If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   The UN Human Rights Council has finally moved into action, and decided to tackle the worst ongoing human rights violation they could possibly find: US voter I.D. laws   (foxnews.com) divider line 486
    More: Asinine, Human Rights Council, rapes, United Nations Human Rights, United States, American Election, Spakovsky, minority rights, electoral system  
•       •       •

1337 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Mar 2012 at 8:19 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



486 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-15 08:26:44 AM
They are indeed anti-democracy.
 
2012-03-15 08:28:42 AM
Good.
 
2012-03-15 08:28:44 AM
The GOP are pushing Voter ID laws to suppress the vote of students and the poor.

Must be weird to have Saudi Arabia (who don't even allow women to vote) try to tell your system is farked up.

/Not one to talk since our last election had some significant improprieties.
//Stupid robocalls.
 
2012-03-15 08:29:21 AM
Although I am not completely opposed to requiring some form of identification to vote. The way these are things generally implemented is in fact nothing but a way to make it harder for minorities to vote. But that is exactly what subby, fox news and Republicans want. Because the only way they are going to win an election in 20 years is straight up cheating.
 
2012-03-15 08:29:49 AM
avoid the comments section for that article

what has been herped cannot be underped
 
2012-03-15 08:32:03 AM
America. Once again making a lie of the oath of allegiance and all the propaganda about equality and democracy.
 
2012-03-15 08:32:53 AM

crab66: The way these are things generally implemented


these things are*

Derp.
 
2012-03-15 08:33:54 AM
That's good. The people who are pushing for voter ID laws in the U.S. are renowned for their respect and deference to the UN. They will certainly view this investigation as legitimate.
 
2012-03-15 08:34:24 AM

crab66: Although I am not completely opposed to requiring some form of identification to vote. The way these are things generally implemented is in fact nothing but a way to make it harder for minorities to vote. But that is exactly what subby, fox news and Republicans want. Because the only way they are going to win an election in 20 years is straight up cheating.


Yep, the goal of these laws is clearly to keep as many of the wrong people from voting as possible. Here in Oregon we do all voting by mail. You register once and that's it. They send you your ballot in the mail and you sign it. No ID required. Washington now does all their voting by mail as well. If we can do it here in the Pacific NW I don't see why they can't do it everywhere else. Actually, I do see why. If you require people to have to take time off work and brave miserable weather and require certain types of photo ID then it makes it easier to keep those wrong people from voting.
 
2012-03-15 08:34:38 AM
Well, the idea is to suppress basic rights with the voter laws, so I don't see how the council is in the wrong here.
 
2012-03-15 08:36:31 AM
Does anyone else think this whole thing is stupid? I'm not trying to troll, but can anyone actually provide statistics that show that either people who should be voting are not being allowed to vote because they don't have identification or that people who AREN'T supposed to be voting that ARE because of no ID requirements. I'd like support from either side, if possible. To me, requiring a photo ID just seems like a common sense solution to verifying that the person voting is who they say they are and that they aren't precluded from voting due to felony or other reasons.

As far as the two people that the NAACP brought with them to discuss their fears about being able to vote, the first example, a woman who was granted clemency (but not a pardon) may not have had her right to vote restored and the second, who was out of state attending school, shouldn't get to vote in the local election because he's not a local citizen. However, he can fill out an absentee ballot and send that in.
 
2012-03-15 08:41:59 AM

SniperJoe: Does anyone else think this whole thing is stupid? I'm not trying to troll, but can anyone actually provide statistics that show that either people who should be voting are not being allowed to vote because they don't have identification or that people who AREN'T supposed to be voting that ARE because of no ID requirements. I'd like support from either side, if possible. To me, requiring a photo ID just seems like a common sense solution to verifying that the person voting is who they say they are and that they aren't precluded from voting due to felony or other reasons.

As far as the two people that the NAACP brought with them to discuss their fears about being able to vote, the first example, a woman who was granted clemency (but not a pardon) may not have had her right to vote restored and the second, who was out of state attending school, shouldn't get to vote in the local election because he's not a local citizen. However, he can fill out an absentee ballot and send that in.


