Supreme Court allows Texas voter ID law for now

[Teddy B 17,252]

Voter ID laws are iffy because people shouldn't be required to carry ID and it's no coincidence that it's associated with totalitarian states. If you don't agree with that you can't say that you oppose 'big government' because you do not.

Speaking practically, photo ID for preventing voter fraud (which has been established isn't a significant problem that requires a solution) requires a system of ID that is itself fraud-proof. That isn't cheap to do. As others have said, the only way to do this is with a passport. However, there is no legal requirement to carry one. So what is the solution here? A law that requires ID that doesn't prevent fraud - what's the point?

Like I've said a hundred times, this is truly a moot issue. It's a political hot bed for both sides to keep their base pre-occupied and fired up. The Republicans make the claim that they are losing elections because fraudulent votes are being cast by people claiming to be someone else. The Dems claim that requiring a voter id would discriminate against poor people who cannot afford id's. I tend to believe the Dems argument holds a bit of water, but neither is a major issue because voter fraud is not a major issue. Voter fraud is a smoke screen.

[UncleBeer 244]

The Republicans make the claim that they are losing elections because fraudulent votes are being cast by people claiming to be someone else.

Why should it have to come to a stolen election in order to care about voter fraud?

[Teddy B 17,252]

Why should it have to come to a stolen election in order to care about voter fraud?

Do you replace the engine in your car, just because someday it might seize?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Like I've said a hundred times, this is truly a moot issue. It's a political hot bed for both sides to keep their base pre-occupied and fired up. The Republicans make the claim that they are losing elections because fraudulent votes are being cast by people claiming to be someone else. The Dems claim that requiring a voter id would discriminate against poor people who cannot afford id's. I tend to believe the Dems argument holds a bit of water, but neither is a major issue because voter fraud is not a major issue. Voter fraud is a smoke screen.

Indeed. If the US had the same problems with elections that we see in say, Zimbabwe or Russia, then maybe there would be something to be concerned about.

Other than that, I'd say the people obsessing over voter fraud need to up their daily dose of immodium.

Do you replace the engine in your car, just because someday it might seize?

As a libertarian (or is that a librarian?) he probably had the engine removed from the car and drives it a la Fred Flintstone - since why should someone rely on something they have no control over to get from A to B. You should take responsibility for your own locomotion, dammit!

[Teddy B 17,252]

Indeed. If the US had the same problems with elections that we see in say, Zimbabwe or Russia, then maybe there would be something to be concerned about.

Other than that, I'd say the people obsessing over voter fraud need to up their daily dose of immodium.

As a libertarian (or is that a librarian?) he probably had the engine removed from the car and drives it a la Fred Flintstone - since why should someone rely on something they have no control over to get from A to B. You should take responsibility for your own locomotion, dammit!

If the people who go nutty about preventing voter fraud, (a problem that really doesn't exist), used the same logic in their personal lives, they'd be bankrupt and living in a van down by the river within a month.

I've got a 30 year roof on my house, but I think I'll replace it every 5 years just to be safe.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Teddy B

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Yes Dave, there was no small amount of irony in there but don't let me stop you from ignoring that and being offended for the sake of it.

Yeah right. With your love affair for the current administration, I'm pretty sure you'd actually cut anyone who said something ironic or foul about your girl Hilary.

[GBCW 397]

I think he dislikes you right wing wackjobs more than he loves Obama.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

You seem to be under the assumption that all poor people collect benefits, therefore they possess id's. That simply isn't true. To make a blanket statement that poor people should sacrifice more, drink less coke and eat fewer snickers to afford an id is asinine. It shows how ignorant you are as to what most poor people endure on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with self accountability for most poor people and it's not a leftie or personal thing, it's a human thing.

I've never claimed that voter fraud does not exist. The voter fraud that does take place is so miniscule, it does not pose the slightest of problems or threat to the integrity of our election system. Proving eligibility to obtain an absentee ballot would include what exactly?

How does one go about getting benefits without an ID? They SOMEHOW had to prove they who were they claimed to be beofre they got that EBT card or housing assistance, I assure you. Birth cert, passport, or stae/govt issued ID... SOMETHING to verify their identity.

