Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 55
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Do we make laws and observe constitutional protections based on majority rule? I seem to remember the founders saying something about the purpose of the Constitution was to protect the rights of the minority (group with less than 50% not minorities).
    The vast majority of minority's support voter ID as well

    Again give me reasons why people shouldn't have an ID and why it's restricting their right to vote?

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255:31849425
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Do we make laws and observe constitutional protections based on majority rule? I seem to remember the founders saying something about the purpose of the Constitution was to protect the rights of the minority (group with less than 50% not minorities).
    The vast majority of minority's support voter ID as well

    Again give me reasons why people shouldn't have an ID and why it's restricting their right to vote?
    Because there is no widespread fraud to regain with and why add a extra loophole when it is not needed? Regardless of how many support it (republican propaganda b's caused this btw) iis a sham and not needed.

    Please support something that franchises more instead of limiting. There are many more glaring issues to tackle.
    Last edited by Raider_Mackin; 09-13-2017 at 12:40 PM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Raider_Mackin View Post
    Because there is no widespread fraud to regain with and why add a extra loophole when it is not needed? Regardless of how many support it (republican propaganda b's caused this btw) iis a sham and not needed.

    Please support something that franchises more instead of limiting.

    76% of non whites support voter ID so I guess they support something that disenfranchises them?

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255:31849440
    Quote Originally Posted by Raider_Mackin View Post
    Because there is no widespread fraud to regain with and why add a extra loophole when it is not needed? Regardless of how many support it (republican propaganda b's caused this btw) iis a sham and not needed.

    Please support something that franchises more instead of limiting.

    76% of non whites support voter ID so I guess they support something that disenfranchises them?
    BFD. The majority of Americans pre Obama supported a constitutional amendment to define marriage between a man and woman only. Opinions change when facts are learned and quickly in some cases.

    Once again there is not a glaring problem with voter fraud, this is a ploy by the right to change the demographics to their favor, and disenfranchise certain groups.

    This is absolutely silly to make this a priority with the problems this nation is facing currently. It is a waste of valuable time and effort.
    Last edited by Raider_Mackin; 09-13-2017 at 12:47 PM.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Raider_Mackin View Post
    BFD. The majority of Americans pre Obama supported a constitutional amendment to define marriage between a man and woman only.

    Once again there is not a glaring problem with voter fraud, this is a ploy by the right to change the demographics to their favor, and disenfranchise certain groups.
    You need an ID for pretty much everything you do including: Applying for a job, buying beer/cigarettes, applying for unemployment/food stamps, buying a bus pass etc

    It's not disenfranchising someone to ask for something you need in your life anyways

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255:31849459
    Quote Originally Posted by Raider_Mackin View Post
    BFD. The majority of Americans pre Obama supported a constitutional amendment to define marriage between a man and woman only.

    Once again there is not a glaring problem with voter fraud, this is a ploy by the right to change the demographics to their favor, and disenfranchise certain groups.
    You need an ID for pretty much everything you do including: Applying for a job, buying beer/cigarettes, applying for unemployment/food stamps, buying a bus pass etc

    It's not disenfranchising someone to ask for something you need in your life anyways
    BS about not a attempt to disenfranchise. We are not talking about the issues you mentioned above we are speaking of voting.

    What don't you understand? THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM WITH VOTER FRUAD! MANY STATES HAVE MAIL IN BALOTS! NO NEED TO ADD A EXTRA LAYER OF BUREAUCRACY TO A NON EXAISTANT PROBLEM! THIS IS A ATTEMPT TO DISINFRANCHISE PEOPLE!

    Also.I.don't get carded when buying cigs or alcohol and the person behind the counter makes a good judgement call on my 45 year old face. I have never had to show ID for a bus pass. And voting causes no momatry gain on a individual level to draw on. Your analogies have no sway.
    Last edited by Raider_Mackin; 09-13-2017 at 12:56 PM.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pittsbruh
    Posts
    68,937
    Background checks and strict ID laws don't require the time of day to argue against. They are thinly veiled attempts to suppress votes. Nothing more. Anyone who buys into the necessity of making things more difficult isn't worth arguing with.