There was a report on MSNBC that these laws effectively prevent a couple hundred thousand of legitimate voters from voting in order to prevent the very rare case of people voting that shouldn't. These laws are trying to solve a problem that is nowhere near as bad as the proponents make it out to be.
 
2012-03-15 08:43:10 AM

Pincy: If you require people to have to take time off work and brave miserable weather and require certain types of photo ID then it makes it easier to keep those wrong people from voting.


Wrong people? Like people who would stand in line for four hours to get some free pancakes put don't care enough to get up 20 minutes early to vote.
 
2012-03-15 08:44:45 AM
Stopping by the local school or library, show an ID, and vote takes about three minutes.

Implying that's too much effort--less effort than taking a healthy dump--is completely giving up on the concept that voting is important. People who value their vote so little they complain about accuracy really shouldn't be voting in the first place.

Voter ID laws are great ideas. Even if I wanted to accept they are for voter suppression, it's not to keep minorities out. I would say it's more accurate to say the laws would restrict the voting of people who are such complete losers in life they don't have any ID, or can't be bothered to get one.

/This include super-old people. My grandparents, if they were alive, would be pushing 100 and always had identification. All the arguments against voter ID laws are enabling laziness and poor life skills.
 
2012-03-15 08:45:17 AM

SniperJoe: can anyone actually provide statistics that show that either people who should be voting are not being allowed to vote because they don't have identification


"In this study, we assess whether all eligible voters have equal access to valid photo identification, or if some segments of the population are being uniquely harmed by Indiana voter ID laws. . . . Examining a variety of demographic variables, we find consistent and statistically significant evidence that Whites, college educated, upper income, and middle-age voters in Indiana are more likely to have valid ID. Because we present data for actual registered voters, the findings go far to suggest that voter identification laws in Indiana do disenfranchise many citizens who are entitled to full voting rights.

"[Later, in the conclusion:] Not only does the Indiana law disproportionately impact the communities most vulnerable to changes in the electoral process, there is also a clear partisan bias associated with these laws as well. Our data suggests that a greater number of Democrats than Republicans or Independents are excluded from voting under Indiana's voter identification laws." - "The Disproportionate Impact on Indiana Voter ID Requirements On the Electorate" (new window)

Yes, voter ID laws are usually passed to disenfranchise people.
 
2012-03-15 08:47:11 AM
You want to help decide who is in charge but cannot be bothered to obtain a state ID? I don't think so. Last I heard "people with no state ID " is not a protected class. I've known plenty of dirt poor people who had an ID.
 
2012-03-15 08:47:16 AM

quoinguy: Stopping by the local school or library, show an ID, and vote takes about three minutes.

Implying that's too much effort--less effort than taking a healthy dump--is completely giving up on the concept that voting is important. People who value their vote so little they complain about accuracy really shouldn't be voting in the first place.

Voter ID laws are great ideas. Even if I wanted to accept they are for voter suppression, it's not to keep minorities out. I would say it's more accurate to say the laws would restrict the voting of people who are such complete losers in life they don't have any ID, or can't be bothered to get one.

/This include super-old people. My grandparents, if they were alive, would be pushing 100 and always had identification. All the arguments against voter ID laws are enabling laziness and poor life skills.


Complete losers in life like University students?
 
2012-03-15 08:48:37 AM
Low-hanging fruit.
 
2012-03-15 08:49:33 AM

SniperJoe: Does anyone else think this whole thing is stupid? I'm not trying to troll, but can anyone actually provide statistics that show that either people who should be voting are not being allowed to vote because they don't have identification or that people who AREN'T supposed to be voting that ARE because of no ID requirements. I'd like support from either side, if possible. To me, requiring a photo ID just seems like a common sense solution to verifying that the person voting is who they say they are and that they aren't precluded from voting due to felony or other reasons.