As to the bold part... are you sure? As shown prior, there are only 31 cases of voter fraud known. Known. How many crimes go unreported in this world? How many times have you done 10 miles over the speed limit, yet never got caught? Doesn't mean you aren't guilty, just means you aren't convicted. I would suggest that it goes on more than the lefties here want to admit. I remember years ago seeing news articles where several dead people were "voting" in state & local elections. Don't recall the outcome, cuz I wasn't interested at the time.

[SMOKE 1,426]

You seem to be under the assumption that all poor people collect benefits, therefore they possess id's. That simply isn't true. To make a blanket statement that poor people should sacrifice more, drink less coke and eat fewer snickers to afford an id is asinine. It shows how ignorant you are as to what most poor people endure on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with self accountability for most poor people and it's not a leftie or personal thing, it's a human thing.

I've never claimed that voter fraud does not exist. The voter fraud that does take place is so miniscule, it does not pose the slightest of problems or threat to the integrity of our election system. Proving eligibility to obtain an absentee ballot would include what exactly?

no where have I stated or implied 'all poor people collect benefits'. I said if someone is eligible for benefits, the requirement to secure ID doesn't seem like an issue. but, keep on trying to reword my posts if you like. I couldn't care any less.

you are making blanket statements regarding a mythical diabolic republican scheme to keep 'poor' from voting. what is asinine is your conspiracy theory on the driving factors of republican's or anyone's desire to enact voter ID laws. its common sense. if you vote, your vote effects others. why would you be against people proving they are who they say they are?

you have said:

Most people without an id are poor. Most poor people vote democrat.

I'm not saying that this is a major problem or that it is a legitimate reason not to have a voter id law. What I am saying is that spending millions of dollars on implementing voter id laws simply for the reason of preventing voter fraud is a waste of money. I am in favor of a national id system, but not for preventing something like voter fraud that has been proven really isn't a legitimate problem. If a national id system was geared more towards preventing the hiring of illegal immigrants, I think it would garner much more support.

yes teddy it IS a legitimate problem or it wouldn't be continually brought up. showing picture ID at the polls would cut it down to a 'miniscule' issue.

look there it is again:

If the people who go nutty about preventing voter fraud, (a problem that really doesn't exist)

Edited October 22, 2014 by SMOKE

[Teddy B 17,252]

no where have I stated or implied 'all poor people collect benefits'. I said if someone is eligible for benefits, the requirement to secure ID doesn't seem like an issue. but, keep on trying to reword my posts if you like. I couldn't care any less.

you are making blanket statements regarding a mythical diabolic republican scheme to keep 'poor' from voting. what is asinine is your conspiracy theory on the driving factors of republican's or anyone's desire to enact voter ID laws. its common sense. if you vote, your vote effects others. why would you be against people proving they are who they say they are?

you have said:

yes teddy it IS a legitimate problem or it wouldn't be continually brought up. showing picture ID at the polls would cut it down to a 'miniscule' issue.

look there it is again:

Voter fraud is a non issue. It is used by both parties as a tool to shift voters focus from the real issues. When you can show me proven widescale cases of voter fraud to prove the contrary, then you'll have a case. The only reason I'm going back and forth with you is because I do believe that some poor [people will suffer and possibly not end up voting if they are required to purchase an id to vote. I do not believe that is a large problem either, but I do believe it's more of an issue than the fallacy of voter fraud itself.

I am in favor of a national id system and if someone cannot afford an id, then the gov't should supply it for them. But let's drop this ridiculous notion of preventing fraud. It simply doesn't exist on the level you want to think it does.

Edited October 22, 2014 by Teddy B

[GBCW 397]

Voter fraud is a non issue. It is used by both parties as a tool to shift voters focus from the real issues. When you can show me proven widescale cases of voter fraud to prove the contrary, then you'll have a case. The only reason I'm going back and forth with you is because I do believe that some poor [people will suffer and possibly not end up voting if they are required to purchase an id to vote. I do not believe that is a large problem either, but I do believe it's more of an issue than the fallacy of voter fraud itself.

