Voter ID laws

[Revoltingest]

Shall I put you in the "anything that's possible should be mandatory" camp then?

No, I'm not a Dem or a Pub.
I see your 'facts' as mere confirmation bias.

Funny opinion for a libertarian.

Even libertarians use ID.

 

[Alceste]

Now you are being senselessly ridiculous, and I won't acknowledge your listed silliness beyond that.

Proof of who a voter is when they vote is not unreasonable. Your claim that voter fraud is negligible is silly, as you can't prove statistically something that leaves no papertrail. That's like saying you can prove how many murders didn't take place because of a preventative measure. How would you know?

You can't read people's minds, so you would never know. Voter ID is NOT unreasonable, nor is it unprecedented.

And there is no reason the people who don't have ID can't go out and get it.

Live voter impersonation would leave a paper trail. The impersonated party would show up to vote and discover the record showing he had already voted. There was one single case of this in all the evidence you presented.

 

[Alceste]

No, I'm not a Dem or a Pub.
I see your 'facts' as mere confirmation bias.

Even libertarians use ID.

Show me your comparable counter-evidence then. A study. Not an opinion article from a right wing PR firm, and not an anecdote.

Otherwise I see your aloof neutrality as mere intellectual laziness.

 

[Revoltingest]

Show me your comparable counter-evidence then. A study. Not an opinion article from a right wing PR firm, and not an anecdote.
Otherwise I see your aloof neutrality as mere intellectual laziness.

No facts I dig up would hold sway. The matter for most isn't about logic & evidence, but rather is partisan.
So I will be aggressively lazy, & do no more reading than I already have. I look at it simply....ID is cheap,
ID is very useful, ID provides a miniscule amount of security to the voting process, & it really p****s off
the Dems.....all great reasons to require it. I can't do crap without regularly showing ID, so let the poor
do it too.

 

[Alceste]

No facts I dig up would hold sway. The matter for most isn't about logic & evidence, but rather is partisan.
So I will be aggressively lazy, & do no more reading than I already have. I look at it simply....ID is cheap,
ID is very useful, ID provides a miniscule amount of security to the voting process, & it really p****s ofthe Dems.....all great reasons to require it. I can't do crap without regularly showing ID, so let the poor
do it too.

Evidence (a study) would hold sway of course. And I think you know it would. I've read everything presented so far, but it's been either irrelevant to establishing the prevalence of voter impersonation (the news articles, the felon catching project), an opinion piece (the Heritage foundation), or impossible to parse into an empirical assessment of the prevalence of live voter impersonation (the list of links to news stories, the first five of which had nothing to do with live voter impersonation).

Think you can do better? Or are you more comfortable telling yourself there's no such thing as the truth, so there's no point trying to figure out what it is?

I think you might have to turn in your libertarian card if you think it's reasonable to disenfrachise between five and twelve million citizens just so the Republicans can kick the poor in the nuts.

 

[Revoltingest]

Evidence (a study) would hold sway of course. And I think you know it would. I've read everything presented so far, but it's been either irrelevant to establishing the prevalence of voter impersonation (the news articles, the felon catching project), an opinion piece (the Heritage foundation), or impossible to parse into an empirical assessment of the prevalence of live voter impersonation (the list of links to news stories, the first five of which had nothing to do with live voter impersonation).
Think you can do better? Or are you more comfortable telling yourself there's no such thing as the truth, so there's no point trying to figure out what it is?
I think you might have to turn in your libertarian card if you think it's reasonable to disenfrachise between five and twelve million citizens just so the Republicans can kick the poor in the nuts.

I find the numbers you cite to be ludicrous.
Anything can be found on the internet, but that doesn't make it factual.
I've found articles supporting your view to be entirely lacking.

 

[Alceste]

I find the numbers you cite to be ludicrous.
Anything can be found on the internet, but that doesn't make it factual.
I've found articles supporting your view to be entirely lacking.

What is your specific criticism of the study I linked to, other than you don't like their findings?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

And there is no reason the people who don't have ID can't go out and get it.

None? Not confusion ... or language ... or age ... or health ... or ...

What do you think is the likelihood that there will be more cases of voting fraud in the absence of such a law than of disenfranchised voters as a result of its enacted?

 

[Harmonious]

... if you think it's reasonable to disenfrachise between five and twelve million citizens just so the Republicans can kick the poor in the nuts.

Why are you so convinced these people will be disenfranchized?

Or are you saying that these people are so helpless, useless, and/or lazy that they CAN drag themselves to the polls, but CANNOT find their way to a post office or DMV?

Are you seriously saying that up to twelve million people are that useless and lazy that a quick trip and $14 will stop them from exercising their right to vote?

How horribly uncharitable, if not racist, of you.

 

[Revoltingest]

97.8% of facts are made up on the spot.

 

[Harmonious]

None? Not confusion ... or language ... or age ... or health ... or ...

Nope. People who need that much help are usually accompanied by other people. There are services like "Access-i-Ride" and things, if family, neighbors, or their normal care takers aren't available.

These same people manage to get to the polls. If they can manage that, they can manage a a trip (with help if necessary) to a post office or DMV.

What do you think is the likelihood that there will be more cases of voting fraud in the absence of such a law than of disenfranchised voters as a result of its enacted?

Much higher.

 

[tytlyf]

Even libertarians use ID.

Not all of them

 

[Harmonious]

Live voter impersonation would leave a paper trail. The impersonated party would show up to vote and discover the record showing he had already voted. There was one single case of this in all the evidence you presented.

More to the point... People show up and make up names, using false identities, and then show up somewhere else with a different name. They don't necessarily take over someone else's name, which would make waves.

