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.

(Sun Sentinel)   That voter purge in Florida? It has already caught a grand total of TWO men who weren't citizens but voted anyway. See, it's clearly a justified decision   (sun-sentinel.com) divider line 205
    More: Followup, voter file, purge, Miami Herald, Rick Scott, voter purge  
•       •       •

4676 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Jun 2012 at 12:48 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-06-04 10:25:08 AM
Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.
 
2012-06-04 10:47:33 AM

Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.


Are you a citizen?
(areyouawizard.jpg)
 
2012-06-04 10:58:29 AM
With so many economic and social issues to deal with, it makes you wonder why the Republicans focus on "voter fraud."

Sh*t. They even did this sh*t in my state and I live in the truest of blue states in the union. I'm a disabled veteran. I'm a property owner/landlord and I donate to local charities. I do my part, and I don't cause any grief with the police, except that I drive very fast on the highway. Why the hell do I have to affirm my citizenship to the state and the country when I go get my license renewed and register as non-affiliated? I only had to change over from Democrat because I forgot to after the last election. (You need to be a member of the party in this state to vote in a primary.)

I only bring up my attributes because i don't think anyone should have to prove this bullsh*t. You're here, you're queer, I don't care! You can vote, you can pay whatever taxes you do pay. This smacks of Heinlein and I do not like it one bit. Hell, even service doesn't guarantee citizenship. What they did to that WWII vet? Disgusting.

We're talking about an infinitesimal percentage of votes in the grand scheme of things. A percentage that would likely be negated if we spent a few billion on a standardized voting system with a paper trail to count all votes. Awwww... One less stealth dreamship for the Navy. I think our Republic is worth that trade-off and investment.

Stop asking me if I'm a citizen in 5 different ways and just count the f*cking votes accurately. Try that. If that fails, I'll submit to your biometric ID at the polling station. Hopefully, they accept ejaculate as a verifier.
 
2012-06-04 11:02:23 AM

Wangiss: Are you a citizen?


Citizen, and uninterrupted registered voter since I turned 18.

NewportBarGuy: Stop asking me if I'm a citizen in 5 different ways and just count the f*cking votes accurately. Try that. If that fails, I'll submit to your biometric ID at the polling station. Hopefully, they accept ejaculate as a verifier.


Have you seen those poll workers? At least the old ladies will get a thrill!
 
2012-06-04 11:23:10 AM

Diogenes: Have you seen those poll workers? At least the old ladies will get a thrill!


Oh my god! Why did you have to give me a visual? Clearly, I have not thought this through. I swear I have more real teeth than everyone at my polling place. I imagine that is what going to Wednesday Bingo is like. I just cast my vote, place it into the ancient machine probably built by Edison himself and run away as fast as possible.

So unclean!
 
2012-06-04 11:52:38 AM
I think there should be an official mechanism at the FEC level to clean state voter rolls every 5 to 10 years, like a census. But it shouldn't be done at the local level because that invites far too much corruption for a sleaze merchant like Rick Scott. Clearly people move around a lot and other factors make it necessary to remove people ineligible to vote. The problem is how to handle this in as little a partisan way as possible.
 
2012-06-04 11:56:41 AM

NewportBarGuy: They even did this sh*t in my state and I live in the truest of blue states in the union.


I don't bother voting Federal anymore. It doesn't matter. Whoever the Democrat on the ballot is, Rhode Island's electoral votes go that way.

Maybe if the electoral college goes away and we go pure majority vote.
 
2012-06-04 12:07:05 PM

Diogenes:
Have you seen those poll workers? At least the old ladies will get a thrill!


What about pole workers, can we see pole workers instead?
 
2012-06-04 12:18:02 PM

Somacandra: I think there should be an official mechanism at the FEC level to clean state voter rolls every 5 to 10 years, like a census. But it shouldn't be done at the local level because that invites far too much corruption for a sleaze merchant like Rick Scott. Clearly people move around a lot and other factors make it necessary to remove people ineligible to vote. The problem is how to handle this in as little a partisan way as possible.


What needs to happen is the same thing that needs to happen with education. Totally strip the local authorities of any control whatsoever. Have a national voter ID. There would have to be an initial, and quite massive, effort to register people, and they could probably do it in any number of ways, but having a single database would work in a ton of ways, not the LEAST of which would be ensuring a one person, one vote scenario. You could update your address at the polling place if need be, or hell, as far as that goes you could vote ANYwhere in a Federal election. On vacation, no problem.

Yes, it'd come with some issues, and would need to be biometric-secured. But if you did it right you could remove most local suppression efforts.
 
2012-06-04 12:21:41 PM

dahmers love zombie: Somacandra: I think there should be an official mechanism at the FEC level to clean state voter rolls every 5 to 10 years, like a census. But it shouldn't be done at the local level because that invites far too much corruption for a sleaze merchant like Rick Scott. Clearly people move around a lot and other factors make it necessary to remove people ineligible to vote. The problem is how to handle this in as little a partisan way as possible.

What needs to happen is the same thing that needs to happen with education. Totally strip the local authorities of any control whatsoever. Have a national voter ID. There would have to be an initial, and quite massive, effort to register people, and they could probably do it in any number of ways, but having a single database would work in a ton of ways, not the LEAST of which would be ensuring a one person, one vote scenario. You could update your address at the polling place if need be, or hell, as far as that goes you could vote ANYwhere in a Federal election. On vacation, no problem.

Yes, it'd come with some issues, and would need to be biometric-secured. But if you did it right you could remove most local suppression efforts.


How convenient! I bet you could use that record for all kinds of stuff!
 
2012-06-04 12:54:13 PM

Wangiss: I bet you could use that record for all kinds of stuff!


how would those records be any better for shenanigans than the records that any other govt agency has?
 
2012-06-04 12:56:17 PM
Every vote counts, unless there's two that are voting illegally, then it's a ridiculous waste of time to have their illegitimate votes scrubbed from the record.
 
2012-06-04 12:57:06 PM

dahmers love zombie: the same thing that needs to happen with education. Totally strip the local authorities of any control whatsoever.


ah, the French model.

/and my that I mean "the way the French do education," not "a stick-thin French woman"
 
2012-06-04 12:59:15 PM
So the Republicans are doing this so that minorities (Democrats) can't vote, but they only kicked two off the roles?

So the Republicans are trying to swing the vote their way by removing two ballots?

And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?

Not sure how this is a big enough deal for either side to be OUTRAGED!11!!!!1!
 
2012-06-04 01:00:45 PM
I get it. Any effort to keep out dead people, non-citizens and multiple voters is a waste of time. If these didn't benefit the Dems you'd be crapping yourself in rage over it.
 
2012-06-04 01:02:27 PM

NewportBarGuy: Diogenes: Have you seen those poll workers? At least the old ladies will get a thrill!

Oh my god! Why did you have to give me a visual? Clearly, I have not thought this through. I swear I have more real teeth than everyone at my polling place. I imagine that is what going to Wednesday Bingo is like. I just cast my vote, place it into the ancient machine probably built by Edison himself and run away as fast as possible.

So unclean!


1 real tooth is not exactly a high bar when you consider the voting populace. Having more *teeth* than everyone at your polling place I think what you meant? same answer though.
 
2012-06-04 01:03:50 PM

NewportBarGuy: With so many economic and social issues to deal with, it makes you wonder why the Republicans focus on "voter fraud."


Because under the guise of "voter fraud," they can suppress the vote from groups that tend to vote (D) and win more elections. This is about winning elections for one side, not about fairness in elections.

NewportBarGuy: They even did this sh*t in my state and I live in the truest of blue states in the union.


Speaking of unions, under the guise of "balancing budgets" they destroyed unions. If you look at the top 10 outside donors to politicians, 7 are Republican. The 3 left that are Democrat? Unions. You have 7 groups funded by corporations that are not just allowed to continue but indeed protected by Citizens United that vote (R). It is critical corporations have a right to free speech in this country. But when workers gather together to counter the voice of corporations, they are attacked and destroyed.

Again, it's about winning elections.

NewportBarGuy: We're talking about an infinitesimal percentage of votes in the grand scheme of things.


That's irrelevant, Republicans are going to pretend it is anyways to justify their continued attacks.
 
2012-06-04 01:04:11 PM
Strange. I live in Europe. There is no voter registration. Government already knows who its citizens are and where they live. I am sure that would raise privacy concerns in the US.
 
2012-06-04 01:04:55 PM

IAmRight: Every vote counts, unless there's two that are voting illegally, then it's a ridiculous waste of time to have their illegitimate votes scrubbed from the record.


Did they vote, or did they vote and the vote was counted? Those are different scenarios requiring different amounts of concern.
 
2012-06-04 01:05:17 PM
Wouldn't it be cheaper just to offer every non citizen $50 to not vote?

No way anyone could have a problem with that.
 
2012-06-04 01:05:39 PM
I also think that the "proof" mechanism is being overdone. BUT, telling us that Florida has caught a grand total of two miscreants, tells us nothing. You would have to be pretty dumb to show up to fraudulently vote without the proper ID in a state where it is required.
 
2012-06-04 01:05:43 PM
Guy on TV this morning finished listing his "evidence" and his opponent pointed out he had basically proven voter fraud was not a problem.
 
2012-06-04 01:05:47 PM

Silly Jesus: And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?


I would assume the D outrage is more related to the cost of the initiative in relation to its results.
 
2012-06-04 01:06:05 PM

filter: Strange. I live in Europe. There is no voter registration. Government already knows who its citizens are and where they live. I am sure that would raise privacy concerns in the US.


No, the government already knows. We just like to pretend they don't and so do they.
 
2012-06-04 01:07:56 PM

Silly Jesus: So the Republicans are doing this so that minorities (Democrats) can't vote, but they only kicked two off the roles?

So the Republicans are trying to swing the vote their way by removing two ballots?

And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?

Not sure how this is a big enough deal for either side to be OUTRAGED!11!!!!1!


Well they tried to kick 50,000 people off the rolls, but only two have been confirmed ineligible.
 
2012-06-04 01:10:13 PM

Silly Jesus: And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?


Actually the Democrats are outraged that thousands of valid voters were removed from the rolls in order to purge the TWO invalid voters. At this rate they won't have any registered voters in Florida once they get done purging invalid voters.

Except, of course, the actual goal isn't to purge invalid voters. The goal is to purge valid voters. So they'll stop long before that. Like right around the time the only districts left to purge are those that have previously gone Republican in prior election cycles.
 
2012-06-04 01:11:26 PM

I_Am_Weasel: Diogenes:
Have you seen those poll workers? At least the old ladies will get a thrill!

What about pole workers, can we see pole workers instead?


All those wrinkled flaps clinging to the poles......

*weirdest boner*
 
2012-06-04 01:11:29 PM
What part of illegal don't you understand, subby?
 
2012-06-04 01:12:01 PM

Silly Jesus: Not sure how this is a big enough deal for either side to be OUTRAGED!11!!!!1!


Because you have no idea how the purge works. Here's how it works:

1) Florida suspects you are a non-citizen based on whatever they feel like. This might total around 180,000 people.
2) Florida removes their eligibility to vote and issues them a notice they are not eligible to vote.
3) Should that person choose, they can take the extra step to wander in to vote. Presumably most will, some will find it annoying just to cast a vote and will not vote.

Silly Jesus: And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?


No. So far we've spent lots of time effort and money to bust two people. The suspected non-citizens who have to prove themselves also are in specifically targeted groups that tend to vote (D). The outrage is Florida is going through the voters and if chances are they vote (D) they are called a non-citizen and told to prove otherwise. Taxpayers are paying for Florida to suppress the (D) vote and in return, busted two people.

You're welcome for explaining it to you. Next time you might search out the info yourself before drawing conclusions.
 
2012-06-04 01:12:55 PM
Farkers are okay with voter fraud because Democrats get the votes. News at 11:00.
 
2012-06-04 01:14:27 PM
FTA: "They were among 13 registered voters who acknowledged they weren't U.S. citizens, Miami-Dade's election supervisor says."

Also, that's in just one county.

Let FL do its thing so we can see if there is or isn't a significant problem
 
2012-06-04 01:15:14 PM

Thunderpipes: Farkers are okay with voter fraud because Democrats get the votes. News at 11:00.


And you're OK with all manner of imaginary "threats" because it keeps Republicans in office and the populace fearful and complacent.
 
2012-06-04 01:16:03 PM

evilmrsock: I would assume the D outrage is more related to the cost of the initiative in relation to its results.


