Every legal American citizen has the required ID to vote. Only illegal aliens and criminals avoiding apprehension do not. ID is mandatory for school, job, social services, library, credit, bank account, bars, rent a home...
Kinda OT, but here's my question: Let's pull 18-21 y/o's out of the equation. I'm down with them being required/enabled to register to vote similar to Selective Service (the draft) is for guys, but that isn't the case yet and I don't trust public schools to do anything remotely appropriate with "Civics" class. And maybe include newly-confirmed immigrant legal citizens... maybe they need a "get out the vote" campaign. I'm ok with this. For literally anyone else: If someone hasn't chosen to register to vote in at least the two (if not many, many more) election cycles since they've been eligible to vote, what makes you think that their opinion is one you want voting on? Not saying they can't (of course it's their right), but whatever side of the spectrum you vote on, why would you want a misinformed or disinterested voter?
No, this is new. Remember, I used to live there and was born there. I'm a military brat born on Ft. McPherson (now defunct) in Atlanta. My uncle was a sheriff's deputy in Fulton County. My aunt lived in Atlanta as did my other uncle on my mother's side. In the old days Whites had other ways of controlling African-Americans. They had the poll tax and the literacy test. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 put a halt to those practices and provided for oversight to any changes in voting rules in the deep South. Now, the conservative Supreme Court has pretty much eliminated the act and you now have these new prohibitions obviously aimed at all minorities but mostly African-Americans and our youth. I believe it's in Texas where your student ID cannot get you the privilege of voting but your gun permit can. Why do you suppose that is? It's because our youth tend to vote for Democrats.
I'm only guessing, and I haven't heard of that, but maybe because a Chinese or Russian visa-holder can get a student ID at UT or A&M, but you need to show proof of legal residency for a weapons permit? I wonder what it is that makes youths vote D, but less so as they get older? :hm:
Your first and second assertions are blatantly false. I don't even need to show ID to make a bank withdrawal or cash a check. New library cards follow different rules. And since every library system is different, I suppose some libraries might accept your old library card for renewal purposes. There are jobs that require no ID especially for the self employed farm laborer, house maid, gardener, dish washer etc. etc. etc. Do you have any substantiation for your assertions regarding poor folks in Georgia that take the bus 'cause they can't afford a car and maybe can't even read?
31 out of a Billion voting instances with fraud. Is this really worthy of any sort of effort to eliminate? With your statement about youths changing their voting habits as they age, are you suggesting that younger voters ought not to have their votes counted? Also, this would seem to bolster the argument that the more education a voter has the more tendancy there is to vote Democrat. Why is that?
This doesn't happen. Here's the way it worked in Oregon before mail in ballots. You go to vote. The clerk asks your name, they look you up on the list, they simultaneously hand you a ballot and check your name off. Now, no one can use your name unless they vote on a provisional ballot which is subsequently investigated before validating the second person's provisional ballot. Meanwhile, you've documented one of the 31 out of one Billion fraudulent votes. Good job securing our Democracy, eliminating that 0.000000031% fraud.
A) We're not in a democracy, and I don't fight for one. B) As I've shown, your number is not true. The NYT article posted above (and again here, in case you didn't see it) showed that an entire election got thrown out because there was massive fraud. Much more than 31. Much. More. And what of the almost 200k in FL alone? They were all active voters. If you think that less than 31 of those 200k voted at some point in the 20 years before, then I don't know what to say. C) Tammany Hall was the way it was, once.
I wonder if the votes from the (D)'s candidate for FL governor's brother and sister were included in the "31 in a billion" fraud number. I tend to think not, but I've been wrong before. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...nvestigation-may-have-engaged-in-voter-fraud/
Why would I want you as a voter, Brian? You are obviously informed and interested, but nevertheless maybe not the sort that I want voting. So if we are casting voters out, I cast you out. How about them apples? But the truth is, only one party wants to restrict voting rights. And that's because that party no longer represents a more-or-less majority of the population, so they have to resort to disenfranchising voters. barfo
You also missed the point of the question, so it's probably my fault and will re-state: "What is the impetus for 'register everyone to vote'?" Why do community organizers and activists want to get people who, for whatever reason, haven't voted, to vote? And why do you--barfo and Lanny--want them? Especially since I don't see (though you may privately think so) you clamoring for things like ensuring everyone has an ID? Or that everyone should be here legally? Or....? To your first point, I don't trust the Democrats to enforce any law, and therefore am not shocked that they don't want to enforce voter ID laws. That's just part of being informed.