I am in favor of a national id system and if someone cannot afford an id, then the gov't should supply it for them. But let's drop this ridiculous notion of preventing fraud. It simply doesn't exist on the level you want to think it does.

We have no real way of measuring it, though. So how do we even know if it happens or not?

Someone else can walk into my polling station, say they're me, sign my name so it looks somewhat similar (not hard for a professional) and then vote as if they were me.

If I found out it happened (as in if I came by later that day and tried to vote), I'd know something was up and complain.

The complaint would be investigated. Lots of places don't allow video surveillance of polling stations so let's assume this is one of those. What would they investigate? The signature. That's all they have to go on and if the signature is within some % of accuracy (based on a digital analysis), they have to presume there's no case.

That goes into the statistics as "no fraud found" and becomes part of the Democratic Party talking points about no fraud.

So what happened here?

The very lack of oversight the Democratic Party promotes led to the lack of evidence the Democratic Party needs to claim there's no fraud.

A bit too convenient, no?

[SMOKE 1,426]

We have no real way of measuring it, though. So how do we even know if it happens or not?

Someone else can walk into my polling station, say they're me, sign my name so it looks somewhat similar (not hard for a professional) and then vote as if they were me.

If I found out it happened (as in if I came by later that day and tried to vote), I'd know something was up and complain.

The complaint would be investigated. Lots of places don't allow video surveillance of polling stations so let's assume this is one of those. What would they investigate? The signature. That's all they have to go on and if the signature is within some % of accuracy (based on a digital analysis), they have to presume there's no case.

That goes into the statistics as "no fraud found" and becomes part of the Democratic Party talking points about no fraud.

So what happened here?

The very lack of oversight the Democratic Party promotes led to the lack of evidence the Democratic Party needs to claim there's no fraud.

A bit too convenient, no?

you're a diabolical republican. r3thuglican got **

Edited October 22, 2014 by SMOKE

[Teddy B 17,252]

How does one go about getting benefits without an ID? They SOMEHOW had to prove they who were they claimed to be beofre they got that EBT card or housing assistance, I assure you. Birth cert, passport, or stae/govt issued ID... SOMETHING to verify their identity.

As to the bold part... are you sure? As shown prior, there are only 31 cases of voter fraud known. Known. How many crimes go unreported in this world? How many times have you done 10 miles over the speed limit, yet never got caught? Doesn't mean you aren't guilty, just means you aren't convicted. I would suggest that it goes on more than the lefties here want to admit. I remember years ago seeing news articles where several dead people were "voting" in state & local elections. Don't recall the outcome, cuz I wasn't interested at the time.

Dave, anyone can get an id for state benefits, even illegal aliens. One does not need to be a citizen to do so. So what good is that id in the terms of preventing voter fraud?

31 very small known cases of voter fraud since the year 2000 is somehow a problem? For who?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Do you replace the engine in your car, just because someday it might seize?

or change the oil and perform maintenance so it will not. I loved your post. This is a non issue to inflame the base on both sides, but the Dems position is valid. ROFL

[Teddy B 17,252]

We have no real way of measuring it, though. So how do we even know if it happens or not?

Someone else can walk into my polling station, say they're me, sign my name so it looks somewhat similar (not hard for a professional) and then vote as if they were me.

If I found out it happened (as in if I came by later that day and tried to vote), I'd know something was up and complain.

The complaint would be investigated. Lots of places don't allow video surveillance of polling stations so let's assume this is one of those. What would they investigate? The signature. That's all they have to go on and if the signature is within some % of accuracy (based on a digital analysis), they have to presume there's no case.

That goes into the statistics as "no fraud found" and becomes part of the Democratic Party talking points about no fraud.

So what happened here?

The very lack of oversight the Democratic Party promotes led to the lack of evidence the Democratic Party needs to claim there's no fraud.

A bit too convenient, no?

I did a double take and had to go back and see who posted this.

This scenario on any type of large scale basis is completely laughable.