I'm not a Democrat, but this is half of my problem with it, yeah (the other half is that this whole molehill-to-mountain of "Voter ID fraud" is a half-assed dog whistle designed to get the racists fired up before the election, and that it's working). What a complete and total waste of money.
 
2012-06-04 01:16:36 PM
How much would our taxes have to go up to keep all Floridians from voting? If the price is right, it might not be that bad of an idea.

/don't even
//you have your own tag for a reason
 
2012-06-04 01:18:43 PM

Diogenes: Thunderpipes: Farkers are okay with voter fraud because Democrats get the votes. News at 11:00.

And you're OK with all manner of imaginary "threats" because it keeps Republicans in office and the populace fearful and complacent.


Well to be fair, Democrats hate America and want to destroy the American family.
 
2012-06-04 01:20:31 PM
There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Subby is a moron who shouldn't be allowed to vote. http://www.theledger.com/article/20120518/POLITICS/120519309
 
2012-06-04 01:23:01 PM
Of course my question is, how did farkers, including me, miss Louisiana GOP convention members having police arrest and drag away Louisiana GOP convention Ron Paul supporter members

Link
 
2012-06-04 01:24:41 PM
But the GOP is just showing how Small Government and Fiscally Conservative they are with this!
 
2012-06-04 01:29:36 PM

domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.


Imagine that - a regular review of the rolls finds people who died, or moved away but failed to re-register in a new state or county.

It's so discourteous of dead people to not notify the elections board about their updated status.
 
2012-06-04 01:29:39 PM

domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Subby is a moron who shouldn't be allowed to vote. http://www.theledger.com/article/20120518/POLITICS/120519309


But state officials also have said there may be as many as 182,000 registered voters who are not eligible to vote.


Subby's statement: accurate.
Your statement: inaccurate.

But, yea, Subby is the moron here.
 
2012-06-04 01:29:58 PM

BarkingUnicorn: FTA: "They were among 13 registered voters who acknowledged they weren't U.S. citizens, Miami-Dade's election supervisor says."

Also, that's in just one county.

Let FL do its thing so we can see if there is or isn't a significant problem


Sure, they can do it... after the election, so as to not accidentally purge valid voters. Clearly, time is not of the essence:
They were among 13 registered voters who acknowledged they weren't U.S. citizens, Miami-Dade's election supervisor says. Since elections records show each voted - Cue once in 1996 and Walters seven times since 2000 - the office forwarded the men's names to the Miami-Dade state attorney's office.

Plus, it's not really confirmed that they actually voted:
Cue, 53 and from Miami, told The Herald he's a schizophrenic, doesn't remember voting and said three others have his same name and birth date.

"I've never voted a day in my life," Cue said. "I've lived in this house for 14 years and I have never filled out any paperwork regarding voting."
 
2012-06-04 01:32:22 PM
I'm okay with the sentiment, not with the conflict of interests and poor implementation.
 
2012-06-04 01:34:48 PM
This is a huge non-story. State wants to update voter roles and remove deceased people. Good for them. A little housekeeping is always in order. Any other story is just manufactured outrage.

Protip: if you can't tell if you're registered to vote, and don't know how to check, either, you're too damn stupid to vote anyway. Obviously you can't be bothered to learn basic civics.
 
2012-06-04 01:34:53 PM

Silly Jesus: And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?

Not sure how this is a big enough deal for either side to be OUTRAGED!11!!!!1!


I came here to say the same thing (maybe with fewer exclamation marks), but it does add up to more frustration and costs for older voters. It's funny how a party that so often points to the DMV as evidence of ineffectual government services wants to make more people have to deal with government bureaucracies.
 
2012-06-04 01:35:47 PM

domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.


Are there actually people voting under those names? I don't give a shiat if Benjamin Franklin is on the voter roll so long as nobody is voting under that name.
 
2012-06-04 01:36:17 PM

Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.


(a) I certainly hope said Evangelical group is not tax-exempt.

(b) Did you point out that taxes are lower under Obama?
 
2012-06-04 01:36:53 PM

ImpendingCynic: domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Imagine that - a regular review of the rolls finds people who died, or moved away but failed to re-register in a new state or county.

It's so discourteous of dead people to not notify the elections board about their updated status.


When a person who has died remains on the voters roll, it is relatively simple to secure an absentee ballot and vote in their name. This can, does, and has happened. That's why this purge is being conducted - reducing the opportunity for fraud is as important as reducing, prosecuting, and eliminating actual fraud. I can explain it to simpletons like you and Splinshints, but I can't comprehend it for you. One simple bastard a day is my limit and thanks to you I'm stocked up.
 
2012-06-04 01:37:02 PM
cwolf20
Of course my question is, how did farkers, including me, miss Louisiana GOP convention members having police arrest and drag away Louisiana GOP convention Ron Paul supporter members

Of course my question is, how is that relevant to this thread? Also, why do Ron Paul supporters hate democracy? They lost the vote. Now they want to steal the delegates that are in no way rightfully theirs based on the primary voting.
 
2012-06-04 01:37:08 PM

PsyRat: This is a huge non-story. State wants to update voter roles and remove deceased people. Good for them. A little housekeeping is always in order. Any other story is just manufactured outrage.

Always

in order? Like, say, a week before the election? And if you've been improperly removed, you can mail in a request to re-register that will be processed in 4-6 weeks?
 
2012-06-04 01:37:39 PM

Lord Dimwit: (a) I certainly hope said Evangelical group is not tax-exempt.

(b) Did you point out that taxes are lower under Obama?


Pre-recorded. But I've been calling them all day at the number on their web site.
 
2012-06-04 01:38:24 PM

Silly Jesus: So the Republicans are doing this so that minorities (Democrats) can't vote, but they only kicked two off the roles?

So the Republicans are trying to swing the vote their way by removing two ballots?

And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?

Not sure how this is a big enough deal for either side to be OUTRAGED!11!!!!1!


See, this is why I have you labeled as "cracker assed troll." No one on the left or middle objects to these guys being removed. Heck, if they knowingly committed fraud, charge them. What most people object is the thousands of LEGAL voters that they tried to remove from the voting list.

If you have to remove 10,000 legal voters in order to remove ONE illegal one, then maybe illegal voting isn't that big of a problem to worry about.
 
2012-06-04 01:39:35 PM

domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Subby is a moron who shouldn't be allowed to vote. http://www.theledger.com/article/20120518/POLITICS/120519309


No kidding. But how many were added after they were dead? I doubt many, if any. Why would a dead person magically drop off the list? System is a joke. There should be no need to register if voting is a right. No wonder turnout is so low.
 
2012-06-04 01:42:08 PM
You Democrat Pro-fraudsters are starting to sound like Truthers and Birthers.
 
2012-06-04 01:43:17 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: this whole molehill-to-mountain of "Voter ID fraud" is a half-assed dog whistle designed to get the racists fired up before the election, and that it's working


What exactly is the difference between a "dog whistle" and a "conspiracy theory"?
 
2012-06-04 01:43:38 PM

domenad: When a person who has died remains on the voters roll, it is relatively simple to secure an absentee ballot and vote in their name. This can, does, and has happened. That's why this purge is being conducted - reducing the opportunity for fraud is as important as reducing, prosecuting, and eliminating actual fraud. I can explain it to simpletons like you and Splinshints, but I can't comprehend it for you. One simple bastard a day is my limit and thanks to you I'm stocked up.


Well, thanks for the assumption that because I don't share your paranoid outrage, I'm a moron. Yes, obviously someone could vote in place of someone who died, but that doesn't mean it happens often, and just because the names of the recently dead were still on the voter rolls (obviously a common occurrence) doesn't justify a witch hunt.

So yeah, go ahead and regularly audit the rolls to remove people who have died. Just don't scream FRAUD! while you're doing it.
 
2012-06-04 01:49:24 PM
Logically fallacy in Subby's headline.

If those other 125,000 people are neither voting, citizens, or living, why are they on the rolls?
 
2012-06-04 01:49:58 PM
Were any of you paying attention in 2000 and 2004 - or did you think Bush actually won?

http://www.salon.com/2002/11/01/lists_2/

http://www.gregpalast.com/voting-fraud-is-a-fraud-buzzflash-interview s -greg-palast/
 
2012-06-04 01:50:03 PM
Three if you count Jeb Bush.
 
2012-06-04 01:53:36 PM

Trackball: You Democrat Pro-fraudsters are starting to sound like Truthers and Birthers.


www.picturenose.com
 
2012-06-04 01:55:57 PM
www.jookos.com
 
2012-06-04 01:59:45 PM

Silly Jesus: So the Republicans are doing this so that minorities (Democrats) can't vote, but they only kicked two off the roles?

So the Republicans are trying to swing the vote their way by removing two ballots?

And the Democrats are outraged that two ballots were removed?

Not sure how this is a big enough deal for either side to be OUTRAGED!11!!!!1!


No, you completely misread the whole thing. Thousands of people have been kicked off the rolls. Only two have certifiably been found to be justified. The other thousands who have been kicked off the voting rolls are presumed to be certifiably justified, but in reality, quite the opposite.
 
2012-06-04 02:00:45 PM
Subby: they found sufficient evidence for charges for these two, NOT only two have been found.

Good jorb you jackwagons, make this about Democrats and Republicans not about honesty and integrity in elections.

If your chosen party has as their strategy relying on dead and inelligable voters for it's electoral results then you need to rethink your outrage and your grasp on reality.
 
2012-06-04 02:01:00 PM
Geez, I'm surprised Republicans even bother to do this anymore. I mean, they've already proven the truth of what that commie Lenin or Stalin said about how it doesn't matter who votes as much as it does who counts the votes. And with all of those nice, new, pitifully insecure electronic ballot boxes made by good old Amurikan corporate people like Diebold, nothing could possibly go worng. Amirite?

\And if things get tight for the GOP, they've always got SCOTUS to fall back on. Bush v. Gore, Citizens United, etc., etc.
 
2012-06-04 02:01:05 PM

Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.



But I was told by conservatives that California is inhospitable for businesses, right-leaning organizations and religion!!!
 
2012-06-04 02:02:13 PM

Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]


Almost all those listed are financial transactions or include some transaction that may have a financial component. Voting does not.
 
2012-06-04 02:04:29 PM

deadcrickets: But the GOP is just showing how Small Government and Fiscally Conservative they are with this!


The GOP: Government small enough to fit in your uterus!

/at least here in Virginia
 
2012-06-04 02:04:34 PM

GT_bike: Subby: they found sufficient evidence for charges for these two, NOT only two have been found.

Good jorb you jackwagons, make this about Democrats and Republicans not about honesty and integrity in elections.

If your chosen party has as their strategy relying on dead and inelligable voters for it's electoral results then you need to rethink your outrage and your grasp on reality.


http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-gop-war-on-voting-20110 8 30

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/florida-g o p-takes-voter-supression-to-a-brazen-new-extreme-20120530

http://electionfraudblog.com/election-fraud-beginners-guide/
 
2012-06-04 02:05:34 PM

Fluorescent Testicle: evilmrsock: I would assume the D outrage is more related to the cost of the initiative in relation to its results.

I'm not a Democrat, but this is half of my problem with it, yeah (the other half is that this whole molehill-to-mountain of "Voter ID fraud" is a half-assed dog whistle designed to get the racists fired up before the election, and that it's working). What a complete and total waste of money.


Sure it's about the waste of money because the cost of false voters altering our political process doesn't cost us anything, it couldn't possibly harm us as bad as a records purge does.
 
2012-06-04 02:08:04 PM

filter: domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Subby is a moron who shouldn't be allowed to vote. http://www.theledger.com/article/20120518/POLITICS/120519309

No kidding. But how many were added after they were dead? I doubt many, if any. Why would a dead person magically drop off the list? System is a joke. There should be no need to register if voting is a right. No wonder turnout is so low.


This is what we need to do:

Every registered voter in the polity must vote, either by mail or in person, by a certain date. If you haven't voted within X days of the election, the state attempts to contact you to get your vote. If you're dead, they mark it down and you're removed from the rolls. If you're alive, you give them your vote. To ensure that you have a right to not "vote", there is always a "none of the above" option and a write-in option. You're automatically registered to vote every time you do anything with the government involving your identity - pay your taxes, get a government-issued ID, or pick up a government benefits check, or - and this is important - register for free to vote.

After you vote, you get a cryptographically-secure receipt of the votes you made. The polity publishes a public cryptographic key and your receipt is signed. You can verify that the votes you made are the votes printed on the receipt. At any time up to a year after the election, anyone can get anonymized copies of every ballot, once again cryptographically signed. Anyone can request copies of the entire election's ballots (with no names or other identifying information associated with them) and do an independent recount. Since everything is cryptographically signed, it's hard to fake an election, and since anyone can request copies of all the ballots, anyone can do a recount. If you're worried that your vote wasn't counted, you can request a copy of all the ballots and make sure it's in there.