Here's why: because when these laws come up from conservatives, there is almost always a cost associated with obtaining the ID. It costs money to obtain the ID itself, and even if it doesn't, it can cost money to get the forms required to prove your identity, travel expenses, lost wages, etc. It can be argued that is disenfranchisement of the poor.

Even if cost is not an issue (or you disagree that cost is an issue), there is the additional problem of what IDs can be accepted. There was a case where the voting law would allow a voter to prove their identity with a gun license, but not a public university ID. Both are issued by the state government and considered valid forms of identification, but since gun license holders tend to vote Republican and public university ID holders tend to vote Democratic, the bias is pretty obvious.
 
2012-03-15 08:51:12 AM

DrewCurtisJr: Pincy: If you require people to have to take time off work and brave miserable weather and require certain types of photo ID then it makes it easier to keep those wrong people from voting.

Wrong people? Like people who would stand in line for four hours to get some free pancakes put don't care enough to get up 20 minutes early to vote.


So those people I see on TV waiting hours to vote are a figment of my imagination?
 
2012-03-15 08:51:13 AM

quoinguy: Stopping by the local school or library, show an ID, and vote takes about three minutes.


And it is specifically illegal in I think 9 states due to Section 5 of the VRA. Why that logically means it isn't illegal in every other state, since the VRA has been upheld as legal, I don't know. But to pretend that these aren't used to restrict "undesirables" from voting it utter stupidity since that is specifically why it was banned in those 9 states, which were doing exactly that.
 
2012-03-15 08:51:25 AM
Republicans: The government can't do anything right! Look at how much burden it is to get anything from the DMV!

Poor voters: I don't have the time and transportation to get to the DMV and jump through all the hoops for a new recognized voter ID. It's an undue burden.

Republicans: The DMV is a symbol of American ingenuity! Anyone that claims it's a burden to go get an ID is bullshiating!
 
2012-03-15 08:51:31 AM
If you don't see a problem with the new voter restrictions, you are part of the problem.
 
2012-03-15 08:52:32 AM

quoinguy: Stopping by the local school or library, show an ID, and vote takes about three minutes.


Again, I'll ask, those people I see on TV waiting hours in crappy weather to vote are just a figment of my imagination?
 
2012-03-15 08:54:38 AM

SniperJoe: Does anyone else think this whole thing is stupid? I'm not trying to troll, but can anyone actually provide statistics that show that either people who should be voting are not being allowed to vote because they don't have identification or that people who AREN'T supposed to be voting that ARE because of no ID requirements. I'd like support from either side, if possible. To me, requiring a photo ID just seems like a common sense solution to verifying that the person voting is who they say they are and that they aren't precluded from voting due to felony or other reasons.

As far as the two people that the NAACP brought with them to discuss their fears about being able to vote, the first example, a woman who was granted clemency (but not a pardon) may not have had her right to vote restored and the second, who was out of state attending school, shouldn't get to vote in the local election because he's not a local citizen. However, he can fill out an absentee ballot and send that in.


There was a study that pointed out the percentages of people without drivers licenses in various demographics. I cannot find it right now, unfortunately.


And the big example everyone is thinking about is Wisconsin's voter ID law -- which closed DMVs in neighborhood where people generally vote for Democrats, reduced hours in some other DMVs, prohibited the use of student IDs for voting, required a photo ID with name and current address (but expressly prohibiting using photo ID without current address in conjunction with a utility bill, rental agreement, mortgage or other proof of address which would be accepted when applying for a drivers license) and allows people who cannot afford to pay the $28 fee for a non-driving photo ID to get it for free if they intend to use it for voting (but specifically prohibits DMV employees from telling applicants about this unless they ask for it). All in the name of "preventing voter fraud."
 
2012-03-15 08:55:37 AM
How the fark are those people functioning otherwise? How are they taking part in society at all without ID? November 2 is not a secret. If your ass cannot make it to the DMV ONCE in the 2 year election cycle then you are not trying.
 
