America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 11 years ago by Pheloniousmunk. 46 replies replies.
Voter ID Law
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Mathen Offline
#1 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 8:41 AM EST
Joined: 05-27-2011
Posts: 2,338
I vote.

Every single election that I'm eligible to vote in, I'm at the polls. School board elections, county supervisor... you name it. Since the day I turned 18 I have missed exactly one opportunity and that was the presidential election of 96. I was scheduled to fly from Hawaii to Seattle that afternoon for military exercises, and the night before they changed me to an early flight before the polls opened. No time for an absentee ballot. I raised so much hell about that I got an apology from the Division Commander.

I am, for the record, what I consider to be a "tempered in reality" Libertarian. I am not so naive as to believe we can function without any kind of taxes whatsoever. I also believe that certain laws that regulate the free market in order to protect a) the populace or b) natural resources are appropriate. You know.. Don't put cyanide in baby lotion, truth in advertising laws, no dumping mercury in the Chesapeake Bay, stuff like that. I am a responsible gun owner, I believe in freedom of press, assembly, and religion (despite the fact that I don't practice one), and have told cops that "No, you may not search my car unless you have a warrant, probable cause, or I am under arrest. Call a judge."


I am very much a fiscal conservative but I am also very liberal on social issues. For example, because in many ways marriage is a legal status which confers certain benefits I believe gay couples should have the right to all of the same benefits as straight couples. I also believe that no church should be forced to perform a gay wedding ceremony. I'm not ever going to mary a man, but I certainly can't think of a single good reason that two people who spend their lives together should not be able to make medical decisions for each other or have rights of property inheritance exactly the same as me and my wife. Who incidentally, were married in a civil ceremony.

Regardless, not trying to start that debate up again!

Voter ID laws. On the surface, I'm for them. I often wonder when I'm going to go to the polls, will I tell them my name, and be told I've already voted that day? Seriously. It's a concern of mine. Seems to me that producing an ID is a mechanism that makes voter fraud less easy. I personally can't fathom it being 2012 and not having a valid form of ID. You have to produce it for so many things, I wonder how you can function in society without it?

Today in the Washington Post there is an article on this (no link, I read it on my phone) where they discuss a couple of actual cases of people not having an ID. One of them, a midwife birth from 1959. The midwife apparently didn't record the birth for several days and records don't jibe. Hell, that's only a handful of years older than me. One of my best friends was born in 59. So maybe not having an ID is more common than I think? I'm truly not interested in preventing someone eligible to vote from voting. Even people who disagree with my beliefs (which, in a two party system, is just about everybody).

So if you never buy alcohol, nor a gun, nor fly anywhere, and you live in the city and take the train, bus, or walk wherever you need to go, do you really need an ID? I guess not. Maybe you're a housewife, or maybe you've had the same job since before it was required to validate citizenship? As I mentioned earlier, I'm pretty socially liberal. I don't think the Government should have a right to force you to have an ID. It smacks of the old movie cliche of "Show me your papers please."

Well I get to thinking about all these things and the circumstances in which you wouldn't have an ID and are unable to get an ID and you are truly eligible to vote, it seems to me that it is such a string of coincidences that the number of people affected by this is relatively small. If you can get on a bus to go to the polling place, cannot you not get on a bus, go to the DMV, and get a walkers ID?

Is the preservation of the belief in the integrity of our electoral system more important than the disenfranchisement of a relatively small percentage of the population? I'm not talking about poll taxes or literary tests here, just the ability to prove who you say you are. If there is really such an issue with people eligible to vote who don't have an ID, maybe the answer is facilitating getting them an ID rather than just letting anybody go to the polling place and claim they are somebody that is eligible to vote. Hell, just put a picture ID on voters registration cards and make it free.

Cliff's notes: After careful consideration, in order to protect the integrity of elections, I believe it is proper and not a violation of civil rights to insist on a valid form of photo identification when voting. This includes some mechanism of proving your identity as well when using an absentee ballot.

What say you?
teedubbya Offline
#2 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 10:05 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I'd like to learn a little more about the problem before proposing a solution. I'd really like to see the extent of fraud out there. No doubt there is, but generally I like a solidly defined problem prior to exploring possible solutions.

