Lose your house, lose your vote

[HAL 9000 96]

If you lose your home, I assume you live somewhere else. Keep those IDs up to date and make sure you know where you're supposed to vote!

Definitely. People HAVE to keep on the lookout against these Republican'ts waiting to try every little book to circumvent people's democratic duties.

it's a republican ploy, only because the dems didn't think of it first.

Way to go for Democracy once again. Republicans, keepers of the process.

I guess both sides can do it at any point- but til now I haven't read that much of Democrats challenging people's right to vote in a reasonable manner so as to protect people's right to be able to cast their ballots. Perhaps its that liberal media again, blocking the sun with its ever-powerful reach.

if the dems had come up with this, would you have been so against it?

But they were... back in the days of Jim Crow laws. At least in name, since Southern Democrats became present day Republicans.

And yes... I would be completely against such a crass violation of democracy if done by anyone. There is sleaze, and then there is sleaze.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

If you lose your home, I assume you live somewhere else. Keep those IDs up to date and make sure you know where you're supposed to vote!

Definitely. People HAVE to keep on the lookout against these Republican'ts waiting to try every little book to circumvent people's democratic duties.

it's a republican ploy, only because the dems didn't think of it first.

Way to go for Democracy once again. Republicans, keepers of the process.

I guess both sides can do it at any point- but til now I haven't read that much of Democrats challenging people's right to vote in a reasonable manner so as to protect people's right to be able to cast their ballots. Perhaps its that liberal media again, blocking the sun with its ever-powerful reach.

if the dems had come up with this, would you have been so against it?

Yes I would. Let Americans vote goddammit....I don't care how they'll vote, just let them vote. It's the fundamental trait of a democracy.

as you well know, residency is part of the voting process. personally, i don't see anything wrong with it as it ensures that people vote at the correct place (here in kansas, just try going to a different place to vote instead of the one you are supposed to vote at). and of course most states also require you to update your driver's license within so many days after moving.

now if the people are still living in the house that has a foreclosure notice, that's a problem as it denies them the right to vote, but it remains to be seen if that occurs.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

[HAL 9000 96]

If you lose your home, I assume you live somewhere else. Keep those IDs up to date and make sure you know where you're supposed to vote!

Definitely. People HAVE to keep on the lookout against these Republican'ts waiting to try every little book to circumvent people's democratic duties.

it's a republican ploy, only because the dems didn't think of it first.

Way to go for Democracy once again. Republicans, keepers of the process.

I guess both sides can do it at any point- but til now I haven't read that much of Democrats challenging people's right to vote in a reasonable manner so as to protect people's right to be able to cast their ballots. Perhaps its that liberal media again, blocking the sun with its ever-powerful reach.

if the dems had come up with this, would you have been so against it?

Yes I would. Let Americans vote goddammit....I don't care how they'll vote, just let them vote. It's the fundamental trait of a democracy.

as you well know, residency is part of the voting process. personally, i don't see anything wrong with it as it ensures that people vote at the correct place (here in kansas, just try going to a different place to vote instead of the one you are supposed to vote at). and of course most states also require you to update your driver's license within so many days after moving.

now if the people are still living in the house that has a foreclosure notice, that's a problem as it denies them the right to vote, but it remains to be seen if that occurs.

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

Edited September 12, 2008 by maviwaro

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

We need a national ID.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

[HAL 9000 96]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

Well... polling location employees are supposed to verify in some places.

Besides, if not, then it is supposed to happen during voter registration. And if you go into foreclosure between then and voting time, then it would probably be assumed that you'd vote only once anyway- regardless of polling location. Which means that the effort to disturb the democratic process is one not borne out of a tactic to ensure fidelity to the process but rather one aimed at specific locations that predominantly vote a certain way.

Hence the tactic of Republican challenges in areas that predominantly vote Democratic.

Nevertheless, given the recent foreclosure market, I suppose the Republican tactic can and should be expanded to more Republican locations if they are going to be allowed to interfere with people's right to vote.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

Well... polling location employees are supposed to verify in some places.

Besides, if not, then it is supposed to happen during voter registration. And if you go into foreclosure between then and voting time, then it would probably be assumed that you'd vote only once anyway- regardless of polling location. Which means that the effort to disturb the democratic process is one not borne out of a tactic to ensure fidelity to the process but rather one aimed at specific locations that predominantly vote a certain way.

Hence the tactic of Republican challenges in areas that predominantly vote Democratic.

Nevertheless, given the recent foreclosure market, I suppose the Republican tactic can and should be expanded to more Republican locations if they are going to be allowed to interfere with people's right to vote.

all i've seen them verify is my driver's license and my voting card. what else can they verify?

[HAL 9000 96]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

Well... polling location employees are supposed to verify in some places.

Besides, if not, then it is supposed to happen during voter registration. And if you go into foreclosure between then and voting time, then it would probably be assumed that you'd vote only once anyway- regardless of polling location. Which means that the effort to disturb the democratic process is one not borne out of a tactic to ensure fidelity to the process but rather one aimed at specific locations that predominantly vote a certain way.

Hence the tactic of Republican challenges in areas that predominantly vote Democratic.

