you have to pay $13.50 to vote in pennsylvania

canndo said:
Beenthere, where is this rampant voter fraud you keep talking about? show us, please.

Also, think for a moment, do all those fraudulent voters only vote on off hours? how exactly do you imagine that keeping polling places open for fewer hours could possible reduce voter fraud but not limit legitimate voters?

You admonished me for my stand on "common sense". Honestly beenthere, where is yours? I have presented a situation where your understanding of common sense could send you to a single conclusion, that Republicans are purposefully skewing the voting in their states. Then I posted the statement of a man who confirmed it.

Why are you refusing to accept what is obvious?

What would it take for me to convince you that republicans are subverting voters in order to unethicaly alter the presidential election?
Click to expand...

Dude, like i said I don't buy into your strawman. Voter fraud is a crime that is super hard to prosecute much less convict. Defamation and libel lawsuits are extremely hard to prove and win but that does not mean it doesn't happen on a daily basis.
 
beenthere said:
Dude, like i said I don't buy into your strawman. Voter fraud is a crime that is super hard to prosecute much less convict. Defamation and libel lawsuits are extremely hard to prove and win but that does not mean it doesn't happen on a daily basis.
Click to expand...



Where is the straw man Beenthere? You are intentionaly depriving voters of their right in order that you might prevent something that you only have some vague belief exists.

What you are saying is that all through history until this election, voter fraud has been so rampant that it has affected every election.

Now, let us look at numbers for a moment. the Brennan center for justice is a non-partisan organization and it estimates that as many as 5 MILLION people will not be able to vote because of voter ID requirements.


The studies may be flawed, it could well be twice that number but we won't go in that direction. Let us rather go in the other direction. Let us be safe and say that one fifth of that number is correct. I can't believe that you will contend that the organization is 100 percent wrong and that nobody will be deprived.

So in order for your voter ID laws to be reasonable, there will have to be 999,999 cases of voter fraud stopped.

Now you maintain that voter fraud esists but we just can't detect it or convict. Are you maintaining that we can neither convict nor detect almost a million cases of voter fraud?

In short, as I say, you are doing what I have speculated, you are ignoring fact and study and logic and clinging to naked supposition which is devoid of either logic or evidence, that there are more cases of unknown, unseen, undetectable voter fraud than there are cases of actual, predictable, obvious legitimate voters being rendered unable to vote.

All of this to justify an untenable position.
 
Grandpapy said:
If fraud is an issue they should be looking into Diebold. IMO
Click to expand...


Well Diebold is certainly suspect but if I can't convince a conservative that Republicans are screwing with the system with the facts on hand and obvious, how am I going to do that with the shady goings on at those companies.
 
Again Beenthere, what do you need to be convinced that voter ID in practice during this election is a bad idea?
 
canndo said:
Again Beenthere, what do you need to be convinced that voter ID in practice during this election is a bad idea?
Click to expand...

I think it would take an altered reality, being stripped of logical thinking, and completely ignoring common sense to agree with you or bucky. If you need an ID to use most methods of currency transfers for identification reasons, then it should be no less for voting. My vote is important to me and I think it should be protected just as much as my money.
 
canndo said:
Please don't make the same mistake as so many NRA members do, you have taken the 2nd amendment out of context.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
​
Is what it says. It is the only amendment that supposedly explains itself. It would have been far better had it been worded the way you have, but it was not and so leaves doubt as to its true meaning.

Reading as good liberals do, for the most power to the individual, I agree that your having to provide ID to anyone but the seller is in shady constitutional ground, background checks as well are questionable. A waiting period in my opinion is not, as you are not guarnteed promptness as you are for a trial. The cost? I think that would depend upon where the money goes. As far as the weapon not being shipped across state lines - that as well could be justified, especialy in light of what the 2nd amendment really say.

Now, you make a huge jump in saying that if registration fraud is rampant we should simply assume that voter fraud is as well.