I've yet to see anything credible that clearly lays out the level of fraud and where it is. I here a lot of hyperboly and anecdotal stuff, but nothing solid. My guess is there is some fraud, I'd just like a better look at it before doing anything knee jerk.

signed

fencepost
Mrs.Tank Offline
#3 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 10:16 AM EST
Joined: 02-15-2005
Posts: 10,047
You need an id to drive, to bank, to work, to drink, to fly, to buy a gun, to buy spray paint, and to buy certain medications.
You even need an id to get a library card.

Requiring one for voting does not seem too far out of line.
Abrignac Offline
#4 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 10:48 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,357
Mathen wrote:
Is the preservation of the belief in the integrity of our electoral system more important than the disenfranchisement of a relatively small percentage of the population? I'm not talking about poll taxes or literary tests here, just the ability to prove who you say you are. If there is really such an issue with people eligible to vote who don't have an ID, maybe the answer is facilitating getting them an ID rather than just letting anybody go to the polling place and claim they are somebody that is eligible to vote. Hell, just put a picture ID on voters registration cards and make it free.



Nothing more to say that hasn't already been well said.
teedubbya Offline
#5 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 10:53 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I want less laws not more. A law should have a compelling reason to exist. I've yet to see one in this regard.

I have no issue with requireing an id.... just don't see why the outcry for it right now.... there is no proof of a need at this point, and when that happens I always wonder if there is another reason for pushing something like this...... maybe its harmless *shrug*.
Mathen Offline
#6 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:03 AM EST
Joined: 05-27-2011
Posts: 2,338
teedubbya wrote:
I want less laws not more. A law should have a compelling reason to exist.


I guess a reasonable question is "What is the frequency of voter fraud vs. the number of eligible voters who would not be able to vote if an ID law were enacted?" I'm down with having that question answered. With empirical evidence.
teedubbya Offline
#7 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:05 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
That is where I am at.... but I really don't care about those that would be excluded (to an extent)...... what is the real level of fraud... not the hysterics ... true empirical picture....not well aunt sally saw so and so...or 12 people in montana got caught.... real data. I'm not anti voter id... if there is really a problem we should fix it.

I am totally against legislation for the sake of legislation...... or for only political reasons.... I beleive this is one of those.


Implementation of ALL legislation has a cost........
DrafterX Offline
#8 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:05 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,577
teedubbya wrote:
there is no proof of .



It's all over the internets... what else do you want..?? Huh
teedubbya Offline
#9 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:11 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
We have spent billions (maybe trillions) in bogus security laws and regulations in a knee jerk reaction to 911. We need to protect ourselves from out emotions and our politics as much as we need to protect ourselves against outside influences.

even implementing an ID requirement cost way more than most folks know.... from the development through signature of the law then writing of the rules and regs then actual implementation..... it cost money...... is there a real cost/benefit here?

if so... great.... if not... put the emotion away and move on.
DrafterX Offline
#10 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:17 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,577
teedubbya wrote:

even implementing an ID requirement cost way more than most folks know....on.


Think
maybe we could get volunteer Black Panthers to check IDs at the door.... Mellow
teedubbya Offline
#11 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:18 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
DrafterX wrote:
Think
maybe we could get volunteer Black Panthers to check IDs at the door.... Mellow



lol right accross the street from the illinois nazi party
rumraider Offline
#12 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:35 AM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
The only people who need freedom are those with something to hide, right?
teedubbya Offline
#13 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:39 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose
jojoc Offline
#14 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 11:55 AM EST
Joined: 03-05-2007
Posts: 6,272
TW - this was the first year I had to produce ID to vote, and I have no problem with the requirement. However, I tend to agree with you TW. I am not at all convinced that this will reduce voter fraud much at all, if any. It would take a large group of well organized people to cause any significant affect on the outcome of an election. The odds of getting caught when you have a large number of people going from polling place to polling place voting at each one seems high.

The other side of that coin is, how in the world can you figure out how many false voters there are if there is no way to verify the identity of the person that is voting. so, absent requiring positive voter identification, I don't see that there is any real way to get that empirical evidence to show how much fraud there is.
z6joker9 Offline
#15 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 12:01 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2011
Posts: 5,902
Our beliefs are so eerily similar that I'm going to have to question them all over again (though I have not always been so enthusiastic and consistent in voting).