Nevertheless, given the recent foreclosure market, I suppose the Republican tactic can and should be expanded to more Republican locations if they are going to be allowed to interfere with people's right to vote.

all i've seen them verify is my driver's license and my voting card. what else can they verify?

In Kansas...

Particularly of interest with these "challengers" is what they try to do in polling locations previously known to yield with Democrat candidates. As well as, of course, excuse the tactic to combat potential 'fraud' in newly-registered voters.

That does not ring consonant with challenges based on updated residency as with the foreclosure example.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

Well... polling location employees are supposed to verify in some places.

Besides, if not, then it is supposed to happen during voter registration. And if you go into foreclosure between then and voting time, then it would probably be assumed that you'd vote only once anyway- regardless of polling location. Which means that the effort to disturb the democratic process is one not borne out of a tactic to ensure fidelity to the process but rather one aimed at specific locations that predominantly vote a certain way.

Hence the tactic of Republican challenges in areas that predominantly vote Democratic.

Nevertheless, given the recent foreclosure market, I suppose the Republican tactic can and should be expanded to more Republican locations if they are going to be allowed to interfere with people's right to vote.

all i've seen them verify is my driver's license and my voting card. what else can they verify?

In Kansas...

Particularly of interest with these "challengers" is what they try to do in polling locations previously known to yield with Democrat candidates. As well as, of course, excuse the tactic to combat potential 'fraud' in newly-registered voters.

That does not ring consonant with challenges based on updated residency as with the foreclosure example.

that still does not address how the polling place employees can verify a potential voter's residency.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

AJ, take your meds. NOW.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

AJ, take your meds. NOW.

I know what I want right now and it ain't meds.

Bring me the booze!

[HAL 9000 96]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

Well... polling location employees are supposed to verify in some places.

Besides, if not, then it is supposed to happen during voter registration. And if you go into foreclosure between then and voting time, then it would probably be assumed that you'd vote only once anyway- regardless of polling location. Which means that the effort to disturb the democratic process is one not borne out of a tactic to ensure fidelity to the process but rather one aimed at specific locations that predominantly vote a certain way.

Hence the tactic of Republican challenges in areas that predominantly vote Democratic.

Nevertheless, given the recent foreclosure market, I suppose the Republican tactic can and should be expanded to more Republican locations if they are going to be allowed to interfere with people's right to vote.

all i've seen them verify is my driver's license and my voting card. what else can they verify?

In Kansas...

Particularly of interest with these "challengers" is what they try to do in polling locations previously known to yield with Democrat candidates. As well as, of course, excuse the tactic to combat potential 'fraud' in newly-registered voters.

That does not ring consonant with challenges based on updated residency as with the foreclosure example.

that still does not address how the polling place employees can verify a potential voter's residency.

Training. Much in the same way someone can be trained to spot a fake ID, a polling official can be trained to identify legal residency by virtue of what each state defines as proof of residency. Be it an ID, be it current utility bills, etc.

I do believe the challenges that have taken place do so to slow the lines down. To get people to not vote. Which is interference.

[IAMX 3,055]

Well well well, Republicans trying again to disenfranchise voters yet again. Just like 2000 and 2004.

At least they're not flip-flopping. Quite consistent indeed.

Must feel good for conservatives to vote for a ticket that enjoys taking the freedom of others. God bless America!

Edited September 12, 2008 by SRVT

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

charles, this is gonna sound strange since this is a political thread, but i agree with you on all points.

zomg!

I think that can be addressed at the polling location without suspect interference from people that are not employed by each state's elections commission. Interference is the key word here.

But yes... people should be intelligent enough to follow state statutes that guarantee identity and location. Perhaps they should be reminded of this during foreclosure proceedings?

isn't addressing it at the polling location a bit late?

agreed on the reminder during foreclosure

Well... polling location employees are supposed to verify in some places.

Besides, if not, then it is supposed to happen during voter registration. And if you go into foreclosure between then and voting time, then it would probably be assumed that you'd vote only once anyway- regardless of polling location. Which means that the effort to disturb the democratic process is one not borne out of a tactic to ensure fidelity to the process but rather one aimed at specific locations that predominantly vote a certain way.

Hence the tactic of Republican challenges in areas that predominantly vote Democratic.

Nevertheless, given the recent foreclosure market, I suppose the Republican tactic can and should be expanded to more Republican locations if they are going to be allowed to interfere with people's right to vote.

all i've seen them verify is my driver's license and my voting card. what else can they verify?

In Kansas...

Particularly of interest with these "challengers" is what they try to do in polling locations previously known to yield with Democrat candidates. As well as, of course, excuse the tactic to combat potential 'fraud' in newly-registered voters.

That does not ring consonant with challenges based on updated residency as with the foreclosure example.

that still does not address how the polling place employees can verify a potential voter's residency.

Training. Much in the same way someone can be trained to spot a fake ID, a polling official can be trained to identify legal residency by virtue of what each state defines as proof of residency. Be it an ID, be it current utility bills, etc.

I do believe the challenges that have taken place do so to slow the lines down. To get people to not vote. Which is interference.

this isn't about fakes, but proving the voting card one has is valid or not. i don't know about you, but i don't go to the polling booth with an electric bill on me

essentially, this is going to be a tough hurdle for all concerned - both the poll workers and the voters.