A New Voter ID Question

[TPFKA@W]

Sue wins the internet for today!

[MajGenl.Meade]

It's for sure a white man's world in America. Look here: I raised that boy since he was the size of a piss-ant. And I'll say right now, he never learned to read and write. No, sir. Had no brains at all. Was stuffed with rice pudding between th' ears. Shortchanged by the Lord, and dumb as a jackass. Look at him now! Yes, sir, all you've gotta be is white in America, to get whatever you want.

[wesw]

now I have to google chaucey gardner.....

[wesw]

chauncey

[Lord Jim]

I'm so glad you put that in two posts rather than just editing the first one wes...

[wesw]

oh my goodness! I (italics) certainly have not been one of the posters who has been the purveyor of multiple, rapid posts of late.

I was not so petty as to point out the ones who have (italics) been doing so because it really isn t a big deal....

...and meade, with support for disenfranchising the least among us, and his calling people fools (in various creative ways, which somehow allow him a clear conscience), has not only become a pseudo-liberal, but has, seemingly, thrown off the easy yoke of jesus as well...

[Econoline]

In the present case there been shown no evidence that the extent of voter fraud is more than trivial while the added difficulty is significant.

I agree with you...but--playing devil's advocate--I have to point out that other (supposedly) intelligent people have reached precisely the opposite conclusion.

As for the second part of your post, I agree completely.

[Big RR]

Actually, it was that second point that I originally wanted to post about. And it appears there is a diversity of opinion here.

[MajGenl.Meade]

oh my goodness! I (italics) certainly have not been one of the posters who has been the purveyor of multiple, rapid posts of late.

That's true, neighbor

[wesw]

it is possible to believe in making voting easy and convenient for every citizen, and to believe in voter ID laws and a fraud free vote

[Joe Guy]

So I am interested in seeing other people's views about voting. I don't want to discuss the whole ID issue again; rather, whether you believe some restrictions on voting to make sure those who do are motivated to do so is a good idea.

I would guess that most people who really want to vote are finding ways to do it. There is probably not a significant number of people who want to vote but can't, so it's very likely their lack of votes would not affect the outcome of any election.

It's easy enough to vote now. Until someone shows evidence of a serious problem, we don't need to figure out ways to make it any easier.

[Big RR]

I see your point Joe Goy, but I personally think that we all benefit when the largest number of people who can, do vote. Not only those who say they want to vote, but those who are maybe a little too easily discouraged and just don't show up because it's too bothersome. Now some will say we're better off without those votes be cast, but I don't think so.

We do know that we have a fairly low percentage of registered voters casting votes in even presidential elections; and while I do not have the data handy, I have seen data that suggests that only half to two thirds of those who are eligible to register to vote do so. Certainly there are a large number of reasons why people don't vote or don't register, but we did see the registration rolls increase noticeably when we made the procedure less complex--allowing registration at more convenient places or by mail so it's safe to assume that some are put off by the hurdles to registration (low though they might be). I would think the same is true of voting.

So I do think we have to look closely at our system to see how to encourage those who can to vote.

[wesw]

well , RR, what do you think about a national day of voting, say a federal holiday on a friday in November?

time to take mom-mom to the polls, and have lunch with her....

plenty of empty buses, since work is closed, all headed to polling places...

block parties after with fireworks and the whole shebang!

[wesw]

oh, and rubato. I was very impressed by at least half of your earlier post.......

[Big RR]

Wes--a holiday might make sense, but putting it on a Friday or Monday encourages some to take long weekends and not vote. A Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday might be better.

Or failing that, maybe later poll hours or being open for more than one day to encourage turnout.

They all deserve consideration.

[wesw]

yeah, but I envision it as a day of celebration. Friday makes more sense in that regard, as many folks are off work on Saturdays.

[Gob]

I was just kiddin'

$20,000.00 is preferable. And perhaps a spelling test and a general knowledge quiz.

And dna analysis.

[Joe Guy]

I see your point Joe Goy...

Oy vey!...

I agree that the more people who vote the better but I don't see how it is inconvenient to vote now. If a person registers one time, he or she or trans-he or trans-she or gay-he or lesbian-she or a hermaphrodite could sign up for absentee voting and never have to go to a poll again. We do it here in California and I'm assuming it can be done in other states.

It can't get much more convenient than that.

[Econoline]

Currently, the issue does not seem to be "making it easier to vote"; rather, it's some states (*ALL* Republican-controlled, and many of them southern states which had to be forced by the federal government to end voter discrimination in the 1960s) starting to make it HARDER to vote. In these cases, absent a very good reason, increasing the difficulty even a little ought to be viewed with a great deal of suspicion.

As for absentee voting... I confess I don't know if (or how much) the laws vary from state to state. You may well be right about it being that easy everywhere; I just don't know. But there's a reason it's called an "absentee vote" or an "absentee ballot". I recall when I first started voting (my first election was in 1968) in order to get an absentee ballot you had to fill out a written application and provide a valid reason for being "absent" from the polling place on election day--just like if you were absent from work or absent from school. Even if that's not still the case, I have a feeling that many (mainly older) voters still think or at least feel that in order to vote they *MUST* show up at the polling place on election day and cast their ballot in person. Many of these people take great pride in having done Their Civic Duty by showing up to vote in election after election for umpty-umpteen elections in a row. Shouldn't there have to be a really really good reason before making the process of voting even a little bit more inconvenient for them by requiring a new ID which they don't have?

[BoSoxGal]

Meade, since it appears you ARE really advocating property ownership as a requirement for voting I have to say FUCK YOU! especially since I know you hate 'foul' language. Since you're a Brit, I'm even going to call you CUNT for added effect.

One of the greatest tragedies of our current economic climate and student loan debt crisis is that many of the best educated folks in this country can't afford to buy a home, being already enslaved to a 'mortgage' tied to their higher education. As an example, I didn't purchase property until just 2 years ago, but I've been a highly informed voter since my first eligible (age-wise) general election in 1992.

If you were in this same room with me making that disgusting anti American argument, I'd punch you in the face AND kick you in the nuts, and happily take the legal consequences for doing so - because voting is my FUCKING BIRTHRIGHT, MY ANCESTORS KICKED YOUR ANCESTORS' ASSES OUT OF THIS COUNTRY SO I COULD HAVE THAT FUCKING BIRTHRIGHT, THEY SPILLED THEIR BLOOD FOR ME TO HAVE THAT FREEDOM - WHICH SHOULD BE FUCKING RESPECTED BY SOMEONE WHO IS A JOHNNY COME LATELY CUNT.

YOU MISS YOUR STINKING LANDED GENTRY CLASS SYSTEM SO MUCH? Go FUCKING HOME!!

PS, I'm burning your book at my next opportunity. AZZHOLE!! FUCKING WANKER!!