If it's so financially burdensome to get an ID for the poorest because they can't afford an ID, can't travel to a government office, etc., they would never be able to apply for government benefits at all. Assuming they are some of the poorest in our country, who exactly can't afford to get an ID? The homeless? They usually can't vote anyway... Again, Voter ID laws are wrong IMO but let's focus on the real reasons why they are wrong.
Originally Posted By ecdc Again, it's a matter of motivation. People look at this problem through the lens of an informed citizen who takes voting seriously. Like it or not, that's not how a lot of Americans are. By making it more difficult to vote, it tips the balance for people already discinclined to vote. It's no coincidence that the people least affected by voter ID laws tend to vote Republican, including the elderly and upper-class Americans and middle-class whites.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "If Blacks tended to vote Republican instead of Democratic, it would be the Democrats calling for voter ID and we both know that." No we don't. How do you figure? "But why not support my idea?" Who has argued against easy and cheap government IDs?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Why is it so difficult for some citizens to admit that the true purpose behind the voter I.D. laws is to restrict voting in specific demographics? Namely, poor minorities who tend to vote for Democrats*** Because such a purpose would be nefarious. Duh. ***If this issue were actually about voter fraud and false voter identity...*** Clearly it's not, though, except for the derps who actually swallow such tripe, the same droolers who vote against their own interests time and again, and would believe ANYTHING their radio told them.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<*"If Blacks tended to vote Republican instead of Democratic, it would be the Democrats calling for voter ID and we both know that." No we don't. How do you figure?>> At least in Minnesota, Democrats were the strong supporters of same day registration and early voting... both which tend to primarily increase turnout of Democratic voters. Let's not pretend that either side is pure... both sides will do anything they can to maximize their advantage.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Except that one side wants to encourage more voting, and one side less. If Democrats were trying to make it harder for Republican-leaning voters to vote, then there would be a true equivalence.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip There is equivalence in their goals. Why do they want to encourage more voting? Because those who presently participate at a low rate tend to be core constituents of the Democratic party... the young, poor and minorities. The Republicans on the other hand think things are just fine as they are because their core constituents already vote... the wealthy, white middle class, and elderly. It's not like the Democrats have some lofty altruistic goal of increasing participation... they want to increase participation because they know doing so will bring more additional Democrats to the polls than additional Republicans. Which is fine, but don't think that one side is more pure in motive than the other.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>There is equivalence in their goals. Why do they want to encourage more voting?<< Dude, you're becoming an Onion-like parody. "Area White Man Courageously and Unflinchingly Plays Devil's Advocate!" Of course Democrats want to win. Saying that's not somehow "pure" in politics is crazy. And it does not follow AT ALL that Democrats would somehow be doing what Republicans are if the situation were reversed. This whole "I need to keep saying both parties are the same to rise above the fray" thing is just silly. They. Aren't. At. All. The. Same.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "At least in Minnesota, Democrats were the strong supporters of same day registration and early voting... both which tend to primarily increase turnout of Democratic voters. Let's not pretend that either side is pure... both sides will do anything they can to maximize their advantage." So making it easier to vote is just like making it harder to vote. OK. "There is equivalence in their goals." The goal to get more votes than the other side? Well, yeah. But one side does it by making it easier to vote. The other side does it my suppressing the vote. This is evidence that the Dems would try to suppress the vote if it served them? Pretty weak sauce there.
Originally Posted By KongKongFuey Dabob and number 16 post I miSSed the poinT?????? I don't think so. I know your point quite well. You said: $ALL citizens are supposed to have the right to vote$ Where did you get that noNSEnse???? 5 year old citizens do not have the right. Retarded who are conserved do not have the right either. Sound minded adult felons almost always may not vote. There are limitations or qualifications to voting and for good reason. BECAUSE REASONABLE PEOPLE IN THE USA DO NOT WANT OUR LAWS, POLICIES AND EXECtion THereof influenced by the uNDESERVING AND/or by those lacking sound jUdgment . Anyone who lacks thE skillset or ambition to secure a publiCaLLY issued ID has no business helping to steer the country. In short what you and others here DEeM a burden or hardship to satisfy voting requirements I do not.
Originally Posted By KongKongFuey Sorry about indiscriminate upper and lower case as my shift key seems to be possessed or is just flat out broKEn.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Retarded who are conserved do not have the right either.<< Troll smarter not harder.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <There is equivalence in their goals.> Only in the sense that both football or baseball teams who take the field both have the goal to win. Well... yeah. But if one plays fair and the other has to cheat to win (and voter suppression is, at bottom, cheating), then they're not equivalent.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Gimme a break, KKF. (Beau?) 5 year olds are not Constitutionally allowed to vote, no kidding. Some states don't allow felons. But all citizens otherwise not prohibited by law are supposed to have equal access to the polls. That's why poll taxes are illegal. They were instituted to prevent "undeserving" people from voting. And these new laws are essentially a poll tax, and even conservative justices are finding this to be so. But the fact that you find some "undeserving" to vote is interesting. And un-American.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip All you need to do is look at Chicago/Illinois politics to see that Democrats can be just as corrupt as Republicans. When either party has strength in an area they do everything they can to exploit that strength. Republicans currently have superior strength in voter turnout and seek to preserve that situation in any way they can. And that is surprising how??