I too had much trouble figuring out which side of the fence to come down on when Mississippi voted on this issue earlier in the year. Should we prevent a small amount of people from voting to prevent a small amount of fraud, or accept this small amount of fraud in exchange for allowing a few more people to vote? Is it really so small (the fraud or the ID-less people), for so many voters to be so concerned with the issue? Even though voting has already taken place and the law passed, I have not yet come down on a side.
Pheloniousmunk Offline
#16 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 12:51 PM EST
Joined: 09-28-2011
Posts: 402
Voting is possibly our most important civic responsibility and right as a citizen of the United States. Voting carries such significant responsibilty that convicted felons, who may be citizens of the US, lose the right so why should anyone but a bonafide, law abiding citizen, not simply resident of this country be allowed to vote in our elections?

As jojoc has stated, establishing what level of voter fraud is actually occurring now would be nearly impossible, but it doesn't matter for two reasons. First, electing our representatives and making the laws of our country should only be a priviledge of a citizen, as it is in any other civilized nation. Second, just as illegal immigration is growing exponentially, so too can we extrapolate that abuses of our electoral system will grow exponentially. Even if voter fraud were confined to illegal immigrants, that group is an ever growing population who demonstrates on a daily basis that they will not follow the laws of this country.

I refuse to accept the anecdotal story of the woman birthed by a mid wife and thus being unable to establish her legal identity due to conflicting birth dates or some other nonsense. I have first hand experience with conflicts of the nature, somewhere along the line my birth date was changed at the Social Security Administration which caused my Federal Tax Return to not be accepted after many years of working and paying taxes. It was a PITA to figure out what happened but once I knew what the problem was, it was fairly painless to get my birthdate established for all legal purposes. Only a person who is dead, illegal, or just plain lazy and doesn't really care about voting can't get valid ID.
teedubbya Offline
#17 Posted: Fri, Aug 17 2012, 12:58 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
jojoc there are ways to get at it. we've done it in the past..... analyzing patterns, census data, death notices etc..... nothing 100% but you can get to something with decent confidence intervals. It's not easy though, and its well after the fact.
CWFoster Offline
#18 Posted: Sun, Aug 19 2012, 11:19 PM EST
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
teedubbya wrote:
I'd like to learn a little more about the problem before proposing a solution. I'd really like to see the extent of fraud out there. No doubt there is, but generally I like a solidly defined problem prior to exploring possible solutions.

I've yet to see anything credible that clearly lays out the level of fraud and where it is. I here a lot of hyperboly and anecdotal stuff, but nothing solid. My guess is there is some fraud, I'd just like a better look at it before doing anything knee jerk.

signed

fencepost


OK, here's two. One is VERY recent, and VERY verifible, the other is something I heard, and may or may not be true, i can't swear to it.

1) 2008- Minnesota- Al Frankin runs against Republican incumbent, loses by 700+ votes out of over a million cast ballots, demands multiple recounts. During recounts, a watchdog group investigating allegations of voting impropriety starts comparing voter registration rolls with state criminal records. After numerous recounts Al Frankin is declared the winner by 312 votes, is sworn into office as the 60th Democrat and locks out any republican chance of a fillibuster of Obamacare. the watchdog group finds 1100 possible casews of felons illegally voting in the 2008 elections. It is widely believed that they voted mostly Democrat (would YOU as a convicted felon vote for people who think you should STAY locked up? c'mon!) Out of 1100 POTENTIAL illegal votes, TO DATEthere have been 170 convictions, and there are still a few hundred cases under investigation. NOTE: To obtain a CONVICTION under this law, the prosecution NOT ONLY has to prove the felon voted illegally, but has to prove he KNEW he wasn't supposed to vote! So there are many cases where there was an illegal vote cast (probably for Franken) but no conviction, because they couldn't prove the voter knew it was illegal for him/her to vote. 170 CONVICTIONS! That narrows that margin to 142, with 1000 possible fraudulent votes still in the balance. Now we fight trying to get Obamacare repealed.

2) In 1960 Nixon/Lodge lost to Kennedy/Johnson. It was widely believed at that time that LBJ's political machine in Texas, stuffed ballot boxes, while either the Dailey Political machine or the sam Giancana crime family (depending upon whose opinion you read) delivered Cook County and thus Illinois to Kennedy. THOSE TWO STATES would have changed the results of the 1960 Presidential elections. It WAS discovered long after Nixon conceded the election that a high number of voters in one precinct of Cook County (Chicago) all lived at the same address, which coincidentally is the largest cemetary in the city (OK, I used the term 'lived' rather loosely, but it's Chicago).