If someone notices a strange face out of place, and no one thinks to check otherwise, the pollsters assume it's a new person in the district, and without verification, an unscrupulous person could vote often, if they spread themselves out. There would be no papertrail, as how could anyone prove that they weren't who they said they were? They didn't use ID, so we don't really know what the statistics are.

Or are you suggesting that there is some crystal ball that can be used to check these things without ID?

When I was out of country before my 19th birthday, I signed up for an absentee ballot. When I applied for it, I needed to use my ID to prove who I was, and I needed to give them the address of where I would be when I sent it, so that if they got something in my name from a different address than the one I listed, they would know it was a case of voter fraud.

I could do it. Other people can, too.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Nope.

How do you manage such disgusting certitude? It's really shameful.

 

[Harmonious]

How do you manage such disgusting certitude? It's really shameful.

Did you actually read the rest of my post?

 

[`mud]

From what I get:
We have to get the newer I.D.'s from the registrar, or whatever that title means, so that we will be newly registered with new photo I.D.'s.
That sounds like a good idea to me, but, everyone must have these "new I.D.'s" to be able to vote in any precinct. "NEW" meaning that everyone that is registered to vote, will now have to go to the line at the registry offices, and get line for the new I.D.'s are formulated.
Everyone gets a new I.D.
~
Well we don't have that.
So we're stuck with the poor facing expenses that they can little afford.
I can hear it now:
"Oh well...I have to vote. I'll just give up coffee for a month, I'll get by."
~
About now, the "`tingist" is hooting "hoooorahhh" about the truth or maybe the falsity of this post ! You never know !
hey Revoltingest, you say you're in business, look around your business and count the source country being used by your employees, including yourself.
~
I have plenty of coffee, and do the richer amongst us, this country is steering into a landowner/slaves early 17 century politically controlled elitists and far less people to buy their products.
~
And we're both Atheists, how about that !
~
`mud

 

[Alceste]

Why are you so convinced these people will be disenfranchized?

Or are you saying that these people are so helpless, useless, and/or lazy that they CAN drag themselves to the polls, but CANNOT find their way to a post office or DMV?

Are you seriously saying that up to twelve million people are that useless and lazy that a quick trip and $14 will stop them from exercising their right to vote?

How horribly uncharitable, if not racist, of you.

They ARE disenfranchised. I say that because it's a fact. At this moment, five million Americans who are eligible to vote would not be permitted to do so if there were an election held today. You're saying that because it is theoretically possible for them to take steps to become reenfranchised, it doesn't matter that they've been disenfranchised.

But you still have provided no evidence that there is any reason to disenfranchise five million Americans, other than voter suppression.

 

[Alceste]

More to the point... People show up and make up names, using false identities, and then show up somewhere else with a different name. They don't necessarily take over someone else's name, which would make waves.

If someone notices a strange face out of place, and no one thinks to check otherwise, the pollsters assume it's a new person in the district, and without verification, an unscrupulous person could vote often, if they spread themselves out. There would be no papertrail, as how could anyone prove that they weren't who they said they were? They didn't use ID, so we don't really know what the statistics are.

Or are you suggesting that there is some crystal ball that can be used to check these things without ID?

When I was out of country before my 19th birthday, I signed up for an absentee ballot. When I applied for it, I needed to use my ID to prove who I was, and I needed to give them the address of where I would be when I sent it, so that if they got something in my name from a different address than the one I listed, they would know it was a case of voter fraud.

I could do it. Other people can, too.

So you've completely given up the search for evidence of a live voter impersonation problem and are going to exclusively rely on whatever you imagine to be theoretically possible?

You do realize that hypothetical conjecture is even shoddier than anecdotal evidence, I hope. I imagine its possible that ultra-advanced humanoid space aliens could easily forge human ID and vote in our elections. Therefore we should subject all voters to a thorough physical examination before entering the polling station to detect any signs of alien physiology. After all, anybody can get a physical. I do it all the time. No big deal, right? Everything that's possible should be mandatory.

 

[4consideration]

I just started looking into this issue. Here's where I am right now. I don't want to see anyone disenfranchised. So far, I don't really see that as a big risk of happening.

It seems there are approximately 207,643,594 eligible voters in the U.S.
How many eligible voters are registered to vote in the United States
(I know these figures could be wrong. Does anyone have better or significantly different figures?)

It also appears that of those eligible voters 150,000,000 are actually registered.

That leaves approximately 57,643,594 eligible voters in the U.S. that are not registered to vote.

It seems we are talking about 5 million eligible voters in states that currently have voter ID laws (12 million possible total if all states did.) If we are talking about voters as being possibly disenfranchised here, I don't see that it makes sense to assume that they are all coming out of the registered eligible voters catagory.

Does anyone have information (links) to show whether or not those eligible voters that do not have ID's are part of the registered voters figure, or how that breaks down?

My guess is that there would be a much greater portion of those without any ID in the not-registered catagory, but I don't see that question as having been addressed yet. Anybody have information on this point?

 

[Harmonious]

So you've completely given up the search for evidence of a live voter impersonation problem and are going to exclusively rely on whatever you imagine to be theoretically possible?

You do realize that hypothetical conjecture is even shoddier than anecdotal evidence, I hope. I imagine its possible that ultra-advanced humanoid space aliens could easily forge human ID and vote in our elections. Therefore we should subject all voters to a thorough physical examination before entering the polling station to detect any signs of alien physiology. After all, anybody can get a physical. I do it all the time. No big deal, right? Everything that's possible should be mandatory.

Actually, I've decided that it doesn't matter what I come up with. You will never be satisfied. You've made up your mind, and nothing I bring that is contrary to your view will ever be good enough.

I don't need to bang my head against a brick wall. It will serve no purpose other than to give me a headache.