If the published counts don't match up with independent verification, something's fishy. If you're not contacted for your vote, or are contacted after you vote, something's fishy.

Because you get a receipt, you can verify your vote counted. Because anyone can request copies of all the ballots, the election is independently verifiable. Because the ballots are anonymized, no one can force someone else to vote a certain way. Because voting is mandatory, everyone who is supposed to be able to vote can vote. Because registration is automatic in many different contexts, the voter rolls are maintained reasonably well. Because the ballots and receipts are cryptographically signed, you know that what's printed on them is what was actually on them.

Of course there are holes - if the private signing key is compromised, votes could be faked. That's somewhat mitigated by the fact that each individual voter can verify his or her vote, and could be even more mitigated by releasing the private key a year after the election or something like that.
 
2012-06-04 02:09:10 PM
It's a non-story now. The Justice Department has sent Florida a cease and desist letter about purging. Additionally, a federal court has ruled that FL's new law requiring organizations conducting voter registration drives to turn in registration forms within 48 hours of completion or they will be declared invalid is unconstitutional. Sorry GOP but you've failed again.
 
2012-06-04 02:09:21 PM

Trackball: You Democrat Pro-fraudsters are starting to sound like Truthers and Birthers.


That makes no sense, no matter how I look at it.
 
2012-06-04 02:10:34 PM

Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]


What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? Even if it isn't racist, requiring someone to give money to the government is, according to every conservative ever, a tax. If you have to pay money to the state to get an ID, and you have to have an ID to vote, then you are de facto paying a tax to vote.
 
2012-06-04 02:11:29 PM
Ooops! Forgot Fark doesn't automatically hyperlink! Oh well - apparently Fark also likes to toss links as "unfetchable".
 
2012-06-04 02:13:50 PM
My university's college republicans (without identifying themselves as such) were registering voters on campus at the entrance to the business school. This was in September. I heard from a couple of people who signed up there and opted to choose Democrat on the form didn't get their registrations complete until mid November. Meanwhile, people who I knew that didn't select a party affiliation or selected Republican received theirs in a timely manner and were able to vote that year.

That's the same College Republican group that held a States' Rights themed party which apparently is a party where you invite your white friends and put up confederate flags as decoration. They of course were calling for the federal government to ban same sex marriage when Massachusetts made it legal. They also observed Robert E. Lee's birthday instead of MLK Jr. day on our university's day off in January. What a shiatty group of cheaters and assholes.
 
2012-06-04 02:15:51 PM

Smackledorfer: Trackball: You Democrat Pro-fraudsters are starting to sound like Truthers and Birthers.

That makes no sense, no matter how I look at it.


Clumsy attempt at projection.

He's saying that Democratic claims that voter fraud is an insanely exaggerated problem are akin to believing in silly conspiracy theories. Which assumes the fraud is there and is a real problem, and Democratic beliefs that the Republicans are disenfranchising Democratic-leaning voters is the REAL conspiratorial thinking.

Simply put, "rubber and glue."
 
2012-06-04 02:23:11 PM

lennavan: Because under the guise of "voter fraud," they can suppress the vote from groups that tend to vote (D) and win more elections. This is about winning elections for one side, not about fairness in elections.


If you think trying to identify people who are non-citizens, non-residents of a particular voting area and those who are unregistered to vote is "voter suppression" then I have a bridge to sell you.

besides, isn't a bit bigoted for democrats to just assume that brown people dont have ID and cant be bothered to understand the voting process?
 
2012-06-04 02:24:26 PM

Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]


That's pretty much a pack of lies.

- It's possible to board an airplane without valid id. I've done it. The TSA asks you a bunch of questions to prove that you are who you say you are. Things like "what's your brother's middle name?", and "who lives at (address of a close relative)?"

- You can be admitted into a hospital without id, happens all the time. Dr's offices are private businesses and they get to decide under what conditions they will accept your business.

- There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

- Nope, picked up a prescription for my son and a co-worker the other day. Just told them the names and they handed me the drugs. No id involved.

- I'm able to make bank transactions online with my username and password.

- I don't recall sending id along with my applications for University. Of course that was some time ago, perhaps that has changed.

- I never showed id to get my utilities hooked up. They knew where I lived :-)

- When I bought my car my dealer registered it for me. I never had to show my id for that.

- Just got a free HIV test on Friday. Took 20 minutes, but required no id.

- Haven't donated blood in a while, but they never asked for ID when I did. Has this changed?

- Pretty sure you caan buy a firearm at a gun show without showing ID, and you can definitely do that if you a buying from a private individual.

- Last few times I wrote a check I didn't need to show ID.

- Definitely don't need to show ID to use a credit card. I don't even sign my cards and they almost never ask for ID.

- Have bought train tickets online without showing ID.

- I just give them my library card when I want to check out a book. I don't have to show ID.

- I've never had to show ID to apply to rent an apartment.

Again, pack of lies. Why are you repeating them?
 
2012-06-04 02:25:43 PM

jimmy2x: I also think that the "proof" mechanism is being overdone. BUT, telling us that Florida has caught a grand total of two miscreants, tells us nothing. You would have to be pretty dumb to show up to fraudulently vote without the proper ID in a state where it is required.


this is only the people from miami dade county, not the whole state. and they didn't even get to finish because miami dade was ordered to stop looking for the illegal voters that the law orders them to attempt to find and remove.
and the process isn't working very efficiently because the Obama administration has decided not to follow the law and hand over the ICE database since it will hurt his reelection chances.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/03/v-fullstory/2830794/how-obama- ai ded-and-abetted-scotts.html
 
2012-06-04 02:28:13 PM

Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? Even if it isn't racist, requiring someone to give money to the government is, according to every conservative ever, a tax. If you have to pay money to the state to get an ID, and you have to have an ID to vote, then you are de facto paying a tax to vote.


Lol.

There is no "Right to Vote" in Federal elections.

Here is a group trying to make it become a right. Link

Here is a U.S. Representative attempting to amend the Constitution to make is a right. Link

Here's a quite complex explanation of this concept, and it's history. Link

And here's what SCOTUS said. Link

Also, the ID's proposed are free. Yes, the taxpayers end up paying for them in the end, but they also end up paying for the ballots and the people to count the votes etc. So it's a wash...
 
2012-06-04 02:28:51 PM

o5iiawah: lennavan: Because under the guise of "voter fraud," they can suppress the vote from groups that tend to vote (D) and win more elections. This is about winning elections for one side, not about fairness in elections.

If you think trying to identify people who are non-citizens, non-residents of a particular voting area and those who are unregistered to vote is "voter suppression" then I have a bridge to sell you.

besides, isn't a bit bigoted for democrats to just assume that brown people dont have ID and cant be bothered to understand the voting process?


1) The voter suppression thing is in the disproportionate numbers of legitimate voters who are purged vs. the few. No one wants ineligible people voting and you're an asshole to imply anyone would.

2) Is the voter registration drive targeting Christians (see my link) equally as wrong minded? This is not a strawman. It's happening.

I guess Christians and white folk are equally lacking in the means to secure ID and understand the voting process.
 
2012-06-04 02:32:23 PM
I am sure this is way undercounted sort of like the whole number for people being tested that tested posative for drugs while on welfare. Speaking of that anyone get the count of people that were given the choice to take a test or get off welfare. I know there are atleast 5 households that took the get off welfare choice. But I guess those numbers are not good enough to report. PS If I know 5 imagine how many there are out there.
 
2012-06-04 02:34:32 PM
Well, the dimes make the dollars, right?
 
2012-06-04 02:35:56 PM

Lord Dimwit: Of course there are holes - if the private signing key is compromised, votes could be faked. That's somewhat mitigated by the fact that each individual voter can verify his or her vote, and could be even more mitigated by releasing the private key a year after the election or something like that.


But none of that prevents the fact that under your scenario, the vote could be transferred to another party, especially under duress.

"Like your job? Yes? OK, hand over your voter key"
 
2012-06-04 02:38:12 PM

Zasteva: - There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.



the requirement is for new hires, not when you turn in your app to mcdonalds.
 
2012-06-04 02:38:45 PM

Silly Jesus: www.jookos.com


Most of those things don't require an ID and only three of them aren't strictly private transactions. None of them are rights.

So, basically, your fancy graphic is mostly wrong to begin with, and even where it's not, it mostly refers to the requirements placed on private transactions by private parties that can set whatever restrictions they want.

Have you been sufficiently embarrassed for posting such a foolish thing or would you like to try and press the flimsy tatters of your horrendously disingenuous argument in favor of preventing people from participating in one of the most fundamental defenses of liberty possible?
 
2012-06-04 02:40:24 PM

Zasteva: Again, pack of lies. Why are you repeating them?


I think he likes to troll for people pointing out the "non-prophet organization" error, or else he'd have fixed it by now.
 
2012-06-04 02:40:26 PM

Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? Even if it isn't racist, requiring someone to give money to the government is, according to every conservative ever, a tax. If you have to pay money to the state to get an ID, and you have to have an ID to vote, then you are de facto paying a tax to vote.

Lol.

There is no "Right to Vote" in Federal elections.



The 1965 Voting Rights act says pretty much otherwise.
 
2012-06-04 02:40:35 PM
And while I am at it, incompetent banks like BOA can keep track of every penny I spend, no matter what continent. Yet elections can recount and recount and recount, and never come up with the same totals twice. It is 2012. When will we have accurate election results?
 
2012-06-04 02:41:42 PM

Splinshints: Silly Jesus: www.jookos.com

Most of those things don't require an ID and only three of them aren't strictly private transactions. None of them are rights.

So, basically, your fancy graphic is mostly wrong to begin with, and even where it's not, it mostly refers to the requirements placed on private transactions by private parties that can set whatever restrictions they want.

Have you been sufficiently embarrassed for posting such a foolish thing or would you like to try and press the flimsy tatters of your horrendously disingenuous argument in favor of preventing people from participating in one of the most fundamental defenses of liberty possible?


Not yet.
www.jookos.com
How about we ask him why he thinks you need an ID to volunteer at a secular - i.e. "non-prophet" - organization?
 
2012-06-04 02:42:39 PM
... or, I suppose, ask him where he lives that he has to pay a utility to not block the sun. Springfield?
 
2012-06-04 02:42:58 PM

Spudsy1: But I guess those numbers are not good enough to report. PS If I know 5 imagine how many there are out there.


Soooo..... your argument here is that a problem is widespread because you made an unverifiable claim that I'm supposed to expand speculatively on in my own imagination?

I personally know of none. Therefore you should be able to imagine that the problem doesn't exist it all. Guess I won that argument, huh?
 
2012-06-04 02:46:41 PM

Zasteva: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

That's pretty much a pack of lies.

- It's possible to board an airplane without valid id. I've done it. The TSA asks you a bunch of questions to prove that you are who you say you are. Things like "what's your brother's middle name?", and "who lives at (address of a close relative)?"

I have always been asked for ID. Especially post 9/11. The one time that I forgot it I was made to go all the way out to the parking lot to retrieve it from my car before I could go further.

- You can be admitted into a hospital without id, happens all the time. Dr's offices are private businesses and they get to decide under what conditions they will accept your business.

Sure, you can be treated without an ID, but they would at some point like to know who to send the bill to and that you aren't just throwing out some random name.

- There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

That depends on your line of work. I have always been required to do so.

- Nope, picked up a prescription for my son and a co-worker the other day. Just told them the names and they handed me the drugs. No id involved.

True. I've done that as well.

- I'm able to make bank transactions online with my username and password.

True.


- I don't recall sending id along with my applications for University. Of course that was some time ago, perhaps that has changed.

It has.

- I never showed id to get my utilities hooked up. They knew where I lived :-)

I needed to.


- When I bought my car my dealer registered it for me. I never had to show my id for that.

I did.

- Just got a free HIV test on Friday. Took 20 minutes, but required no id.

I use a condom so I'll defer to you on this one.


- Haven't donated blood in a while, but they never asked for ID when I did. Has this changed?

Not a fan of needles.

- Pretty sure you caan buy a firearm at a gun show without showing ID, and you can definitely do that if you a buying from a private individual.

Um, definitely needed ID for gun purchase.

- Last few times I wrote a check I didn't need to show ID.

Me neither.

- Definitely don't need to show ID to use a credit card. I don't even sign my cards and they almost never ask for ID.