If some dumb assed Democrat can't vote because he or she doesn't have an ID card, how do they buy cold remedies when they get sick You can't buy anything with psudoephedrine in it without an ID. How can they buy beer and booze and cigars/cigarettes? How can they drive a car? How can they cash a welfare check, or use their EBT card without being able from time to time PROVE they are the owner of that card? the original post said the OP was delivered by a midwife and a discrepancy on the recorded birth dates keeps them from getting an ID, what? How do you buy your cigars dude? Don't drive? I'm sure that somewhere in the courthouse there's a clerk who will issue an ID if byou can provide two or three witnesses who DO have an ID to swear an affadavit that you are who you are. Then you can do all kinds of nifty things, even when it's not election day!
CWFoster Offline
#19 Posted: Sun, Aug 19 2012, 11:40 PM EST
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
teedubbya wrote:
We have spent billions (maybe trillions) in bogus security laws and regulations in a knee jerk reaction to 911. We need to protect ourselves from out emotions and our politics as much as we need to protect ourselves against outside influences.

even implementing an ID requirement cost way more than most folks know.... from the development through signature of the law then writing of the rules and regs then actual implementation..... it cost money...... is there a real cost/benefit here?

if so... great.... if not... put the emotion away and move on.



C'mon Teedubbya, They ALREADY have a table full of volunteers sitting there, checking your name against the voter registration rolls for your precinct. The ONLY difference is instead of asking for your name and address, they ask for a photo ID so they can see that it is indeed you! Even photo ID's could be faked, but it would be cost prohibitive and labor intensive to do on as large a scale as I'm sure has been going on. Consider this, You could get a group of ACORN volunteers to fill out fifty bogus voter registration cards for non-existent people at bogus addresses (vacant lots, empty buildings, cemetaries, ect.) Have them submit fifty of these in each of 20 precincts. On election day, you load the fifty volunteers up into a bus, each one has the name of ONE bogus name and address for each precinct, the bus takes a half a day going from precinct to precinct and the volunteers get off, consult their list go in, say, yes, I'm Mickey Mouse, I live at #12 Candyland Rd., get their ballot, cast it, and climb back on the bus and go to the next precinct. Net result 20X50=1000 bogus votes, and those are the ones that would never get questioned, because a REALL person isn't going to show up earlier or later to try and vote! It's the DEMOCRATS who don't want the voter registration rolls in New York and Florida compared to remove people who are registered in both places! Former New Yorkers can vote back home absentee, and then in person in Florida, now ask yourself, what party is dominant in New York? Whick Counties are the most popular for the snow birds to retire to? Vast parts of Florida vote Republican, how do the snow bird counties vote? how PREVALENT is Voter fraud in this country? I've heard of a DOZEN cases in Florida, Mississippi, Indiana, Wisconsin (there was a guy called into a Nothern Virginia radio station saying he was on a bus full of Union activists heading from MICHIGAN to WISCONSIN to vote in the Scott Walker recall! My GOD man! Wake up and smell the coffee!
teedubbya Offline
#20 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 8:14 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Dude you have no idea what it really cost to implement a law.

As for voter fraud, I have no doubt it happens. It is just to what extent. I'm very pragmatic. If the cost is more than the benefit then I'm likely to be opposed to it.

You've shown nothing to change that.
teedubbya Offline
#21 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 8:16 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Anecdotal and I heard someone on the radio information doesn't phase me.
CWFoster Offline
#22 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 9:01 AM EST
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
teedubbya wrote:
Anecdotal and I heard someone on the radio information doesn't phase me.


doesn't phase a rock either, I'd probably have a more intelligent conversation with the rock
teedubbya Offline
#23 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 9:03 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Yes. You have demonstrated that.
CWFoster Offline
#24 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 9:16 AM EST
Joined: 12-12-2003
Posts: 5,414
teedubbya wrote:
Yes. You have demonstrated that.


Yes, and I couldn't have done it without your help
jojoc Offline
#25 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 12:20 PM EST
Joined: 03-05-2007
Posts: 6,272
CWFoster wrote:
OK, here's two. One is VERY recent, and VERY verifible, the other is something I heard, and may or may not be true, i can't swear to it.