    I'm more interested in how we make things better. How do we make it easier for everyone to vote? After all, nothing is more foundational to a democracy than that. We need to catch up (I feel like I'm saying this a lot) other countries.

    We need to modernize. A few states are starting to automatically register voters and it should be a national thing. Anytime you interact with a government agency, that agency sends your info electronically to election officials and you are registered, unless you opt out. The should help boost turnout, clean up the rolls, make things more convenient for everyone and reduces the potential for voter fraud. Oregon passed something like this a few years ago, but just with drivers' licences. Oregon registered 270,000 new voters, and a third of them actually voted in 2016. That's tremendous. The demographics for these newly registered voters tended to be younger and living in more diverse and lower income areas. Many states have followed suit.

    The politicized issue? This favors Democrats. Anytime you get young, poor or minority voters out, that favors them. This is why there's the opposite push. Plenty of countries already do this. Plenty of countries have much more modernized voting systems. None of them seem to complain about the issues we complain about (again, noting that the complaints are just politics). Venezuela basically has fraud proof voting infrastructure. Venezuela! Look at all the **** they're going through. Most every other modernized country has higher voter turnout, a higher percentage of registered voters and more lax ID laws than anything the right wants. And they don't have issues.

    Again, there's no reason to give the "we need background checks and strict ID laws" crowd. They're just playing politics...and not being practical or concerned with things get that more people out and voting, and thus a more healthy democracy.
    this my sig

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    77,353
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255 View Post
    The vast majority of minority's support voter ID as well

    Again give me reasons why people shouldn't have an ID and why it's restricting their right to vote?
    There have been 31 cases of in-person voter fraud since 2000 out of (I'm guessing the number here based on presidential election year turnout, completely ignoring off-cycle voting) 691,000,000 votes cast.

    That is why there is no reason for voter ID. It isn't necessary. It is put out there only as a means of keeping people from voting.

    Give me one reason why any change to our voting laws are necessary? The burden of proof is on the person who wants to change the law, not the one who is content with it being the way it is since it works as is.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by ManRam View Post
    Background checks and strict ID laws don't require the time of day to argue against. They are thinly veiled attempts to suppress votes. Nothing more. Anyone who buys into the necessity of making things more difficult isn't worth arguing with.

    I'm more interested in how we make things better. How do we make it easier for everyone to vote? After all, nothing is more foundational to a democracy than that. We need to catch up (I feel like I'm saying this a lot) other countries.

    We need to modernize. A few states are starting to automatically register voters and it should be a national thing. Anytime you interact with a government agency, that agency sends your info electronically to election officials and you are registered, unless you opt out. The should help boost turnout, clean up the rolls, make things more convenient for everyone and reduces the potential for voter fraud. Oregon passed something like this a few years ago, but just with drivers' licences. Oregon registered 270,000 new voters, and a third of them actually voted in 2016. That's tremendous. The demographics for these newly registered voters tended to be younger and living in more diverse and lower income areas. Many states have followed suit.

    The politicized issue? This favors Democrats. Anytime you get young, poor or minority voters out, that favors them. This is why there's the opposite push. Plenty of countries already do this. Plenty of countries have much more modernized voting systems. None of them seem to complain about the issues we complain about (again, noting that the complaints are just politics). Venezuela basically has fraud proof voting infrastructure. Venezuela! Look at all the **** they're going through. Most every other modernized country has higher voter turnout, a higher percentage of registered voters and more lax ID laws than anything the right wants. And they don't have issues.

    Again, there's no reason to give the "we need background checks and strict ID laws" crowd. They're just playing politics...and not being practical or concerned with things get that more people out and voting, and thus a more healthy democracy.
    I'm all for automatic voter registration. I'm all for changing the election to a weekend or making Election Day an national holiday where stores/colleges etc are closed that day so people can get out and vote.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    71,597
    voter fraud? We still wanting to see Obama's birth certificate too?