Ditto.

- Have bought train tickets online without showing ID.

I was required to show ID at the station. That was a few years ago though.

- I just give them my library card when I want to check out a book. I don't have to show ID.

I don't go to the library.

- I've never had to show ID to apply to rent an apartment.

I did.

Again, pack of lies. Why are you repeating them?


Just because things aren't how you've experienced them does not mean that they are not that way for anyone.

The larger point being that there are things in everyday life that many, many people use ID for and no one is OMG THAT BURDEN IS INSURMOUNTABLE !!!1!!!!1!!!111!! OMG, ID'S ARE RAAAAACIST!!!!!11!!!1!!
 
2012-06-04 02:46:54 PM

Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]


No, it's not racist to ask for an ID to vote. However, right now that is an excellent way for Republicans to identify 'likely' Democrats to prevent THEM from voting. Republicans don't want to prevent minorities from voting; just prevent Democrats from voting.

For example, if I wanted to have a picnic and invite only non-racists, I would invite only non-Republicans. Sure, there are racist Democrats, and there are non-racist Republicans, but it's an excellent statistical indicator.
 
2012-06-04 02:48:20 PM

Splinshints: Silly Jesus: www.jookos.com

Most of those things don't require an ID and only three of them aren't strictly private transactions. None of them are rights.

So, basically, your fancy graphic is mostly wrong to begin with, and even where it's not, it mostly refers to the requirements placed on private transactions by private parties that can set whatever restrictions they want.

Have you been sufficiently embarrassed for posting such a foolish thing or would you like to try and press the flimsy tatters of your horrendously disingenuous argument in favor of preventing people from participating in one of the most fundamental defenses of liberty possible?


i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2012-06-04 02:49:23 PM

Wessoman: Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? Even if it isn't racist, requiring someone to give money to the government is, according to every conservative ever, a tax. If you have to pay money to the state to get an ID, and you have to have an ID to vote, then you are de facto paying a tax to vote.

Lol.

There is no "Right to Vote" in Federal elections.



The 1965 Voting Rights act says pretty much otherwise.


Did you ignore all of those links?

Is SCOTUS gravely mistaken?

Is the US Representative fighting for the "right" wasting his time?

Read up on some before you embarrass yourself further.
 
2012-06-04 02:49:25 PM
Lord Dimwit

That's probably the strongest argument I've heard from the anti-ID side but I still don't buy it. The state ID has many and various uses, only one of which involves going to the polls. If I pay $40 for a driver's license, how much of it is a "poll tax?" I drive daily but only vote 2-3 times per year. I can also use my license to cash checks, get on an airplane and many other things.

And to take your argument to an extreme, I pay taxes on the gas I use to drive to the polls, is that a poll tax? If I vote by absentee ballot, does the cost of the stamp count? It's all money paid to the government so I can exercise my right to vote.

The reason I don't have a problem with an ID check is that there are too many idiots, on both sides, who decide on the day of the election that the system is rigged against them because they haven't bothered to get their ducks in a row. Intelligent, reasoned voting is not a one day experience. You have 5 months between now and election day. Primaries have been going on since March. If you want to vote, go to your election board NOW. If you wait until the day of or the day before, don't be surprised when you run into problems. You're not being suppressed, you're being unprepared.
 
2012-06-04 02:51:32 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: Lord Dimwit: Of course there are holes - if the private signing key is compromised, votes could be faked. That's somewhat mitigated by the fact that each individual voter can verify his or her vote, and could be even more mitigated by releasing the private key a year after the election or something like that.

But none of that prevents the fact that under your scenario, the vote could be transferred to another party, especially under duress.

"Like your job? Yes? OK, hand over your voter key"


True. I guess it boils down to which is a bigger problem - people being forced to vote a certain way by a third party, or your vote's being unverifiable once it's cast. I honestly don't know which is a bigger problem. I'm not sure there's a good solution to both problems. I just hate that in current voting systems, once you've cast your vote, it's entirely in the hands of those who count the votes. It's not hard to fake a bunch of ballots, especially in electronic voting polities.

The voter coercion thing could be a little mitigated by giving you an encrypted receipt; the decryption key wouldn't be released for some time. That would mean that your vote isn't immediately verifiable by third parties (or yourself, unfortunately).

In the case of employer coercion, of course, it would be illegal in the same way that gender discrimination is illegal - plenty of places break the law regarding it, but there's at least recourse. I'd be more worried about social-stigma-style intimidation: "When you come to church this Sunday, be sure to bring your voter receipt! You know how God wants you to vote!"
 
2012-06-04 02:51:44 PM
Dear Young idealists,

So the argument is, if there is no proof anyone is breaking the law then we dont need to enforce the law, right?

1) Before we begin, can we assume we all agree that illegal aliens should not be allowed to vote?

2) If no one is enforcing a citizen check, then can we assume more illegals might try to vote? I mean, if we dont enforce the border they seem more inclined to come here, why not use their numbers to vote? Especially if no one is checking?

3) You can bet your 24 years of life experience and liberal arts education that you would be the first person to object if you thought these illegals were voting for Republicans, but since it seems to serve your purpose, you are fine with them voting.

4) Democrats have a habit of leaving out citizen verification in govt programs because they would rather buy the votes of illegals and not worry what long term damage illegals do to the country. This is typical short sightedness. The 1st draft of Obamacare left out citizen verification. The repubs asked that it be included and it only was after someone called the President a liar during the SOTU addresses. (He was right, btw)

5) Your President, the messiah, you know, the centrist, the man who would bridge partisanship, the transformational leader, cannot run on his thin record so he is going to need every vote he can to get reelected so he can have more flexibility in his second term. So he is MORE than motivated to let illegal aliens, space aliens, cows, and dead people vote.

6) Flame on, I never read them anyway.

7) You idiots were sure singing a different tune after the 2000 election.
 
2012-06-04 02:53:30 PM

Lord Dimwit: Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.

(a) I certainly hope said Evangelical group is not tax-exempt.

(b) Did you point out that taxes are lower under Obama?


THIS, I'm still waiting to see these supposed high taxes the Right keeps telling me about.
 
2012-06-04 02:57:28 PM

Silly Jesus: i0.kym-cdn.com


I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You post a graphic that's easily exposed as both inaccurate and massively dishonest and the best you can do is post a stupid image in response. I guess, however, there is no defense of the indefensible.

You're an idiot and a liar and I'm sorry I wasted my time responding to you.
 
2012-06-04 02:58:00 PM

Anderson's Pooper: Lord Dimwit

That's probably the strongest argument I've heard from the anti-ID side but I still don't buy it. The state ID has many and various uses, only one of which involves going to the polls. If I pay $40 for a driver's license, how much of it is a "poll tax?" I drive daily but only vote 2-3 times per year. I can also use my license to cash checks, get on an airplane and many other things.

And to take your argument to an extreme, I pay taxes on the gas I use to drive to the polls, is that a poll tax? If I vote by absentee ballot, does the cost of the stamp count? It's all money paid to the government so I can exercise my right to vote.

The reason I don't have a problem with an ID check is that there are too many idiots, on both sides, who decide on the day of the election that the system is rigged against them because they haven't bothered to get their ducks in a row. Intelligent, reasoned voting is not a one day experience. You have 5 months between now and election day. Primaries have been going on since March. If you want to vote, go to your election board NOW. If you wait until the day of or the day before, don't be surprised when you run into problems. You're not being suppressed, you're being unprepared.


The difference, and of course it's approaching academic, is that you don't have to drive to the polls. You can walk, ride your bike, crawl, whatever you want. You don't have to vote by mail. In the proposed scenarios you must have an ID regardless of the mechanism you use to vote or how you get to the polls. You can vote without paying gasoline taxes or for stamps (it may not be as easy, but it's possible), but in the proposed system, you can't vote without paying for an ID.

As for "being unprepared"...well, "democracy" means everyone gets to vote, even the lazy, the uneducated, the unprepared, the people who were in comas until two hours before the election, the nuns who were in a convent cut off from the world until five minutes before the election, and yes, even the Democrats. :)
 
2012-06-04 02:58:05 PM

relcec: jimmy2x: I also think that the "proof" mechanism is being overdone. BUT, telling us that Florida has caught a grand total of two miscreants, tells us nothing. You would have to be pretty dumb to show up to fraudulently vote without the proper ID in a state where it is required.

this is only the people from miami dade county, not the whole state. and they didn't even get to finish because miami dade was ordered to stop looking for the illegal voters that the law orders them to attempt to find and remove.
and the process isn't working very efficiently because the Obama administration has decided not to follow the law and hand over the ICE database since it will hurt his reelection chances.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/03/v-fullstory/2830794/how-obama- ai ded-and-abetted-scotts.html


BROWN PEOPLE ARE INVADING!!!11!
 
2012-06-04 02:59:25 PM

Theaetetus: Splinshints: Silly Jesus: www.jookos.com

Most of those things don't require an ID and only three of them aren't strictly private transactions. None of them are rights.

So, basically, your fancy graphic is mostly wrong to begin with, and even where it's not, it mostly refers to the requirements placed on private transactions by private parties that can set whatever restrictions they want.

Have you been sufficiently embarrassed for posting such a foolish thing or would you like to try and press the flimsy tatters of your horrendously disingenuous argument in favor of preventing people from participating in one of the most fundamental defenses of liberty possible?

Not yet.
[www.jookos.com image 640x480]
How about we ask him why he thinks you need an ID to volunteer at a secular - i.e. "non-prophet" - organization?


I like that this graphic could easily be retitled, "things that require pants," and still be roughly as accurate.
 
2012-06-04 03:01:32 PM

Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? Even if it isn't racist, requiring someone to give money to the government is, according to every conservative ever, a tax. If you have to pay money to the state to get an ID, and you have to have an ID to vote, then you are de facto paying a tax to vote.


State required voter IDs are provided for free. Some states will even send someone to haul your ass to the DMV (or wherever they are made).
 
2012-06-04 03:01:57 PM

Splinshints: Silly Jesus: i0.kym-cdn.com

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. You post a graphic that's easily exposed as both inaccurate and massively dishonest and the best you can do is post a stupid image in response. I guess, however, there is no defense of the indefensible.

You're an idiot and a liar and I'm sorry I wasted my time responding to you.


I explained it in a post above yours. I wasn't going to go through it again simply due to your inability to read the thread.

The image is what I imagined you to look like while your were "shaming" me.

Lastly, my point wasn't whether the transactions were private or not etc. It was to show that ID's are used in many facets of everyday life for many people and that it isn't the OMG RACIST BURDEN that it's being made out to be.

Thanks for calling me names though. It really strengthens your argument.
 
2012-06-04 03:02:27 PM
Damn it. I want to know why this is being mocked.
The obvious reason is Democrats thrive on the votes of the ineligible, therefore, fark and most media outlets decry it as raaaaaaacist.
Answer me this:
Why is it "bad" to confirm people voting are ELIGIBLE. (This is not an invitation to argue that everyone should have the right to vote, regardless of their citizenship.)
Why would the federal government cause problems for ANY state or local government that want to make sure that those who ARE voting, SHOULD be. (Besides the obvious above statement.)
 
2012-06-04 03:03:42 PM

Lord Dimwit: Anderson's Pooper: Lord Dimwit

That's probably the strongest argument I've heard from the anti-ID side but I still don't buy it. The state ID has many and various uses, only one of which involves going to the polls. If I pay $40 for a driver's license, how much of it is a "poll tax?" I drive daily but only vote 2-3 times per year. I can also use my license to cash checks, get on an airplane and many other things.

And to take your argument to an extreme, I pay taxes on the gas I use to drive to the polls, is that a poll tax? If I vote by absentee ballot, does the cost of the stamp count? It's all money paid to the government so I can exercise my right to vote.

The reason I don't have a problem with an ID check is that there are too many idiots, on both sides, who decide on the day of the election that the system is rigged against them because they haven't bothered to get their ducks in a row. Intelligent, reasoned voting is not a one day experience. You have 5 months between now and election day. Primaries have been going on since March. If you want to vote, go to your election board NOW. If you wait until the day of or the day before, don't be surprised when you run into problems. You're not being suppressed, you're being unprepared.

The difference, and of course it's approaching academic, is that you don't have to drive to the polls. You can walk, ride your bike, crawl, whatever you want. You don't have to vote by mail. In the proposed scenarios you must have an ID regardless of the mechanism you use to vote or how you get to the polls. You can vote without paying gasoline taxes or for stamps (it may not be as easy, but it's possible), but in the proposed system, you can't vote without paying for an ID.