1) 2008- Minnesota- Al Frankin runs against Republican incumbent, loses by 700+ votes out of over a million cast ballots, demands multiple recounts. During recounts, a watchdog group investigating allegations of voting impropriety starts comparing voter registration rolls with state criminal records. After numerous recounts Al Frankin is declared the winner by 312 votes, is sworn into office as the 60th Democrat and locks out any republican chance of a fillibuster of Obamacare. the watchdog group finds 1100 possible casews of felons illegally voting in the 2008 elections. It is widely believed that they voted mostly Democrat (would YOU as a convicted felon vote for people who think you should STAY locked up? c'mon!) Out of 1100 POTENTIAL illegal votes, TO DATEthere have been 170 convictions, and there are still a few hundred cases under investigation. NOTE: To obtain a CONVICTION under this law, the prosecution NOT ONLY has to prove the felon voted illegally, but has to prove he KNEW he wasn't supposed to vote! So there are many cases where there was an illegal vote cast (probably for Franken) but no conviction, because they couldn't prove the voter knew it was illegal for him/her to vote. 170 CONVICTIONS! That narrows that margin to 142, with 1000 possible fraudulent votes still in the balance. Now we fight trying to get Obamacare repealed.

2) In 1960 Nixon/Lodge lost to Kennedy/Johnson. It was widely believed at that time that LBJ's political machine in Texas, stuffed ballot boxes, while either the Dailey Political machine or the sam Giancana crime family (depending upon whose opinion you read) delivered Cook County and thus Illinois to Kennedy. THOSE TWO STATES would have changed the results of the 1960 Presidential elections. It WAS discovered long after Nixon conceded the election that a high number of voters in one precinct of Cook County (Chicago) all lived at the same address, which coincidentally is the largest cemetary in the city (OK, I used the term 'lived' rather loosely, but it's Chicago).

If some dumb assed Democrat can't vote because he or she doesn't have an ID card, how do they buy cold remedies when they get sick You can't buy anything with psudoephedrine in it without an ID. How can they buy beer and booze and cigars/cigarettes? How can they drive a car? How can they cash a welfare check, or use their EBT card without being able from time to time PROVE they are the owner of that card? the original post said the OP was delivered by a midwife and a discrepancy on the recorded birth dates keeps them from getting an ID, what? How do you buy your cigars dude? Don't drive? I'm sure that somewhere in the courthouse there's a clerk who will issue an ID if byou can provide two or three witnesses who DO have an ID to swear an affadavit that you are who you are. Then you can do all kinds of nifty things, even when it's not election day!



is there something on the face of a DL issued to a convicted felon that would show they are not entitled to vote? I don't see that requiring photo ID is going to address this type of fraud.
rumraider Offline
#26 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 2:11 PM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
CWF -
just a question on your Franken example. If the fraud is mostly Democrats, how did that little putz Franken end up winning? Using the numbers you cite, (1100 fraudulent votes and a 1000 vote swing in Frankens favor) repuplicans were far and away the biggest frauds.
jetblasted Offline
#27 Posted: Mon, Aug 20 2012, 11:49 PM EST
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
This whole issue bugs me. It's talked about ad nauseam for months, hell, years even. If someone wants to vote, and know they need an ID and don't have one, they have plenty of time to get one. What does it cost? 10 bucks? ... It reminds me of years ago when broadcast tv went digital, and it was talked about non-stop for 6, 9, 18 months out, and within the 30 day window, people started screaming that it was discriminatory.

Sheesh . . .

d'oh!
dubleuhb Offline
#28 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 12:10 AM EST
Joined: 03-20-2011
Posts: 11,350
rumraider wrote:
CWF -
just a question on your Franken example. If the fraud is mostly Democrats, how did that little putz Franken end up winning? Using the numbers you cite, (1100 fraudulent votes and a 1000 vote swing in Frankens favor) repuplicans were far and away the biggest frauds.

Your not reading it thoroughly, or you don't want to....
rumraider Offline
#29 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 5:40 AM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
dubleuhb wrote:
Your not reading it thoroughly, or you don't want to....

Can you explain or is it just that your dogma is showing?
cacman Offline
#30 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 8:11 AM EST
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
"Try and fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured, but not everyone must prove they are a citizen".
DrafterX Offline
#31 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 8:47 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,577
do you need an ID to get cheese..?? Huh
Pheloniousmunk Offline
#32 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 9:01 AM EST
Joined: 09-28-2011
Posts: 402
rumraider wrote:
Can you explain or is it just that your dogma is showing?

