I don't know of any, either, recently. Before 1980 Chicago used to have the Daly machine, a cover for the Mafia, so I mentioned Tammany Hall.
Attempts at Voter ID, Vote Security, Vote Integrety always being equal to disenfranchisement is a BOGUS issue created by Democrats in order to justify their refusal to improve those areas as they see strategic value in keeping the current status quo (ie: reactionary; ironic no?). As I said earlier, these players can't logically have it both ways. Either they launch a campain to remove requirements to produce photo ID in order to obtain a job (Union backed laws); go to school (universal free education supported by Dems); get government medical care (ObamaCare requirement - Dems only ones who voted for this law); get welfare or food stamps (new requirements to clamp down on rampant fraud); or, they accept that NOW (not in the 1960's), it is all but impossible to function in the U.S. without proper ID, and in reality a campaign to sign up the small number of holdouts without this ID (for free and so that they can vote) would be a HUGE public service campaign that would immensely help those among the poor. Now they will be able to (or more easily able to) apply for government benefits, job applications, school applications, etc. But, I guess Holder is more concerned about losing the votes of felons and illegals and other assorted vote stuffing than he is about helping the very lowest rungs to have a slightly easier time and slightly better shot at functioning in this country.
You were challenged to demonstrate that your bogus issue is a problem, and you came up 8 high. Admit it. You're trying to win elections the old-fashioned voter fraud way, by keeping millions of disenfranchised away from voting.
i would say yes, yes it does. do you think on any given day... more legal people are denied because they left their id at home or more illegal people are denied trying to buy before they are 21 i rarely tried to buy a hip flask of panther sweat before i was 21, but i have quite a few times been denied after i turned 21 because i left my id in the car or at home, same with going to a bar
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sc...leading-election-software-provider-2012-01-11 SCYTL bought SOE. Soros may be involved with SCYTL. SCYTL is controlled by Balderton which is run mostly by Goldman Sachs alum. SCYTL CEO, Pere Valles is from Chicago and ran GlobalNet previously, which was big Obama 2008 contributor. http://investing.businessweek.com/r...ousTitle=Scytl Secure Electronic Voting, S.A.
How is getting a free photo ID card a "poll tax", Denny? Will Obama's national ID card for heathcare be a "health tax"? I'm just wondering how many registered voters out there don't have a photo ID to begin with? How does that work?
So... it sounds like the ID requirement for buying alcohol worked, right? Knowing that you would be carded stopped you (seemingly) from even trying. The cost is that it's a pain in the butt to be denied entry to a bar or to the booze if you've forgotten your ID. The same logic, I would submit, applies to voting. Ed O.
exactly, 1000s of people will be stopped from legally voting, to weed out the 2 or 3 that try to illegally guess if the fewer people that vote the better, mission accomplished
That fewer people overall would vote is inherent in restrictions. Just as putting restrictions on buying alcohol. The intent is to restrict fewer people from voting illegally, just as putting restrictions on buying alcohol. Do you believe that we should remove ID restrictions from buying booze? If so, then I salute your consistency and we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. Ed O.
yes ed, voting = alcohol do you think we should have to show id to have sex? if so then i guess we will just have to agree to disagree
Ok, for me the root of the problem is this. Take into account that the illegal alien population in Oregon is somewhere near the 300k mark. The last election we had for govoner in the state, the spread was about ten percent of that number. One candidate wanted to give hand outs and coddle these people, the other had a differing opinion. With the ability to vote without being a citizen, thanks to the motor voter law and other hyper sensitive measures, and the large campain ads ran on spanish stations, who do you think captured the election? The arguement has nothig to do with economics, rather is, in my opinion, the best way to keep non citizens from stealing an election.
I don't understand what's so funny. Identification requirements serve as barriers to participation and as enforcement of laws. They don't need to be exactly the same to have the same logic applied to both. Ed O.
You Republicans need to put up or shut up. Again--show me one election whose winner was changed by unqualified individuals voting. After the Mafia era, like in the last 30 years. And it has to be from individual effort, not from a state government like Florida throwing a presidential election on purpose, which IDing wouldn't have changed. If you can't, then you are simply arguing for more government regulation without purpose. Carding voters has no more purpose than carding grocery shoppers. You like to list activities which require ID, but you conveniently forget the infinitely longer list of activities which don't require it.
That's an arbitrary standard. Why should the voters of states that have passed these laws have to show that? It seems just as fair for the people who disagree with them to show actual harm of the laws. There is something that ties the acts that require ID with the act of voting: a public interest. There is a public interest in regulating law, in limiting alcohol consumption, and in knowing that a driver is insured. While voting is not the same as any of those things, it is much closer than someone picking up dry cleaning or buying a television or playing laser tag. Ed O.
you dont have to show id in some states to buy booze/smokes/porn if you look older than 35, maybe they should card all the young looking voters
The ID isn't free. You have to take off work to go get it. It's an obstacle to going to the polls. What may seem "free" and trivial to you may not be to someone with 3 jobs and kids to support.
The right to vote has a special status among obligations/rights. It's almost sacred. If you don't like Jury Duty, you can always vote for people who change how it works. If you can't vote, you can't change how anything works.