As for "being unprepared"...well, "democracy" means everyone gets to vote, even the lazy, the uneducated, the unprepared, the people who were in comas until two hours before the election, the nuns who were in a convent cut off from the world until f ...


It costs money (tax dollars) to manufacture the ballots. It costs money (tax dollars) to pay the people to run the polling places and to count the votes. Etc. etc.

OMG POLL TAX
 
2012-06-04 03:05:32 PM
A slight reality check (for those of you open to reality) from Marc Caputo in THE MIAMI HERALD. (hardly a right-wing rag.)

Gov. Rick Scott's administration created a mess by trying to get rid of noncitizen voters.

And President Barack Obama's administration helped him do it.

First, Obama's Department of Homeland Security stonewalled the state's noncitizen voter hunt for almost nine months by refusing Florida access to an immigration database. Then, on Thursday, Obama's Justice Department ordered the purge to halt, in part because time had run out.

Ironically, DOJ's order cited the so-called "Motor Voter" law, which actually calls on states to purge ineligible voters. One former DOJ lawyer and critic, conservative J. Christian Adams, blogged that the former Obama appointee in charge of the voting section announced early on that it would ignore Motor Voter's purge obligation.

"We have no interest in enforcing this provision of the law," he quoted Julie Fernandes as saying in 2009 when she was an assistant attorney general. "It has nothing to do with increasing turnout, and we are just not going to do it." She has since left DOJ.

So to recap: The feds delayed and then said "time expired" under a law it selectively enforces.

Full story here at the Miami Herald.

Meanwhile the purge has detected lots of folks who aren't illegal immigrants, but who have committed OTHER crimes including - surprise, surprise, vote fraud.
 
2012-06-04 03:05:47 PM
Unmentioned in this entire thread is that the states are required to conduct these drives, and to complete them by 90 days prior to the election (42 USC § 1973gg-6 - Requirements with respect to administration of voter registration).

Specifically, "each State shall (4) Conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters by reason of: (A) the death of the registrant; or (B) a change in the residence of the registrant, in accordance with subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section."

Even the form and procedure for the so-called "voter purge" are specified earlier (in para 2) -- they mail a form with stamped reply form, and if the voter doesn't respond they can be removed from the rolls.

Finally, guess what happens if the voter doesn't respond and shows up to vote... the registrar updates the information, and the voter votes. No big deal.

It's the law!

/Much ado about nothing
 
2012-06-04 03:06:47 PM

give me doughnuts: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? Even if it isn't racist, requiring someone to give money to the government is, according to every conservative ever, a tax. If you have to pay money to the state to get an ID, and you have to have an ID to vote, then you are de facto paying a tax to vote.

State required voter IDs are provided for free. Some states will even send someone to haul your ass to the DMV (or wherever they are made).


In many states, those IDs are provided for free only if you can prove economic need, which is still a problem. Even in those states that make them free for everyone, you need another form of state-issued ID (issued for a fee) to get the free ID, so it's really just moving the problem up one level.
 
2012-06-04 03:08:59 PM

ObeliskToucher: Unmentioned in this entire thread is that the states are required to conduct these drives, and to complete them by 90 days prior to the election (42 USC § 1973gg-6 - Requirements with respect to administration of voter registration).

Specifically, "each State shall (4) Conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters by reason of: (A) the death of the registrant; or (B) a change in the residence of the registrant, in accordance with subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section."

Even the form and procedure for the so-called "voter purge" are specified earlier (in para 2) -- they mail a form with stamped reply form, and if the voter doesn't respond they can be removed from the rolls.

Finally, guess what happens if the voter doesn't respond and shows up to vote... the registrar updates the information, and the voter votes. No big deal.

It's the law!

/Much ado about nothing


But, but, but when you explain it that way, we can't say....

occupationoforegon.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-06-04 03:09:18 PM

Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit

Silly Jesus: It costs money (tax dollars) to manufacture the ballots. It costs money (tax dollars) to pay the people to run the polling places and to count the votes. Etc. etc.OMG POLL TAX


The elections are run by the government! ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!

Of course, you know that it's possible that you don't pay those taxes and can still vote, right? My nineteen year old cousin has never had a job, and has therefore never had any income to spend. He's never paid income taxes. He owns no property, so he has never paid property taxes. He's never bought anything with his own money, so he personally has never paid sales taxes. He still gets to vote.
 
2012-06-04 03:12:29 PM

Silly Jesus: Is SCOTUS gravely mistaken?



The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.


It would seem that if SCOTUS can rule on the protection of "The right to vote", they have pretty much conceded that a right to vote can exist (and did exist in the case you cited)

/btw, electing the members of the Electoral Collage is far from the only federal election
 
2012-06-04 03:12:32 PM

Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit
Silly Jesus: It costs money (tax dollars) to manufacture the ballots. It costs money (tax dollars) to pay the people to run the polling places and to count the votes. Etc. etc.OMG POLL TAX

The elections are run by the government! ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!

Of course, you know that it's possible that you don't pay those taxes and can still vote, right? My nineteen year old cousin has never had a job, and has therefore never had any income to spend. He's never paid income taxes. He owns no property, so he has never paid property taxes. He's never bought anything with his own money, so he personally has never paid sales taxes. He still gets to vote.


Huh?

I thought your argument was that paying for an ID was a "poll tax."

Then, several of us pointed out that several other things would have to be categorized as "poll taxes" if your definition is used. Things like the ballots (paid for through tax dollars). This was to point out the absurdity of calling the "free" ID a "poll tax."

Then, you told a story about your deadbeat cousin.

I'm lost....
 
2012-06-04 03:13:07 PM

Diogenes: Thunderpipes: Farkers are okay with voter fraud because Democrats get the votes. News at 11:00.

And you're OK with all manner of imaginary "threats" because it keeps Republicans in office and the populace fearful and complacent.


THIS
 
2012-06-04 03:13:13 PM

Lord Dimwit: The elections are run by the government! ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!



They should be privatized.
 
2012-06-04 03:14:06 PM
Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.
 
2012-06-04 03:16:22 PM

irving47: Damn it. I want to know why this is being mocked.
The obvious reason is Democrats thrive on the votes of the ineligible, therefore, fark and most media outlets decry it as raaaaaaacist.
Answer me this:
Why is it "bad" to confirm people voting are ELIGIBLE. (This is not an invitation to argue that everyone should have the right to vote, regardless of their citizenship.)
Why would the federal government cause problems for ANY state or local government that want to make sure that those who ARE voting, SHOULD be. (Besides the obvious above statement.)


Why is it "okay" to turn away people who have the right to vote as citizens because they forgot their wallet?

As for the "Democrats thrive on the votes of the ineligible" thing...really? I mean, really? I remember reading about how the Bush Administration spent millions of dollars and months of time investigating voter fraud in this country and found not a single case with sufficient evidence to bring to trial - out of an electorate of over 100,000,000 people.

(And before you say "ACORN" or whatever, please remember that there is a difference between registration fraud and voter fraud. Voter ID laws do nothing to prevent registration fraud.)
 
2012-06-04 03:17:10 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: Silly Jesus: Is SCOTUS gravely mistaken?


The right to vote is protected in more than the initial allocation of the franchise. Equal protection applies as well to the manner of its exercise. Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.


It would seem that if SCOTUS can rule on the protection of "The right to vote", they have pretty much conceded that a right to vote can exist (and did exist in the case you cited)

/btw, electing the members of the Electoral Collage is far from the only federal election


Quickly, get word to U.S. Representative Jesse Jackson Jr., the folks at FairVote.org, and the current members of SCOTUS!! Clearly, you have shed new light on this longstanding misunderstanding. There are also quite a few Constitutional law professors, other members of the legislature, legal scholars etc. that you need to get word to. You're gonna need a lot of money for stamps!
 
2012-06-04 03:17:32 PM

relcec: Zasteva: - There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

the requirement is for new hires, not when you turn in your app to mcdonalds.


Of course. I'm guessing you understand that still makes the graphic wrong on that count?
 
2012-06-04 03:17:46 PM

12349876: domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Are there actually people voting under those names? I don't give a shiat if Benjamin Franklin is on the voter roll so long as nobody is voting under that name.


Exactly.

When somebody dies, or moves out of the jurisdiction, it's usually not a first priority to strike them from voter registration.

How many of these entries on the rolls were actually voting when they shouldn't have been?

This purge shortly before a national election is rather suspicious, they could have begun it some time back.
 
2012-06-04 03:20:28 PM

Silverstaff: 12349876: domenad: There were over 100k names on the rolls of dead and ineligible people.

Are there actually people voting under those names? I don't give a shiat if Benjamin Franklin is on the voter roll so long as nobody is voting under that name.

Exactly.

When somebody dies, or moves out of the jurisdiction, it's usually not a first priority to strike them from voter registration.

How many of these entries on the rolls were actually voting when they shouldn't have been?

This purge shortly before a national election is rather suspicious, they could have begun it some time back.


As I said upthread, the Bush Administration spent millions of dollars and months of time, and didn't find a single case of this happening.

So...between "none" and "very few".

Whereas some of the voter ID laws either in force today or under consideration would effectively disenfranchise millions and millions of people.

So, why is it that Republicans are so gung-ho about solving a problem that doesn't exist, but whose solution just so happens to prevent millions of people from voting, people who tend to vote Democratic? Why indeed...
 
2012-06-04 03:22:41 PM

Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit
Silly Jesus: It costs money (tax dollars) to manufacture the ballots. It costs money (tax dollars) to pay the people to run the polling places and to count the votes. Etc. etc.OMG POLL TAX

The elections are run by the government! ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!

Of course, you know that it's possible that you don't pay those taxes and can still vote, right? My nineteen year old cousin has never had a job, and has therefore never had any income to spend. He's never paid income taxes. He owns no property, so he has never paid property taxes. He's never bought anything with his own money, so he personally has never paid sales taxes. He still gets to vote.

Huh?

I thought your argument was that paying for an ID was a "poll tax."

Then, several of us pointed out that several other things would have to be categorized as "poll taxes" if your definition is used. Things like the ballots (paid for through tax dollars). This was to point out the absurdity of calling the "free" ID a "poll tax."

Then, you told a story about your deadbeat cousin.

I'm lost....


...because my cousin didn't pay any of those taxes and still got to vote? So they aren't by definition poll taxes? But if he has to have an ID that costs money to vote, then he has to pay a tax to vote, and that's a poll tax?
 
TWX
2012-06-04 03:27:04 PM
Silly Jesus: List of things that require ID
None of those examples is constitutionally-protected either, with the exception of buying a firearm, and in that circumstances, the courts have ruled that reasonable limits on the purchase of firearms can include an ID requirement.
 
2012-06-04 03:28:08 PM
So that's 2 cases of actual fraud vs. thousands of cases of elderly/poor ailienated. The reality is though, most states do this as routine behavior. The only reason it is news is because how farked Florida is when it comes to handling their elections.
 
2012-06-04 03:32:34 PM

cleek: Wangiss: I bet you could use that record for all kinds of stuff!

how would those records be any better for shenanigans than the records that any other govt agency has?


Seriously. You ever applied for a bank loan and had to answer those identification questions about where you lived and worked? Since the moment you started paying taxes your entire life history has been a matter of public record.
 
2012-06-04 03:33:04 PM
We're not putting up with that Florida election BS that got Georgie Porgie "elected" anymore, so deal with it. It's not hard to prove you're eligible to vote, so STFU and let democracy continue.
 
2012-06-04 03:33:20 PM
Man, Jesus is trolling the hell out of Fark since Friday night.

Did someones alt get banned?
 
2012-06-04 03:36:19 PM

Silly Jesus: Quickly, get word to U.S. Representative Jesse Jackson Jr., the folks at FairVote.org, and the current members of SCOTUS!! Clearly, you have shed new light on this longstanding misunderstanding. There are also quite a few Constitutional law professors, other members of the legislature, legal scholars etc. that you need to get word to. You're gonna need a lot of money for stamps!


Oddly enough, I can't find any evidence that the people you mention think that the selection of the members of the Electoral Collage is the sole Federal election. In fact, if I were a betting man, I think they'd note that the Constitution mentions protections of the right to vote in several places, for instance, the 19th amendment.

You seem to think that because there is not a universal right to vote, that no right to vote exists of any kind.

Seeing as how you are wrong at that, I don't think the groups you mentioned have been confused by your mistakes, so I won't be contacting them.

Take comfort at be right at least once though. When you admitted being 'lost'.

/btw, most of SCOTUS at the time time of Bush v Gore are still sitting. I doubt the newbies are confused either.
 