I can see where you might draw that conclusion after reading CW's account, however one fact that was not made clear in his account is that no votes were invalidated by the investigative efforts of the watchdog group until after Franken was sworn in, and then his margin dwindled significantly and may have been entirely erroneous. Regardless, voter fraud in any direction is unacceptable to me, just like the sham that is the Electoral College vote. My one vote doesn't really count as a vote when the slight majority of downstaters determine to whom ALL of the electoral college votes for the state will be given.
rumraider Offline
#33 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 9:20 AM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
Pheloniousmunk wrote:
I can see where you might draw that conclusion after reading CW's account, however one fact that was not made clear in his account is that no votes were invalidated by the investigative efforts of the watchdog group until after Franken was sworn in, and then his margin dwindled significantly and may have been entirely erroneous. Regardless, voter fraud in any direction is unacceptable to me, just like the sham that is the Electoral College vote. My one vote doesn't really count as a vote when the slight majority of downstaters determine to whom ALL of the electoral college votes for the state will be given.

That makes more sense but how was he sworn in if he had lost originally and no votes were invalidated yet?
Pheloniousmunk Offline
#34 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 10:30 AM EST
Joined: 09-28-2011
Posts: 402
He was sworn in after multiple recounts which gave him more votes, 312 more than the incumbent when he initially had 700 less. I think that perhaps CW is projecting that the 1100 questionable votes are what took Franken from loser to winner in that election. It's possible.
rumraider Offline
#35 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 11:34 AM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
Pheloniousmunk wrote:
He was sworn in after multiple recounts which gave him more votes, 312 more than the incumbent when he initially had 700 less. I think that perhaps CW is projecting that the 1100 questionable votes are what took Franken from loser to winner in that election. It's possible.

Ah. Thank you.
Papachristou Offline
#36 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 1:39 PM EST
Joined: 10-20-2010
Posts: 845
i live in arkansas and they always ask for my ID. The lady checks my name off the list to make sure im registered then looks at my DL so i am not sure what cost teadubba is talking about. it isnt complicated.

To live in modern society, i cannot understand how you could reasonably function without an ID. You cant open a bank account, purchase cigs or beer, lottery tickets, go to certain movies, purchase a home or apartment, apply for benefits, and the list goes on and on. To make things really easy, allow people to get a state issued ID for free. If i ever leave the house without my DL even if i was with friends, i would say oh no, we need to go back, i need my DL. If we are stopped or anything i expect to have to prove who i am.
itsawaldo Offline
#37 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 2:46 PM EST
Joined: 09-10-2006
Posts: 4,221
cacman wrote:
"Try and fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured, but not everyone must prove they are a citizen".


Hee Hee! To funny!

As to ID'd to vote, sure should, we may not have that much fraud now but as some others have said with an influx of illegals from any part of the world they can start influencing local elections and eventually national.
I show my ID 3-5 times a week just for travel, again as others have already said for new goods and services from the community as well.
Pheloniousmunk Offline
#38 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 7:00 PM EST
Joined: 09-28-2011
Posts: 402
rumraider wrote:
Ah. Thank you.

You're welcome. I couldn't stand anymore of your coyness, you telegraphed what you wanted in your first post. Let me guess, you're a liberal? They seem to be the people most likely to think that they're so much smarter than the people they are surrounded by that noone will notice their schemes.

The outcome of that particular election could have been much simpler with solid voter ID laws in place and executed. Furthermore, for the incumbent to run such a close race against a challenger pretty much tells us that the people of Mn. thought he sucked, but they must have thought Franken sucked pretty well as badly. Bet they'd love to have a redo on that election.
chemyst Offline
#39 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 7:04 PM EST
Joined: 05-29-2006
Posts: 1,674
The 'purple finger' would eliminate the "vote often" crowd.

Chemyst Cool
rumraider Offline
#40 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 7:12 PM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
Pheloniousmunk wrote:
You're welcome. I couldn't stand anymore of your coyness, you telegraphed what you wanted in your first post. Let me guess, you're a liberal? They seem to be the people most likely to think that they're so much smarter than the people they are surrounded by that noone will notice their schemes.

The outcome of that particular election could have been much simpler with solid voter ID laws in place and executed. Furthermore, for the incumbent to run such a close race against a challenger pretty much tells us that the people of Mn. thought he sucked, but they must have thought Franken sucked pretty well as badly. Bet they'd love to have a redo on that election.