There's a big difference between enforcement and selective enforcement. What we are seeing from the Republicans is very selective enforcement targeting populations that are more likely to vote against them. But your question is fundamentally elitist. Some people aren't <something> enough to vote, the country should be ruled by the few, not the many. The goal of a democratic society should be to get everyone involved, not to exclude those who haven't been involved. I'm totally fine with a national ID card, that would make a lot of things simpler. I thought it was the paranoid right-wingers who opposed ID cards as a violation of their "freedom". Once they know your name, they can take your guns!!! I'm also fine with making sure that everyone is here legally, although I suspect my method for achieving that would involve a lot more 'amnesty' and relaxing/streamlining immigration rules than yours would. barfo
We're literally just seeing ID laws enforced (except in the bus situation, which was a safety and policy issue). It's not my fault or a predisposition of human nature (though it may seem that way) that people who can't get their names spelled correctly in state databases, or who don't get an ID card, or have moved, vote Democrat. 200k in FL alone is a "selective enforcement targeting population?" Once again, we're not a democratic society, we're a representative republic. In large part due to the Founding Fathers' grasp of history, philosophy and law that demonstrated that mob rule was not the answer. I don't think it makes me "elitist", it makes me "civically and historically informed." But (for the third time, now) my question wasn't whether or not they should vote if they legally registered, it was "why do you want them to so badly?" If your answer to the question is "because everyone should be involved in civic, legal processes, even if they didn't want to" (I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth) then we're golden. Re-institution of the draft in 3....2.....1..... Um, no. Unless, somehow, the ACLU is now a paranoid redux of the KKK, like AntiFa is a re-skinned Brownshirts group. I'm not going to pull the "obviously you don't read my stuff" card, but I don't think we're that far off. I'm not Denny-level libertarian on that front, but I've seen too many people exploited because they're here illegally to not want to get people legal. In short, it seems as if (though please correct me if I'm wrong) that you're ok with the following: - making sure everyone's here legally (even if that involves a lot of editing to current laws to make it happen, which I'm ok with), - that everyone has a National ID card to verify they are who they say they are (which isn't a horrible stretch, since everyone in the military and their family members has a national ID card and 87% of everyone over 16 has a driver's license) - that only people who should vote, do vote So why is it that you think legally-passed voter ID laws are "selectively targeting populations"?
You say 200k, but the article you posted says 200k "may have". Similarly, there are hundreds of republican politicians who "may have" murdered people. Well, there is a difference between society and government, no? I accept your statement about our form of government, but I think it's not terribly on-point here. Are we? Because I think that's what I said in the last post. I'll assume you didn't mean that seriously, but I would be in favor of some sort of a national service requirement - it shouldn't have to be the military though - we don't need that big an army, and there are lots of other things that need doing. I can see that the ACLU would be against it too. I note that that article mentions guns as a factor, though. I don't buy your antifa = brownshirts analogy. Who is Hitler? Ok. I don't actually remember reading anything you posted on immigration before, maybe I missed it or maybe I just didn't disagree with it enough to recall it. Yes. I suppose if those laws were dreamed up in a isolation chamber, with no idea of who would be affected, you'd have a good case that they are just laws. But when a Republican legislature passes a law that they know will selectively disenfranchise democrats, then yeah, I think a little skepticism is in order. For example the North Dakota law that said you have to have a residential address on your ID, knowing that people on reservations did not have residential addresses and were largely D voters. Let's not pretend that voter ID laws are the only voter suppression front, either. There's a number of other gambits that Republicans are using, such as moving polling places out of town (GA and KS, I think), shortening polling hours, etc. barfo
It's because a student ID is not a verified ID. It's given to any and all students, foreign or domestic, law-abiding or felonious. A gun permit holder has been UnConstitutionally forced to go through a complete FBI background check.