2012-06-04 03:39:51 PM

Silly Jesus: I have always been asked for ID [to board an airplane]. Especially post 9/11. The one time that I forgot it I was made to go all the way out to the parking lot to retrieve it from my car before I could go further.


If you had told them that you simply didn't have it, then you would have gone through the TSA question and answer bit. Try it sometime -- though I recommend you do it when you have time to spare and preferably at an uncrowded airport to avoid creating unnecessary hassle for everyone. I did this about 6 months ago when I lost my drivers license just before a business trip.

[other examples clipped for brevity]

Just because things aren't how you've experienced them does not mean that they are not that way for anyone.

Agreed. And just because things like IDs are often used to make things easier for people, doesn't mean that IDs are required. Wanna fix your graphic? Just change it to say "IDs are commonly used for:"

The larger point being that there are things in everyday life that many, many people use ID for and no one is OMG THAT BURDEN IS INSURMOUNTABLE !!!1!!!!1!!!111!! OMG, ID'S ARE RAAAAACIST!!!!!11!!!1!!

First, you don't serve your larger point by posting false information to back it up.

Second, I'm not claiming that IDs are racist, but that a requirement for IDs disproportionately impacts people who are inclined to vote Democratic.

Third, I use a photo ID when I vote, for convenience, but don't wish to be denied my right to vote if I happen to lose my ID on election day or forget to bring it to the polling station.

In almost all of these cases there are exceptions made for people who don't have IDs available. Even driving you might get a ticket if you don't have your operators license on you when pulled over, but they won't prohibit you from continuing to drive as long as the records show that you are a licensed driver, and that ticket is dismissed if you appear in court with your license in hand.

So, the larger point that you are missing is that in almost none of these cases is the ID mandated by law in order to perform the activity. Given that we aren't really seeing any significant problem of voting by ineligible people, why put people through unnecessary hassles to prevent it? Especially when there is a real risk that it will disenfranchise people who legitimately should be able to vote?
 
2012-06-04 03:41:00 PM

Phinn: Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.


What if they are campaigning against what they see are unjust laws and want to vote for the person who they believe will best act to change those laws?
 
2012-06-04 03:44:07 PM

Lord Dimwit: Why is it "okay" to turn away people who have the right to vote as citizens because they forgot their wallet?


Goes back to my point of wanting an informed, prepared electorate. I know it's a pipe dream. Too many birthers and lefty loons for that to happen.
 
2012-06-04 03:44:20 PM

StrangeQ: Phinn: Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.

What if they are campaigning against what they see are unjust laws and want to vote for the person who they believe will best act to change those laws?


This is why I dislike convicts' being prevented from voting in some polities. They are a group with the most potential for having been wronged by the state, so they must definitely should have a voice in how the state operates. For someone to say that convicts gave up their right to vote by committing a crime against the state means they think that there has never been a false or unjust conviction.
 
2012-06-04 03:45:46 PM

Anderson's Pooper: Lord Dimwit: Why is it "okay" to turn away people who have the right to vote as citizens because they forgot their wallet?

Goes back to my point of wanting an informed, prepared electorate. I know it's a pipe dream. Too many birthers and lefty loons for that to happen.


Right, but in my example, the punishment far outweighs the crime. If I spend months researching the issues of the election, research their historical context, and understand the consequences of the election, I shouldn't be denied participation in my democratic government because I was mugged on the way to the polling place.
 
2012-06-04 03:46:33 PM

Anderson's Pooper: The reason I don't have a problem with an ID check is that there are too many idiots, on both sides, who decide on the day of the election that the system is rigged against them because they haven't bothered to get their ducks in a row. Intelligent, reasoned voting is not a one day experience. You have 5 months between now and election day. Primaries have been going on since March. If you want to vote, go to your election board NOW. If you wait until the day of or the day before, don't be surprised when you run into problems. You're not being suppressed, you're being unprepared.


There is no requirement that people vote in an intelligent, reasoned, organized or prepared fashion.

That should be obvious by looking at who people vote for!
 
2012-06-04 03:47:17 PM

Lord Dimwit: So, why is it that Republicans are so gung-ho about solving a problem that doesn't exist, but whose solution just so happens to prevent millions of people from voting, people who tend to vote Democratic? Why indeed...


Whatever it is, it isn't racism, and it isn't partisan. As long as we can all agree that its technically bad for people ineligible to vote to vote, then all costs are justified, and you're the REAL partisan if you disagree!
 
2012-06-04 03:49:52 PM
...so, if only 2 people were affected, what's the problem -- one way or the other? Seems like an almost non-event.
 
2012-06-04 03:53:51 PM

Anderson's Pooper:
That's probably the strongest argument I've heard from the anti-ID side but I still don't buy it. The state ID has many and various uses, only one of which involves going to the polls. If I pay $40 for a driver's license, how much of it is a "poll tax?" I drive daily but only vote 2-3 times per year. I can also use my license to cash checks, get on an airplane and many other things.

It's precisely because this is targeted at the people who don't regularly drive or cash checks or get on an airplane that this is so nefarious. They are selecting the one group that is most disadvantaged to begin with and further marginalizing them. They're not going to take something away from somebody who actually has rights, they're stripping rights away from people who've already lost so many.

And to take your argument to an extreme, I pay taxes on the gas I use to drive to the polls, is that a poll tax? If I vote by absentee ballot, does the cost of the stamp count? It's all money paid to the government so I can exercise my right to vote.

It is perfectly possible to vote without buying gas. Absentee ballots, in my experience, are postage paid to return them to a county clerk, and even if they're not, it's possible to vote without voting absentee. Because you choose to drive to the polls or not be in the precinct when the election is held does not mean that you are paying a poll tax. A poll tax is an expense that cannot be avoided like the expense of procuring ID.

The reason I don't have a problem with an ID check is that there are too many idiots, on both sides, who decide on the day of the election that the system is rigged against them because they haven't bothered to get their ducks in a row. Intelligent, reasoned voting is not a one day experience. You have 5 months between now and election day. Primaries have been going on since March. If you want to vote, go to your election board NOW. If you wait until the day of or the day before, don't be surprised when you run into problems. You're not being suppressed, you're being unprepared.

All of this is true. People should make informed decisions about elections and all the rest of that. But when legislators rush a bill through session that will take effect immediately, then have a lengthy court battle over whether it applies, and then have the supreme court strike it down with less than three weeks to go before the election, and have poll workers who are still demanding to see ID even though the law was struck down, you end up with a clusterfark that is not the fault of the voter. And that's exactly what happened in Missouri in 2006.

And when you give poll workers the power to turn away people, and make a big political issue out of something that shouldn't be politicized, then you let evil little people act out against their neighbors and try to take their rights away. And that's what happened in Maryland in 2006.
 
2012-06-04 03:56:26 PM

Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.


But so what did you tell them? That yes you're tired of Obama's high taxes and you're not registered and your name is Lem M. Ef*ckutu?

Come on, at least tell us you did something spectacular!
 
2012-06-04 03:59:12 PM

StrangeQ: Phinn: Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.

What if they are campaigning against what they see are unjust laws and want to vote for the person who they believe will best act to change those laws?


No, those people shouldn't vote.

No one should vote, really. It's evil.
 
2012-06-04 04:02:22 PM

Gyrfalcon: Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.

But so what did you tell them? That yes you're tired of Obama's high taxes and you're not registered and your name is Lem M. Ef*ckutu?

Come on, at least tell us you did something spectacular!


It was prerecorded. I've been calling them all day but no one picks up. Even if I block my number.

From what I could gather on their site you put in your info if you want a voter registration application. That struck me as odd. I sent them an email asking them why you couldn't just request you be mailed a real, state-issued registration form. And made it very clear I suspected them of culling "unfavorable" applicants and threatened to report them to the state board of elections.
 
2012-06-04 04:05:07 PM

Phinn: StrangeQ: Phinn: Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.

What if they are campaigning against what they see are unjust laws and want to vote for the person who they believe will best act to change those laws?

No, those people shouldn't vote.

No one should vote, really. It's evil.


media.tumblr.com

/surprised nobody's stuck this in here yet...
 
2012-06-04 04:05:08 PM

o5iiawah: lennavan: Because under the guise of "voter fraud," they can suppress the vote from groups that tend to vote (D) and win more elections. This is about winning elections for one side, not about fairness in elections.

If you think trying to identify people who are non-citizens, non-residents of a particular voting area and those who are unregistered to vote is "voter suppression" then I have a bridge to sell you.


Haha, you think this is about identifying people who are not eligible to vote. Man you're stupid.
 
2012-06-04 04:15:41 PM
It's not the voter registration removal that I have a problem with.

It's the timing I have a problem with. I don't think too many people would have had a problem if they had started on November 7th 2012.
 
2012-06-04 04:20:02 PM
Asking for a government issued ID isn't too much in my opinion.

/white male in AZ
 
2012-06-04 04:25:02 PM
Every state should do this.
 
2012-06-04 04:30:46 PM

Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? ...

Lol.

There is no "Right to Vote" in Federal elections.


Let's try this again.

Amendment 24

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.
 
2012-06-04 04:31:42 PM

Somacandra: I think there should be an official mechanism at the FEC level to clean state voter rolls every 5 to 10 years, like a census. But it shouldn't be done at the local level because that invites far too much corruption for a sleaze merchant like Rick Scott. Clearly people move around a lot and other factors make it necessary to remove people ineligible to vote. The problem is how to handle this in as little a partisan way as possible.


There is one side who fights this, don't you ever wonder why, or are all of you this dense?

I know that here in Atlanta one of the union offices I did work for actually spoke about driving homeless to the polls just to let them vote, even though they weren't legally living in the state. His exact words were, I just give em $5 and tell them how to vote.
 
2012-06-04 04:42:15 PM

steamingpile: Somacandra: I think there should be an official mechanism at the FEC level to clean state voter rolls every 5 to 10 years, like a census. But it shouldn't be done at the local level because that invites far too much corruption for a sleaze merchant like Rick Scott. Clearly people move around a lot and other factors make it necessary to remove people ineligible to vote. The problem is how to handle this in as little a partisan way as possible.

There is one side who fights this, don't you ever wonder why, or are all of you this dense?

I know that here in Atlanta one of the union offices I did work for actually spoke about driving homeless to the polls just to let them vote, even though they weren't legally living in the state. His exact words were, I just give em $5 and tell them how to vote.


And yet after dozens of investigations by the DOJ across two presidencies with hundreds of officers, nothing like that was ever discovered to have been happening.
 
2012-06-04 04:46:27 PM

Silly Jesus: The larger point being that there are things in everyday life that many, many people use ID for and no one is OMG THAT BURDEN IS INSURMOUNTABLE !!!1!!!!1!!!111!! OMG, ID'S ARE RAAAAACIST!!!!!11!!!1!!


The problem is the disproportionate impact on minorities, the poor, the young, and the very old.

See: The Disproportionate Impact Of Indiana Voter ID Requirements On The Electorate (PDF)

In the studies they did, they found that white voters had a valid ID that matched their voter registration 84.2% of the time, versus 78.2% for black voters.

Access to valid state ID was even lower for all adults (not just registered voters), 83.2% for whites, 71.1% for black voters.

Percentage of people who had a valid state ID that had their full legal name and matched their voter registration:
Age groups:
18-34: 78%
35-54: 83.8%
55-69: 85.9%
70+: 80.6%

Income:
Under $40K: 78.9%
$40K-$80K: 87.3%
$80K+: 83.0%

People who voted in 2006: 85.9%

And most importantly for the pro-ID crowd:
Republican: 86.2%
Democrat: 81.7%
Independent: 83.2%
 
2012-06-04 04:47:33 PM
eh gringo i'm from mexico
and i'll vote for obama cause he's gonna close the border between our countries
 
2012-06-04 04:53:25 PM
How do we know people who knew they were going to get caught, didn't hear about it and just refrained from voting.

Maybe they should go through the registered voters lists and see what shakes out.

You know, sorta like the folks that drive drunk regularly that do it early in the day, and who stay home on holidays when the cops might be out. It's not rocket surgery to stay one step ahead of the popo. You just can't miss a step...
 
2012-06-04 05:15:07 PM
So, is subby trying to be a sarcastic douchebag with that headline?


It has already caught a grand total of TWO men who weren't citizens but voted anyway. See, it's clearly a justified decision


Hey, Subby... that is TWO more than there should be. Suck me.
 
2012-06-04 05:26:52 PM

vegasj: So, is subby trying to be a sarcastic douchebag with that headline?