Wow. Wasn't being coy at all. Thought it was fair to ask the guy to explain his stated facts when they didn't quite add up. Also my "ah. Thanks" was sincere as well. You explained it and I expressed appreciation for your explanation. Not liberal, like to think for myself and avoid blindly accepting party line positions. I think if you reread my post you'll see I did not think much of Franken either.
Pheloniousmunk Offline
#41 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 7:28 PM EST
Joined: 09-28-2011
Posts: 402
My apologies rumraider. I must be full of all the bs happening here over the last few days.

I agree with your position, I don't vote party lines either. I don't patently believe what either of the big two parties put out.
DadZilla3 Offline
#42 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 7:33 PM EST
Joined: 01-17-2009
Posts: 4,633
Papachristou wrote:
i live in arkansas and they always ask for my ID. The lady checks my name off the list to make sure im registered then looks at my DL so i am not sure what cost teadubba is talking about. it isnt complicated.

Same here. I've lived across the street from the lady who checks my ID for the past 33 years. She checks my ID anyway, just like she checks everyone else's.

I'm neither offended nor am I inconvenienced in any way, and neither are all the other people in town she's on a first name basis with when she checks their ID's.

And no, we're not all WASP Republicans. Most of the folks around here are blue collar Democrats.
rumraider Offline
#43 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 7:42 PM EST
Joined: 08-05-2012
Posts: 727
Pheloniousmunk wrote:
My apologies rumraider. I must be full of all the bs happening here over the last few days.

I agree with your position, I don't vote party lines either. I don't patently believe what either of the big two parties put out.

No problem. And I agree with you about all the craziness going on here!
itsawaldo Offline
#44 Posted: Tue, Aug 21 2012, 8:06 PM EST
Joined: 09-10-2006
Posts: 4,221
chemyst wrote:
The 'purple finger' would eliminate the "vote often" crowd.

Chemyst Cool


I too thought the same thing, why not?
tailgater Offline
#45 Posted: Wed, Aug 22 2012, 8:59 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
I want less laws not more. A law should have a compelling reason to exist. I've yet to see one in this regard.

I have no issue with requireing an id.... just don't see why the outcry for it right now.... there is no proof of a need at this point, and when that happens I always wonder if there is another reason for pushing something like this...... maybe its harmless *shrug*.


So we have to wait for election fraud before we implement a VERY SIMPLE law?

The truth is, we've got tens of millions of people in this country who do not belong. Requiring ID shouldn't be viewed as a "new law", but rather as an obvious and simple precaution.

The Red and Blue states shouldn't be overly concerned.
But as we've seen in FL, the purple states' electorates can be changed by a scant few hundred votes. Is it so unreasonable to suggest that this could be accomplished? Do we really have to wait for this to happen?

The reasons FOR this simple law far outweigh the reasons against. It's not even close.
Pheloniousmunk Offline
#46 Posted: Wed, Aug 22 2012, 12:06 PM EST
Joined: 09-28-2011
Posts: 402
tailgater wrote:
So we have to wait for election fraud before we implement a VERY SIMPLE law?

The truth is, we've got tens of millions of people in this country who do not belong. Requiring ID shouldn't be viewed as a "new law", but rather as an obvious and simple precaution.

The Red and Blue states shouldn't be overly concerned.
But as we've seen in FL, the purple states' electorates can be changed by a scant few hundred votes. Is it so unreasonable to suggest that this could be accomplished? Do we really have to wait for this to happen?

The reasons FOR this simple law far outweigh the reasons against. It's not even close.


+1!.......with one exception to your assertion tailgater. In NYS where I live, the state is considered a blue state because the area centered by New York City has slighly more people than upstate and they typically vote Democratic vs the well know trend of upstate being red. Last week Senator Schumer authored a bill to be presented to our legislature which would give financial aide to the 4 million illegal aliens documented to be in New York and in another story relating to Obama's backdoor enactment of the dream act it was stated that far and away the largest group of known illegals in NYS are in Manhattan. So in a state with a population of roughly 20 million legal residents, we now have a potential illegal voting block equal to 25% of our total populace and they clearly are a demographic beholden to the politics of the liberals. You'd better believe that I want tough voter ID laws! If even 25% of that 25% votes it is clearly enough to forever change the politics in NYS as well as the rest of the country given our number of our representatives in congress and the number of electoral college votes in a presidential election.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top