It has been explained that registration fraud is not orchestrated in order to alter a particular outcome of an election. Your presumption that voter fraud is rampant is demonstrated false by a number of studies indicating that voter fraud is exceedingly rare. It is not coincidence that each incident of voter ID law has been orchestrated by Republicans, each incident of attempted curtailment of voter rights has at its root, Republicans. Specificly ALEC.


What you wind up doing Desert Dude is taking this to the theoretical, in theory, you are correct, but in practice hundreds of thousands of legitimate voters will not be able to vote and the culprits are invariably Republicans.
Click to expand...

See the Heller decision and the McDonald decision: 2A means, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". The "militia" language is irrelevant.

I grew up in Chicago in the sixties and early seventies. I have seen massive voter fraud first-hand: it was buying votes as opposed to non-citizens voting, but fraudulent never the less.


Requiring an ID to vote seems reasonable, and the courts are deciding it is legal as well. These laws are in place now, three full months before the election. Anybody who wants to vote because, "every vote counts", has plenty of time to get an ID that will allow them to do so. Failing to get an ID tells me they don't really want to vote, and that is a perfectly legitimate choice. This is a huge yawn as far as issues are concerned.

Beside, look at this as a gift: When Obama loses, the Democrats can cry "cheating Republicans" and "RACIST", and then all the lefties can go back to their smug sense of superiority.
 
canndo said:
Well Diebold is certainly suspect but if I can't convince a conservative that Republicans are screwing with the system with the facts on hand and obvious, how am I going to do that with the shady goings on at those companies.
Click to expand...

Oh so sorry,

How bout this:
In June, Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai listed off a number of legislative accomplishments. "Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: Done," Turzai said.

Wouldn't a true "American" with American values, say something, along the line of "Voter ID, which is going to allow all of us a fair election"??
 
nontheist said:
I think it would take an altered reality, being stripped of logical thinking, and completely ignoring common sense to agree with you or bucky. If you need an ID to use most methods of currency transfers for identification reasons, then it should be no less for voting. My vote is important to me and I think it should be protected just as much as my money.
Click to expand...


currency transfers are private transactions and ID requirements are as much to protect the company as amything else. Private reqirerments for ID have nothing to do with rights. If your vote is important to you, is the vote of an old lady, who has voted in every election since Kennedy not equaly important to her?
 
beardo said:
They shouldn't let everyone vote anyways, why should people on unemployment or welfare be allowed to vote? Students shouldn't be allowed to vote either and neither should women or members of the military. Public sector employees should not be allowed to vote either.
Click to expand...

so only a 'select' few get the right to vote?

so much for freedom
 
Grandpapy said:
Oh so sorry,

How bout this:
In June, Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai listed off a number of legislative accomplishments. "Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania: Done," Turzai said.

Wouldn't a true "American" with American values, say something, along the line of "Voter ID, which is going to allow all of us a fair election"??
Click to expand...


Note that I posted that very quote and also everything we know about the voting situation in PA. Namely that the state voted went to Obama last election, the state polls for Obama 46 to 42 this election and that Repubs in PA freely admit that there is no voter fraud in PA.

Beenthere claims however, that Turzai meant "we are stopping voter fraud and by so doing, allowing Romney a fair count" - how he arrives there is quite beyond me.
 
i think we should leave. it was obvious when americans needed passports to go to mexico.

ide love to see an american try and sneek into canada
 
Stop trying to convince the Fright wingers about vote fraud
They already know it doesnt exist and the only reason they support it is that it disenfranchises more democrats than republicans by a wide margin
 
canndo said:
currency transfers are private transactions and ID requirements are as much to protect the company as amything else. Private reqirerments for ID have nothing to do with rights. If your vote is important to you, is the vote of an old lady, who has voted in every election since Kennedy not equaly important to her?
Click to expand...

Sure it is and it should be protected as so. They only way we can protect everyone vote is to make sure its the person placing it, end of story.
 
Moses Mobetta said:
Have you done this? I was told either way one was required.
Click to expand...

I just checked
You now need a tourist card
Which you can get at the border
Driving in you dont need a passport to enter
But the USA wont let you back in without one
so they are charging you 27 bucks at the border now to enter no ID required but they need a credit card for the fee and the tourist card
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top