2012-03-15 08:55:46 AM
I don't know why people get so upset about this. This is just the typical BS partisan battle we see all the time. Both parties have their ways of unfairly winning elections. The GOP, for instance, owns the voting machine industry, and Democrats and liberals constantly attack the use of voting machines in elections.

This voter ID law strategy is just the GOP's way to fight back against the way Democrats win elections, which is to convince poor people and minorities to vote for them.

Both sides do it. Vote Republican. (As long as you have your proper papers, bitte)
 
2012-03-15 08:58:19 AM

socodog: How the fark are those people functioning otherwise? How are they taking part in society at all without ID?


I rarely need my ID for anything.
 
2012-03-15 08:58:39 AM

SniperJoe: To me, requiring a photo ID just seems like a common sense solution


Solution to what? Show me the voter impersonation.

quoinguy: Stopping by the local school or library, show an ID, and vote takes about three minutes


It takes significantly longer than that where I live, and the same GOP that's pushing these laws are reducing the number of polling places and the hours they're open in "blah" neighborhoods.

quoinguy: Voter ID laws are great ideas. Even if I wanted to accept they are for voter suppression, it's not to keep minorities out. I would say it's more accurate to say the laws would restrict the voting of people who are such complete losers in life they don't have any ID, or can't be bothered to get one.


socodog: You want to help decide who is in charge but cannot be bothered to obtain a state ID? I don't think so. Last I heard "people with no state ID " is not a protected class. I've known plenty of dirt poor people who had an ID.


People in cities tend not to have cars and therefore no diver's license. They also tend to be "blah" and vote Democratic.

If you think any of those reason are good enough to strip them of their right to vote, there's really no point in discussing this with you.
 
2012-03-15 08:59:05 AM

quoinguy: Stopping by the local school or library, show an ID, and vote takes about three minutes.


Getting to the DMV by bus on the alternate Thursday when it's open.... fark it, you already know where I'm going with this.
 
2012-03-15 08:59:15 AM
No worries. President Santorum will get us out of the UUN.
 
2012-03-15 09:01:53 AM

Pincy: Here in Oregon we do all voting by mail. You register once and that's it. They send you your ballot in the mail and you sign it. No ID required. Washington now does all their voting by mail as well. If we can do it here in the Pacific NW I don't see why they can't do it everywhere else.


I think it is extremely easy to see the failures of mail-in voting.
 
2012-03-15 09:02:12 AM

socodog: How the fark are those people functioning otherwise? How are they taking part in society at all without ID? November 2 is not a secret. If your ass cannot make it to the DMV ONCE in the 2 year election cycle then you are not trying.


Like I said, they're reducing the DMV hours. Some people cannot afford to go to the DMV (lost wages from taking a day off of work to go there and spend damn near all day there, travel costs to actually get there [gas, bus fare, etc], paperwork fees, stuff like that)

Even if the DMV waives the fees, they cannot waive travel costs or reimburse lost wages.
 
2012-03-15 09:03:59 AM
Funny how the same people who support this are also rabidly against government registration and tracking of firearms owners
 
2012-03-15 09:04:10 AM
From Another Article: The tactics used by Fitzgerald to challenge recall petitions resemble a scheme planned for the 2010 elections by the Wisconsin GOP and Tea Party groups, including the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity. Some of those same Tea Party groups are also involved in the current recall "verification" effort.

Recordings released by One Wisconsin Now in September 2010 documented a plot by the GOP and Tea Party groups to engage in the practice known as "voter caging," which would allegedly suppress votes from traditionally Democratic populations. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, "voter caging" involves sending mail to a list of voters (usually from Democratic constituencies like students and minorities), compiling a list of the mail that is returned as undeliverable, then using that list to challenge those voters at the polls or to request that their names be purged from registered voter lists. The Brennan Center says voter caging is "notoriously unreliable" and "can lead to the unwarranted purge or challenge of eligible voters," intimidating some voters and leading to long lines that can deter others from casting a ballot.