It has already caught a grand total of TWO men who weren't citizens but voted anyway. See, it's clearly a justified decision


Hey, Subby... that is TWO more than there should be. Suck me.


Which is a bigger problem for a democracy: two people voting who shouldn't, or thousands of people who should be able to vote being unable to do so?
 
2012-06-04 06:20:42 PM

vegasj: Hey, Subby... that is TWO more than there should be. Suck me.


This bath water is dirty, ditch it!

And stop whining about there being a baby in it!
 
2012-06-04 06:23:50 PM

phyrkrakr: Phinn: StrangeQ: Phinn: Everyone should be allowed to vote as long as they don't have any outstanding arrest or traffic warrants, or missed any probation office check-ins in the previous 2 years.

What if they are campaigning against what they see are unjust laws and want to vote for the person who they believe will best act to change those laws?

No, those people shouldn't vote.

No one should vote, really. It's evil.

[media.tumblr.com image 500x647]

/surprised nobody's stuck this in here yet...


I've BEEN praying, but I'm still not married to Jason Statham's character in "Crank" and living in a yacht anchored off the Grand Caymans. And God TOLD me that was his plan for me!
 
2012-06-04 06:30:16 PM

rufus-t-firefly: It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.


There's a reason I keep Silly Jesus "favorited" as "GED in Law". His frequent, easily debunked legal ideas. Made even funnier when he claims he's an attorney.

Lionel Hutz's Fark Handle?
 
2012-06-04 06:51:05 PM
In all fairness, two votes in Florida could swing a presidential election.
 
2012-06-04 06:51:15 PM
Well, in Florida, that is the margin between winning and losing . . .
 
2012-06-04 07:03:32 PM

glenlivid: Were any of you paying attention in 2000 and 2004 - or did you think Bush actually won?

http://www.salon.com/2002/11/01/lists_2/

http://www.gregpalast.com/voting-fraud-is-a-fraud-buzzflash-interview s -greg-palast/




The Gore Butthurt gift that keeps on giving.

www.mediabistro.com

Keep looking, it's in there moonbats.
 
2012-06-04 08:16:16 PM
If I make a decision to start hunting cockroaches in my house, but I catch only two of them, was it a bad decision?

Or maybe just poor implementation?

You really think there are only two?
 
2012-06-04 08:24:38 PM

Lewis: If I make a decision to start hunting cockroaches in my house, but I catch only two of them, was it a bad decision?

Or maybe just poor implementation?

You really think there are only two?


It depends on how you're hunting them, douchebag. Do you even know for sure if there ARE any cockroaches in your house, or did you just assume they were there before you started looking? And if you did, did you have a good plan for finding them, or are you just crawling around the room on your hands and knees with a magnifying glass and going "AHA! GOT ONE!" everytime a bug flies past? Do you even know what a cockroach looks like?
 
2012-06-04 08:35:06 PM
Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!
 
2012-06-04 08:39:13 PM

Lewis: If I make a decision to start hunting cockroaches in my house, but I catch only two of them, was it a bad decision?

Or maybe just poor implementation?

You really think there are only two?


The fact that only two were proved, out of how many?

You really think there weren't more than 2 false positives?

There were more than 2 false positives in the 2000 purge.
 
2012-06-04 08:46:11 PM

Lewis: Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!


Hysterical laughter Bruce.

I don't have a day job.
 
2012-06-04 08:47:49 PM
Yep, implementation is difficult all right.

Detzner's office and the Republican Party of Florida chairman, Lenny Curry, have complained that another agency under President Obama, the Department of Homeland Security, has blocked access to a federal database, which would help the state more easily identify noncitizens.

Whoa, didn't see that one coming.
 
2012-06-04 08:56:48 PM

Gyrfalcon: Lewis: Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!

Hysterical laughter Bruce.

I don't have a day job.


Cheers, mate! Then I hope you're enjoying either (a) the night shift, (b) your studies, (c) your trust fund, or (d) mom's basement.

'Cause if it turns out you're a kept sexual plaything of a wealthy paramour, then I hate hate hate you.
 
2012-06-04 08:58:23 PM
There is a house with nobody living in it in Florida that has no less than ten people with different names registered to vote.

We now have two categories of people when it comes to voter ID.

People who recognize the problem and want to do what they can to solve it and people who recognize the problem and want to do everything they can to make sure it continues.
 
2012-06-04 09:17:22 PM

Lt. Cheese Weasel: glenlivid: Were any of you paying attention in 2000 and 2004 - or did you think Bush actually won?

http://www.salon.com/2002/11/01/lists_2/

http://www.gregpalast.com/voting-fraud-is-a-fraud-buzzflash-interview s -greg-palast/



The Gore Butthurt gift that keeps on giving.

[www.mediabistro.com image 450x363]

Keep looking, it's in there moonbats.


i194.photobucket.com

She's still wondering why she didn't get that cabinet position after that 'butthurt'
 
2012-06-04 09:31:53 PM

randomjsa: There is a house with nobody living in it in Florida that has no less than ten people with different names registered to vote.


How many of those registrations were ever actually used simultaneously?

Here's a perfectly legal, perfectly legitimate way that could happen.

It's a rental house. Someone moves in, they register to vote there. Their name goes on the rolls at that address. Some time later, six months or a year or two later, that person moves out of state, or they die. A family moves in next. Might be a mother and father, maybe even a grandparent, they all register there as their voting address. They stay there a few years, then they move out of state. This same story repeats itself a few times with families and couples moving in and out over the years. Doesn't take long for 10 voter registrations to pile up, especially with just one extended family living there.

When people die, or when they move and register to vote at a new address, especially one out of state, most jurisdictions don't immediately purge the voter registration of that person. It happens every day, in every state. It's nothing sinister. Certainly not this vaguely defined massive conspiracy to commit voter fraud that you are implying.

If it's some kind of actual voter fraud you are alleging, point out one person. ONE PERSON. who has ever been convicted in court of voter fraud in the state of Florida for any fraud that this purge would have prevented.

Here's an example of the "voter fraud" that's going on in Florida: In Florida voter fraud is rarer than shark attacks: Tampa Bay Times
Also, that is just investigations of alleged fraud, not even convictions. The allegations of fraud serious enough to actually warrant a criminal investigation are rarer than actual confirmed shark attacks.

The biggest example the Tampa Bay Times could come up with was a schoolteacher running a voter registration drive turned in registration forms later than the 48 hour deadline and faces a $1000 fine for doing so.

Oooh. Big fraud there. Certainly a massive purge of voter records that might catch legitimate voters in the crossfire is warranted there to (not) prevent a teacher from turning in forms late.

So, seriously, where is the actual fraud this is preventing? It looks like just an elaborate scheme to deprive legitimate voters of their constitutional right to vote on the grounds that they might vote for the "wrong" person (i.e. a Democrat).
 
2012-06-04 09:41:59 PM

Silverstaff: It looks like just an elaborate scheme to deprive legitimate voters of their constitutional right to vote on the grounds that they might vote for the "wrong" person (i.e. a Democrat).


Just like requiring voters to show ID to vote, amiright?
 
2012-06-04 10:25:04 PM

Lewis: Silverstaff: It looks like just an elaborate scheme to deprive legitimate voters of their constitutional right to vote on the grounds that they might vote for the "wrong" person (i.e. a Democrat).

Just like requiring voters to show ID to vote, amiright?


Oh great. now when James O'keefe want to fark with my vote, all he needs to do is come up with a shopping club card with his picture and my name and signature forged on it, insead of the higher bar that he actually duplicate the signature in the poll worker's book right in front of the poll worker,
 
2012-06-04 10:34:38 PM
Right. Because that's the kind of I.D. voter verification proponents would favor ... not, say, a driver's license, non-driver's license, sheriff's I.D., or a passport or anything like that.

A government-issued I.D. with both a picture and a signature on it? Crazy talk, man. Crazy talk!
 
2012-06-04 10:38:39 PM

Lewis: Gyrfalcon: Lewis: Hysterical analogy fail trolling, Gyrfalcon.

Quit your day job!

Hysterical laughter Bruce.

I don't have a day job.

Cheers, mate! Then I hope you're enjoying either (a) the night shift, (b) your studies, (c) your trust fund, or (d) mom's basement.

'Cause if it turns out you're a kept sexual plaything of a wealthy paramour, then I hate hate hate you.


Wow, I wish I was the kept sexual plaything whatever. Can he look like James Bond only not with Sean Connery's accent?
(I'm studying for the bar, so nobody will hire me--it sucks.)
 
2012-06-04 10:49:28 PM
Wait ... either a gay man, or a straight woman (n0t - your profile has DUDE stamped all over it), who wants to run a stable of dominatrixes?

*shakes head in confusion*
 
2012-06-05 12:45:18 AM

Lewis: A government-issued I.D. with both a picture and a signature on it?


See: Poll tax.
See: Constitutionality of poll taxes.

Come back after you've boned up on your constitutional law.
 
2012-06-05 12:46:35 AM

Vangor: IAmRight: Every vote counts, unless there's two that are voting illegally, then it's a ridiculous waste of time to have their illegitimate votes scrubbed from the record.

Did they vote, or did they vote and the vote was counted? Those are different scenarios requiring different amounts of concern.


...But, how many times did they vote is even more pressing.
 
2012-06-05 12:47:55 AM
show ID to buy beer = responsible society
show ID to vote = racist

remove ineligible voters = fraudster rep. party
"vote early, vote often" = dem. M.O.
\
1960's liberal = don't trust The Man, man
2000's liberal = the government needs to regulate everything, man

wtf is it with you people, anyway? Brain damage??
 
2012-06-05 04:58:40 AM

Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]


Silly assed image is silly assed.
I know I'm feeding a troll, but... here we go...

- if you don't drive
- if you don't fly
- never asked for identification in all my visits to either my doctor or dentist
- never asked for ID when applying for a job. My resume was enough.
- never asked for ID except when picking up prescriptions. I could buy anything else in the store without one.
- What if you do all your banking online and at ATMs?
- never asked for ID to apply for school. after being enrolled and my transcripts sent, yes. But not before. That ID was my social security card and my DD214.
- who gives a f*ck about store credit cards? are they run by the government?
- never asked for ID for my utilities, cable, phone or internet. Just a credit card or bank account number will do. As long as someone can pay for it, they don't give a f*ck.
- who gives a f*ck about car dealers? are they owned by the government?
- the DMV already has you in their database if you have a license. No ID needed to register your car, just a credit card to pay the fees.
- WTF is "outpatient testing"?
- Homeless people can get medicare/medicaid without ID other than their SSN. FAIL.
- who gives a f*ck about donating blood? are the facilities run by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about buying a firearm? is the government selling it to you?
- SS only needs your SSN, and they send you a card for that, in the mail, for free.
- who gives a f*ck about pawn shops? are they run by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about writing a check? is that part of the government?
- who gives a f*ck about credit cards? are they issued by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about car insurance? is it a government service?
- who gives a f*ck about train tickets? are they government trains?
- who gives a f*ck about amusement parks? are they run by the government?
- who gives a f*ck about volunteering at "non-prophet orgs"? are they part of the government?
- all you need to check a book out of the library is your library card, which is either barcoded or mag stripped or both
- [citation needed] though I know THAT won't happen
- no ID needed to buy a house. If I walk up to you with a wad of cash and buy your house, all I need to to have the deed and other papers signed and notarized. Done.
- who gives a f*ck about apartments? are they owned by the government?

So yes, you f*cking moron, asking for ID to vote - since voting is a GOVERNMENT FUNCTION - can be racist when the people who ask for this ID make sure that they do so in such a way that they target the people who are LEAST LIKELY to have one. Those people in too many cases, happen to be people of color, college students, and "those people" from certain parts of town, all whom tend not to vote republican... cause they're smart like that.

You, on the other hand, are a waste of your parents' bodily fluids.
Next time you want to post something as insanely stupid as this FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW:FW: bait, count to ten (use your toes or your teeth if necessary)... then don't.
 
2012-06-05 06:19:43 AM

Lord Dimwit: Whereas some of the voter ID laws either in force today or under consideration would effectively disenfranchise millions and millions of people.

who are non-citizens, non residents of the jurisdiction, missed the cutoff for registration or cannot prove who they are. In other words, they are disenfranchising themselves.

Some people act as though obtaining a photo ID is the hardest thing an individual can ever do.
 
2012-06-05 06:54:45 AM

Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.