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    71,597
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255 View Post
    I'm all for automatic voter registration. I'm all for changing the election to a weekend or making Election Day an national holiday where stores/colleges etc are closed that day so people can get out and vote.
    I would expand voting in booths to an entire week, with weekend option.

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    20,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255 View Post
    I'm all for automatic voter registration. I'm all for changing the election to a weekend or making Election Day an national holiday where stores/colleges etc are closed that day so people can get out and vote.
    I'd be OK with voter ID laws if they were done along with these other initiatives, but it'd have to be strictly controlled.

    First, you'd have to specify a timeline in excess of 2 years prior to implementation of the law to allow people to get the word out and to get the new IDs.

    Second, Anyone who doesn't have an ID should be allowed to get a voting ID for free from the government (otherwise, it's in essence a poll tax).

    Third, There should be a special government registry office to assist those that don't have proper documentation to get voting ID laws.


    If we are going to make people have to show an ID to vote the government should be responsible for giving all it's citizens an ID.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    17,681
    The issue I have with voter id is that I don't know how you add internet based voting without some sort of double validation of who you are.

    Internet based voting, in addition to paper votes and mailed votes, has proven to increase the turnout for the vote. The issue is fraud and how do you stop it in internet voting.

    If the voter ID dies and internet voting is added are you okay with internet voting requiring special security to make sure you are you?

    We are in the process of requiring all states drivers licenses to meet a higher standard of identification and security (which I'm also against). I have a feeling some sort of method of you proving you are you and only you online to the government isn't far away already ... it's just not always called voter ID.
    MacLean's Law: Everywhere you go there will be a jerk. Corrolary: If you go somewhere by yourself you become a jerk.

    I don't care where anyone chooses to go in free agency. I really don't. Yes, KD "broke" the NBA for a year or two, but I can't blame him for going to the team that fit what he wanted.

    The worst part about the Warriors winning is that now I can't have an opinion without being a "homer" or a "hater". It used to be that dialogue had merit independent of accusations.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    17,681
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    I'd be OK with voter ID laws if they were done along with these other initiatives, but it'd have to be strictly controlled.

    First, you'd have to specify a timeline in excess of 2 years prior to implementation of the law to allow people to get the word out and to get the new IDs.

    Second, Anyone who doesn't have an ID should be allowed to get a voting ID for free from the government (otherwise, it's in essence a poll tax).

    Third, There should be a special government registry office to assist those that don't have proper documentation to get voting ID laws.


    If we are going to make people have to show an ID to vote the government should be responsible for giving all it's citizens an ID.
    Right there you are restricting some demographics from voting ... as soon as you say that some people who can legally vote will opt out to keep government scrutiny from their doorstep.

    It's a sticky thing because logic seems to say that it's a no brainer to require an ID to vote, but doing so means a lot of people won't vote and those people are disproportionately likely to vote Democrat.
    MacLean's Law: Everywhere you go there will be a jerk. Corrolary: If you go somewhere by yourself you become a jerk.

    I don't care where anyone chooses to go in free agency. I really don't. Yes, KD "broke" the NBA for a year or two, but I can't blame him for going to the team that fit what he wanted.

    The worst part about the Warriors winning is that now I can't have an opinion without being a "homer" or a "hater". It used to be that dialogue had merit independent of accusations.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    20,793
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Right there you are restricting some demographics from voting ... as soon as you say that some people who can legally vote will opt out to keep government scrutiny from their doorstep.

    It's a sticky thing because logic seems to say that it's a no brainer to require an ID to vote, but doing so means a lot of people won't vote and those people are disproportionately likely to vote Democrat.
    I'm not sure I understand your argument. Are you saying that some people will not vote because of fears of divulging information to the government? I'm not sure how these people are voting currently if that is the case.

    If I misunderstood, I apologize. Can you clarify?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •