Which is worse?

[Trent 0]

Quote

yes "my" writting wa's unklear!!!!!

I actually wasn't sure what you meant. I hope you weren't being douchey to me for it. I try to keep my spelling and junk pretty legible for you.

Quote

Changed the law anyway, because their real motivation was to disenfranchise poor people.

I hope that a court of law has proven that they were out to disenfranchise people. How else could you possibly believe that???

I STILL don't think that asking people to prove they're qualified and registered to vote is unreasonable.

Oh, hello again!

[CMiller 1]

I'm a moderate! Seeing no choice in your poll for me, my right to vote has just been denied. Thanks.

[billvon 2,394]

>I hope you weren't being douchey to me for it.

Your one warning.

[Erroll 49]

Quote

Hopefully you can cover your tracts better than Obama!

I believe there is a lot more to that sentence than you realise!

[NotBond 0]

[replyIf you really want to know (which somehow I doubt) go for a walk along Lower Wacker Drive in Chicago and ask some of the people sleeping on grates down there if they will show you their drivers licenses.

Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyways... - John Wayne

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

If you really want to know (which somehow I doubt) go for a walk along Lower Wacker Drive in Chicago and ask some of the people sleeping on grates down there if they will show you their drivers licenses.

And those people sleeping on the Grates are really the one you want choosing our leaders?

Seems to me that they might not be the best at making good choices.

[airdvr 197]

Quote

If you really want to know (which somehow I doubt) go for a walk along Lower Wacker Drive in Chicago and ask some of the people sleeping on grates down there if they will show you their drivers licenses.

Do you think they even want to vote? If they do then they can. Pretty simple AFAIK.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

And those people sleeping on the Grates are really the one you want choosing our leaders?

Seems to me that they might not be the best at making good choices.

Perhaps we should just let them have 3/5ths of a vote.

Not everyone can have Donald Trump rescue their mortgage for them. There are also plenty of bankers who should be sleeping on those grates but you and I are paying into their welfare program order for them to keep their homes even after they made some very bad decisions.
Regarding the larger issue, it's 2008. We can transact $billions of dollars per day, in an auditable fashion, and in the case of arbitrage these transactions occur with differentials of mere milliseconds, yet we can't seem to get our act together enough to handle an election. The only reason we have electile disfunction is because we apparently like it that way.

[DanG 1]

Quote

And those people sleeping on the Grates are really the one you want choosing our leaders?

Are they US citizens?

Then FUCKING YES!

I truly fear for the future of democracy after I read some of the stuff people here post.

Let me ask you this (semi-)rhetorical question: should homeless Vietnam vets get to vote? I mean, they sleep on grates and have PTSD, are those really the people we want choosing our leaders?

indeed.

- Dan G

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

should homeless Vietnam vets get to vote?

If they are capable of making rational decisions. Then Yes.

The whole idea that we should get every warm body to cast a ballot is pure foolishness. There have always been requirements on that must be met in order to vote. Requiring REASONABLE proof that you meet those requirements should not be a problem.

All Rights come with responsibilities.

(I wish that Military service was a requirement to Vote but it is not. I absolutely believe anyone that served this country has a right to vote.. More of a right that those of us who have not served in my opinion. That still doesn’t mean that people should not have to verify that they are who the claim to be when they show up to cast a Ballot)

[DanG 1]

Quote

If they are capable of making rational decisions. Then Yes.

And there's your problem. Who decides if an individual has that capacity?

Quote

All Rights come with responsibilities.

The right to vote is fundamental. If someone is a US citizen, that right should not be denied regardless of perceived mental capacity, financial situation, or past history. The fact that we are even debating this means that the founding principle of democracy is at risk.

Quote

More of a right that those of us who have not served in my opinion.

Cool. I did serve in the military. How many more votes than you should I get? That was sarcasm.

My point it, there is no such thing as, "more of a right." The right is absolute. Either you have it (are an 18 year old citizen) or you don't. Period.

- Dan G

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

If they are capable of making rational decisions. Then Yes.

Should the McCain Rally lady be allowed to vote?

[Thanatos340 1]

Quote

Either you have it (are an 18 year old citizen) or you don't

And you are not a Convicted Felon, And you are legally a resident of the Area where you cast your ballot and you are properly registered.

Requiring a simple ID card to prove that you are who you say you are is the easiest way to simplify all of this.

[DanG 1]

Quote

And you are not a Convicted Felon, And you are legally a resident of the Area where you cast your ballot and you are properly registered.

I think you are mixing up different issues, but I'll respond to each.

Convicted felon: many states reinstitude a felon's right to vote after they've served their time. I completely agree with this and think it should be mandatory nationwide. If someone has paid their debt to society, they should be allowed to fully re-enter society.

Residency: Agree that you should cast your vote where you reside.

Registration: You tellingly write that people need to be "properly" registered. I agree that there needs to be a roll of eligible voters, but when access to that roll is controlled by people with an agenda, you have problems. I think this is the crux of the argument. I think that "properly" registered means you filled out the form truthfully and meet the very basic requirements. It should not mean that you have access to utilities, have paid for a driver's license, have no spelling errors or typos on any legal documents, or have recently moved and the DMV database has not been updated.

ID:

Quote

Requiring a simple ID card to prove that you are who you say you are is the easiest way to simplify all of this.

Right. Your free voter registration card is a great example of a simple ID. Somehow I bet you want more.

I disagree about the requirement to provide a government issued picture ID on election day. Screening for eligibility should be done during registration and the proper roll created. Denying someone their vote because of absence of, or mistakes on, a non-voting related document is unfair.

- Dan G

[Trent 0]

Quote

Right. Your free voter registration card is a great example of a simple ID. Somehow I bet you want more.

Does it show that you are that name on the card? Can it be lost? Would YOU take that as proof of ID if someone wrote you a check?

Quote

I disagree about the requirement to provide a government issued picture ID on election day. Screening for eligibility should be done during registration and the proper roll created.

Yeah, then they should have to proove that they are the person who was registered and deemed eligible to vote when they come into the polling station. Simple.

Oh, hello again!

[DanG 1]

Quote

Does it show that you are that name on the card?

I guess not. Neither does a utility bill.

Quote

Can it be lost?

Sure. Are you implying that someone else might find it and vote in your name? I suppose that is possible. In the grand sceme of things, it would be pretty hard to influence the outcome of an election by going around looking for lost voter registration cards. It would be a lot easier just to deny those cards to certain people in the first place.

Quote

Would YOU take that as proof of ID if someone wrote you a check?

Totally and completely irrelevant. If I issued people "Dan G Check Writing Registration Cards" then yes, I would take it as ID for someone writing me a check. Since I do not, I do not.

Quote

Yeah, then they should have to proove that they are the person who was registered and deemed eligible to vote when they come into the polling station. Simple.

Why? Apparently you are concerned with widespread voter fraud from people claiming they are someone else. It just doesn't happen. The risk is too great for the reward. On the other hand, restricting access to the roll by a political party can have great reward with essentially no risk.

- Dan G

[Trent 0]

Quote

I guess not. Neither does a utility bill.

That's why a state or federal ID with photo should be required.

Quote

Sure. Are you implying that someone else might find it and vote in your name? I suppose that is possible. In the grand sceme of things, it would be pretty hard to influence the outcome of an election by going around looking for lost voter registration cards. It would be a lot easier just to deny those cards to certain people in the first place.

So if I lose it, then I lose my "simple" ID that you claimed we had in a registration card. So then I can walk into a polling station and just tell them I'm anyone registered in the district and vote? Maybe it doesn't happen much, but why not nip it in the bud?

Quote

Totally and completely irrelevant. If I issued people "Dan G Check Writing Registration Cards" then yes, I would take it as ID for someone writing me a check. Since I do not, I do not.

So you wouldn't accept a registration card as ID. Fair enough.

Quote

Why? Apparently you are concerned with widespread voter fraud from people claiming they are someone else. It just doesn't happen. The risk is too great for the reward. On the other hand, restricting access to the roll by a political party can have great reward with essentially no risk.

It is completely reasonable to require ID for voting. Saying that there isn't enough fraud to worry about it is ridiculous. If there's a crime out there of which only some small, statistically insignificant number of people are convicted... should we just have not made it a crime in the first place?

It really, REALLY doesn't take much effort to get an ID. About the same as getting yourself registered and getting to a poll.

Oh, hello again!

[DanG 1]

Quote

So if I lose it, then I lose my "simple" ID that you claimed we had in a registration card. So then I can walk into a polling station and just tell them I'm anyone registered in the district and vote?

Where did I say that? If you lose your voter registration card, you have to go get another one, just like you'd have to do if you lost your driver's license under the picture ID system. You still have to present an ID, it is just an ID directly tied to the voting system so there can be no claims that your info doesn't match up like we recently saw in Ohio. In fact, if the state wanted to put pictures on the voter registration card and could come up with a way to do it without adding bars to registration (such as fees, arbitrary photo requirements, need for mailing address, etc.) then I'd be all for it. They can't, so I'm not.

Quote

So you wouldn't accept a registration card as ID. Fair enough.

Huh? I specifically said that I would take a registration as ID if it was created for that purpose and matched a roll of eligible check writers. Much like a voter registration card.

Quote

It is completely reasonable to require ID for voting. Saying that there isn't enough fraud to worry about it is ridiculous. If there's a crime out there of which only some small, statistically insignificant number of people are convicted... should we just have not made it a crime in the first place?

It really, REALLY doesn't take much effort to get an ID. About the same as getting yourself registered and getting to a poll.

I'm not advocating legalization of voter fraud. I'm saying that making legal voters jump through more hoops is not the answer. Even without the need for a picture ID, voter fraud is illegal. No one, and I mean no one, is advocating changing that.

And it is really, REALLY easy to disenfranchise people by adding more and more unnecessary requirements to the voting system. That's what this debate is really about: is it better to make it a little easier for a couple people to vote twice, or to prevent a lot of people from voting at all. I choose the former. Apparently, you choose the later.

- Dan G

[kelpdiver 2]

40% of Californians vote by absentee. If there is going to be widespread fraud, it will be this way, not people showing up. As he writes, the risk for so little gained is irrational to be fearful of.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

And dammit -- you can't fix typos in the poll.

I'm outraged by this as well.

To answer your question: I've always argued if you want the "good", you must understand that "bad" will come with it. Thus if one views the "bad" as more important to prevent than the "good" that might/will come of something, there lies your answer.

Having said that, this is a good question for me. I would need to know what exactly you mean to answer. What flaw or potential/proposed flaw in the system (there is more than one, imo) are you referring to?

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[crwtom 0]

Quote

Quote

should homeless Vietnam vets get to vote?

If they are capable of making rational decisions. Then Yes.

The whole idea that we should get every warm body to cast a ballot is pure foolishness. There have always been requirements on that must be met in order to vote. Requiring REASONABLE proof that you meet those requirements should not be a problem.

I'd say the lack of understanding that you display here what democracy is about should disqualify you from voting ....

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

The whole idea that we should get every warm body to cast a ballot is pure foolishness. There have always been requirements on that must be met in order to vote. Requiring REASONABLE proof that you meet those requirements should not be a problem.

I'd say the lack of understanding that you display here what democracy is about should disqualify you from voting ....

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

"Voter fraud" is a fraud perpetrated by the Republican Party to prevent lower income and Un-white types from voting. If you won't "vote right", you have no right to vote. In their eyes anyway.

That's a huge load of horse shit.

Sheesh.

It's interesting that when Indiana (Red) changed it's laws to require ID at elections, despite all the GOP's best efforts they could not come up with a single instance of vote fraud due to misidentification.

Both groups do it it, but democrats screaming "voter fraud" from the rooftops, an event which happens regularly, is not "a fraud perpetrated by the Republican Party". The statement I commented on is a load of partisan tripe, and unusually offbase for that particular poster.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Elisha 1]

Quote

Quote

If they are capable of making rational decisions. Then Yes.

And there's your problem. Who decides if an individual has that capacity?

How is it a problem? Can the certifiably insane vote (i.e. the mentally ill, etc.)? I don't honestly know, but I hope not.

As to identification, at least in California, everyone adult is supposed to have at least an identification card even if they can't get a driver's license. It is a similar card - just not a driver's license. I know a couple of sane, mentally capable adults w/o driver's licenses - I'm sure they have the state ID equivalent though. I would think there would be many in San Francisco, since it is impractical to own a car.

[caress 0]

Voter fraud is a blatent disrespect to all american people- thats my view on that. Fact is-there are many who dont give a rats ass.

People who vote should be competant enough to ensure they are registered and ready-that is your civic duty if you are going to participate in democracy.

How do you entrust people to act on behalf of those who have challenges but are still competant? No one mentioned that-This thread aint crazy enough.

I am glad that we are atleast catching some of the fraud going on in this country. Do we need to invent a fool proof system? yup to preserve true democracy, it should be a big priority. Otherwise, democracy is a lie

I know that our forefathers did not have this shit to deal with when this country and the way it is run was conceived in the first place. Now there is a tear in the flesh that is America and it needs fixing-quick -fast and in a hurry. -Caress

Perhaps we should all vote on video, thumbprint given at time of vote to be cross referenced for non felon status?

I've learned.... That being kind is more important than being
right.