Link (new window)

Republicans have committed so much voter suppression and actual fraud no wonder they accuse others of it all the time.
 
2012-03-15 09:04:51 AM
I remember back in the day when the UN was involved in the affairs of "other countries," the kind where you'd see on the news and think to yourself, "Man, that is messed up, I'm glad we don't have those kinds of problems warranting the need for international involvement because of a corrupt govermental system...". And yet, in 2012, here we are...

/The USA does indeed seem to be circling the drain, doesn't it? Here's hoping we are just setting the stage for a grand re-enlightenment...
 
2012-03-15 09:09:04 AM
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-03-15 09:09:39 AM

quatchi: The GOP are pushing Voter ID laws to suppress the vote of students and the poor.


And the elderly. Apparently, 18% of people over 65 don't have a photo ID.

/That asshole Tom Corbett just signed one of these laws for my state
// I will be actively protesting
///Trying to decide what I will do if asked for ID at the polls
 
2012-03-15 09:09:48 AM
apoptotic


What college does not provide a student ID?
 
2012-03-15 09:10:02 AM

Pincy: So those people I see on TV waiting hours to vote are a figment of my imagination?


There were some problems in a few areas, mostly with early voting, but the average time to vote was less than 20 minutes on election day.
 
2012-03-15 09:10:55 AM

moanerific: apoptotic


What college does not provide a student ID?


You mean the kind of student ID which voter ID laws say don't count as valid ID for voting purposes?
 
2012-03-15 09:11:07 AM

moanerific: What college does not provide a student ID?


A student ID is only valid identification at the school you attend.
 
2012-03-15 09:11:20 AM

moanerific: apoptotic


What college does not provide a student ID?


Republicans have specifically excluded college ID's in Texas, SC, NC, and just about every other red-state, Michigan and Wisconsin from being allowed as valid ID. However, gun permits are apparently fine.
 
2012-03-15 09:12:23 AM

King Something: moanerific: apoptotic


What college does not provide a student ID?

You mean the kind of student ID which voter ID laws say don't count as valid ID for voting purposes?


Exactly.
 
2012-03-15 09:12:44 AM

moanerific: apoptotic


What college does not provide a student ID?


Student IDs don't count as valid ID under these laws because students tend to be liberal.
 
2012-03-15 09:17:02 AM
It's quite simple, to the Republican mind it really IS preventing voter fraud.

They have conflated party loyalty and patriotism and faith to the degree that they can't imagine people voting Democrat and doing so without being socialist, communist, fascist, Islamic, atheist or anarchist. . .all things they regard as treason. So, to prevent fraudulent (democrat) votes, they have to prevent democrats from voting.
 
2012-03-15 09:17:33 AM

DrewCurtisJr: Pincy: So those people I see on TV waiting hours to vote are a figment of my imagination?

There were some problems in a few areas, mostly with early voting, but the average time to vote was less than 20 minutes on election day.


Go vote by mail and you'll never have these problems again and your average time will be way less than 20 minutes.
 
2012-03-15 09:17:41 AM

dababler: moanerific: apoptotic


What college does not provide a student ID?

Republicans have specifically excluded college ID's in Texas, SC, NC, and just about every other red-state, Michigan and Wisconsin from being allowed as valid ID. However, gun permits are apparently fine.


Wisconsin's law technically doesn't prohibit Student IDs.

They're not specifically excluded, but public colleges' IDs don't meet the requirements (photo, name, current address and signature) and it would be way too expensive for them to change their IDs to meet the requirements. They don't count as valid voting IDs, but it's not because of a line in the law that says "college IDs don't count."

The WI GOP probably had this in mind when they were writing this law.
 
2012-03-15 09:20:02 AM

Martian_Astronomer: That's good.


The frogurt contains sodium benzoate.

....That's bad.

/Sorry
 
2012-03-15 09:22:41 AM

King Something: The WI GOP probably had this in mind when they were writing this law.


Ya think?
 
Displayed 50 of 486 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report