Not sure if it's the same group, but this past week I received a similar call from what was obviously a christian voter registration group. I was asked if I'm sick of Obama and his failed anti christian policies etc etc etc. I was in central PA at the time but my legal residence is in Philadelphia which is where I vote. I told the guy on the phone that and also told him I'm not a christian and why should I give him another second of my time? I also inquired how he got my unlisted land line phone number. He said there are ways (some shiat about how god provides) and that I was a lost cause, was going to be very sorry for my sins and he hung up. The caller ID was from a number in CA that does not take incoming calls. Still thinking about reporting it as he did kind of threaten me, but I'm sure it will prove to be a total waste of time. I also found out from a friend that there is no longer anything remotely like a private phone number no matter how much you pay your provider for one. If someone wants that number, they can get it.
 
2012-06-05 07:00:34 AM
I seem to remember that they teach everyone in school that every vote counts, and in history there were one or two winners by one vote. So......
 
2012-06-05 07:42:04 AM

Zasteva: relcec: Zasteva: - There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

the requirement is for new hires, not when you turn in your app to mcdonalds.

Of course. I'm guessing you understand that still makes the graphic wrong on that count?


Point of question: Does it being wrong on one, more than one, many, or even most of the points invalidate the remainder which are true?

/not sure I agree with their premise
//never needed any proof to vote until recently
/oddly, they do absentee ballots from prison in Maine it seems
 
2012-06-05 07:45:24 AM

Jamieboy: Diogenes: Ha! (Warning: CSB)

Just got a call on my cell phone last night from United in Purpose, an Evangelical group. They wanted to know if I was tired of Obama's high taxes and spending, and if I was not registered, they'd get me registered.

Here's a piece on them.

So they're trying to purge Democratic leaning voters while running a slipshod operation to register Christians and Republican leaning voters. Coincidence? I think not. Plus, this operation is out of California, while I live in Orlando.

Yet ACORN were the bad guys.

Not sure if it's the same group, but this past week I received a similar call from what was obviously a christian voter registration group. I was asked if I'm sick of Obama and his failed anti christian policies etc etc etc. I was in central PA at the time but my legal residence is in Philadelphia which is where I vote. I told the guy on the phone that and also told him I'm not a christian and why should I give him another second of my time? I also inquired how he got my unlisted land line phone number. He said there are ways (some shiat about how god provides) and that I was a lost cause, was going to be very sorry for my sins and he hung up. The caller ID was from a number in CA that does not take incoming calls. Still thinking about reporting it as he did kind of threaten me, but I'm sure it will prove to be a total waste of time. I also found out from a friend that there is no longer anything remotely like a private phone number no matter how much you pay your provider for one. If someone wants that number, they can get it.


0000
0001
0002
0003
0004
0005

In theory they'd sanitize it first but compute power is cheap and POTS is outdated so setting up an automated outbound call (with the various disconnect/error message tones included) can be done by anyone with a wee bit of Google skill and, by now, simply hitting up a torrent site. Hell, there are probably scads of freeware apps for it by now.
 
2012-06-05 07:49:52 AM

rewind2846: cause they're smart like that


I probably shouldn't...

If they're smart like that, why are they unable to get an ID?

/wouldn't recommend voting Republican
//you seem lacking in either logic or debate skills
/it's okay, someone will take care of you
 
2012-06-05 09:36:29 AM

UnspokenVoice: Zasteva: relcec: Zasteva: - There is no requirement to show id to apply for a job. I've done it many time.

the requirement is for new hires, not when you turn in your app to mcdonalds.

Of course. I'm guessing you understand that still makes the graphic wrong on that count?

Point of question: Does it being wrong on one, more than one, many, or even most of the points invalidate the remainder which are true?

/not sure I agree with their premise
//never needed any proof to vote until recently
/oddly, they do absentee ballots from prison in Maine it seems


No, being wrong on one or even most doesn't invalidate the remainder.

That said, it seemed to me that the intent of the graphic was to show how many ordinary things require an ID, so what's the big deal about using it for voting?

By refuting the vast majority of those points, instead we've shown the opposite. That for nearly everything that people commonly use IDs to facilitate there are workarounds for people who don't have IDs. So what's the big deal about leaving voting the way it is? -- you can show an ID to make it easier, but it's not a requirement written into law.
 
2012-06-05 10:09:53 AM
DERP!!!!
 
2012-06-05 10:13:40 AM

rufus-t-firefly: Silly Jesus: Lord Dimwit: Silly Jesus: [www.jookos.com image 640x480]

What part of "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax" do you not understand? ...

Lol.

There is no "Right to Vote" in Federal elections.

Let's try this again.

Amendment 24

The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.


www.fairvote.org - There are lots of words here, maybe some of them will help you.
 
2012-06-05 10:20:58 AM

Silverstaff: rufus-t-firefly: It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.

There's a reason I keep Silly Jesus "favorited" as "GED in Law". His frequent, easily debunked legal ideas. Made even funnier when he claims he's an attorney.

Lionel Hutz's Fark Handle?


1. I've never claimed to be an attorney.
2. Example of a legal idea of mine that your far superior mind has debunked?

tl;dr
[citation needed]
 
2012-06-05 10:33:30 AM

o5iiawah: Some people act as though obtaining a photo ID is the hardest thing an individual can ever do.


Florida has become real dicks about getting ID. To renew a DL you'd think that showing up with a face that matches the photo in the computer database would be enough. Uh-uh!

Instead you have to show up with not only photo ID, but extra documentation. You have to have a paper document of your SSN. It doesn't matter that the IRS has a phone hotline to verify SSNs for employers to use. No, you must contact the Social Security Admin and get a piece of paper. You need to show where you live. If you don't own your house or have the utilities in your name, then the people that do have to sign an affidavit that you live there. IIRC you can use connection to two financial institutions to substantiate yourself. I guess Little Tiger Check Cashing and Amscot could help their clientele by issuing photo IDs.

In short they have made it so confusing that they had to create a website just to guide people through the process. http://www.gathergoget.com/ (note the bagger appropriate use of .com for a government connected website)

In short, they've made it much more difficult than it used to be. So it is a barrier to those who never needed a DL before. And what demographics never needed to DLs before? Maybe the elderly, retiring here from a blue state. Maybe people too poor to afford a car? Maybe people who live in a big city and use public transportation? Do you associate those demographics with a strong GOP voter turnout?

I don't think the GOP does.

Smart ALECs.
 
2012-06-05 11:12:39 AM

Fecal Conservative: I think a couple hundred gallons of purple ink would go a long way to stopping all this silliness.

[www.apfn.net image 331x450]

/Hot like fairness and equality


I'm cool with that.

In fact, they could use 3 colors of voting finger ink -- red, blue and purple, and you can pick which one you want to use. Red if you voted Democrat (because they're Commies), blue for Repukes, and purple if you don't want to disclose to the world who you voted for.

Having bright colors on a bunch of people's fingers would make it easy to identify who among us had decided to participate in the corrupt system of voting, i.e., who has no problem using government agents to steal from their neighbors. The markings would be very useful in any post-electoral revolutions, street-sweeps or guerrilla wars that may occur.

Of course, even without a post-electoral reign of terror, the ink-finger system won't cut down on voting by illegal aliens or felons. And there's the problem of absentee voters, too. But the ink fingers would cut down on the vote-early-vote-often crowd.

There's also the question of people with a non-standard number of hands and/or fingers, but my guess is that's not too many people.
 
2012-06-05 11:46:41 AM

Silly Jesus: Silverstaff: rufus-t-firefly: It's right in the farking Constitution. It's not something to be interpreted - it's explicitly stated that there is a right to vote in federal elections.

There's a reason I keep Silly Jesus "favorited" as "GED in Law". His frequent, easily debunked legal ideas. Made even funnier when he claims he's an attorney.

Lionel Hutz's Fark Handle?

1. I've never claimed to be an attorney.
2. Example of a legal idea of mine that your far superior mind has debunked?

tl;dr
[citation needed]


My apologies, I double checked the threads. It was a different GED in Law I remembered here claimed he was an attorney: StanTheMan.

As for your GED in Law Moments:
Claiming that it's justifiable "self defense" to kill somebody fleeing from the scene of their crime, based solely on the fact they'd committed an assault recently and still had the weapon in their hand. Pursuing that person as they are fleeing, knocking them to the ground, and stabbing him to death being justifiable. Link

Claiming that it's obvious Martin Zimmerman won't be arrested or charged as it's open-and-shut self-defense, or if he is arrested the Judge will immediately throw it out and release him because there is absolutely no case. Link

Claiming that it's legal for US citizens to sleep with 14 year old girls when outside the US, as long as local laws say it's okay (18 USC 2423(b) disagrees, you're looking at Federal charges when you get back): Link

Claiming that Police are obviously not liable for damages when they raid a house on an anonymous tip and start a fire by detaining a family member who was cooking at a lit stove, that causes major property damage. . .and the tip turned out to be completely bogus and nothing illegal was found in the raid. Link

Claiming that if somebody is beaten to death in a hazing ritual, it's obviously not illegal because the victim consented to the hazing in the first place: Link
 
2012-06-05 01:08:50 PM

Silverstaff:

My apologies, I double checked the threads. It was a different GED in Law I remembered here claimed he was an attorney: StanTheMan.

As for your GED in Law Moments:
Claiming that it's justifiable "self defense" to kill somebody fleeing from the scene of their crime, based solely on the fact they'd committed an assault recently and still had the weapon in their hand. Pursuing that person as they are fleeing, knocking them to the ground, and stabbing him to death being justifiable. Link

There is ample case law backing this up. I likely cited it elsewhere in that thread. Also, your summary of the situation is a bit off. It wasn't argued that it was "self-defense" but rather that the general public was reasonably in danger from a murderer on a rampage. The courts have repeatedly held that lethal force is justifiable in the protection of third parties from reasonable threat.

Claiming that it's obvious Martin Zimmerman won't be arrested or charged as it's open-and-shut self-defense, or if he is arrested the Judge will immediately throw it out and release him because there is absolutely no case. Link

I did not accurately predict that the prosecutor would commit perjury when filing her affidavit. Link

Also, the hearing where the judge can throw the whole thing out based on his self-defense (SYG) claim has not occurred yet.


Claiming that it's legal for US citizens to sleep with 14 year old girls when outside the US, as long as local laws say it's okay (18 USC 2423(b) disagrees, you're looking at Federal charges when you get back): Link

I, and several others in the thread, were arguing that the wording is not clear as it related to that specific scenario. (Traveling somewhere for the sole purpose of engaging in such activity, rather than traveling for other purposes and happening to also engage in such activity...is how I interpreted it. That would be directly aimed at "sex tourism", which I think is the point of the law.) Either way, I was not making a moral argument. Thanks for the ad hominem thrown in there though...adds to your credibility.

Claiming that Police are obviously not liable for damages when they raid a house on an anonymous tip and start a fire by detaining a family member who was cooking at a lit stove, that causes major property damage. . .and the tip turned out to be completely bogus and nothing illegal was found in the raid. Link

They obviously aren't. Again, the police don't send other people into buildings where they have reason to believe a fleeing, armed, violent criminal is hiding out. You may disagree with it, but that doesn't change the fact that they are no liable for the damages. If you can find some law that would hold them liable, I'd love to see it. There is a long standing concept of "acting in good faith" that protects public safety workers from such things. If you are merely arguing that they are morally liable, then I would tend to agree with you there somewhat. It'd be nice of them to help the family out. They are in no way criminally liable though.

Claiming that if somebody is beaten to death in a hazing ritual, it's obviously not illegal because the victim consented to the hazing in the first place: Link


I argued that it shouldn't be illegal. Should boxers who kill another boxer in the ring be imprisoned? Should my friend be imprisoned if I ask him to punch me, he does, and I am seriously injured?

It seems that when you originally said that I don't know what I am talking about, legally speaking, you really meant to say that you don't agree with how the laws are written.
 
2012-06-05 01:57:22 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: o5iiawah: Some people act as though obtaining a photo ID is the hardest thing an individual can ever do.

Florida has become real dicks about getting ID. To renew a DL you'd think that showing up with a face that matches the photo in the computer database would be enough. Uh-uh!

Instead you have to show up with not only photo ID, but extra documentation. You have to have a paper document of your SSN. It doesn't matter that the IRS has a phone hotline to verify SSNs for employers to use. No, you must contact the Social Security Admin and get a piece of paper. You need to show where you live. If you don't own your house or have the utilities in your name, then the people that do have to sign an affidavit that you live there. IIRC you can use connection to two financial institutions to substantiate yourself. I guess Little Tiger Check Cashing and Amscot could help their clientele by issuing photo IDs.

In short they have made it so confusing that they had to create a website just to guide people through the process. http://www.gathergoget.com/ (note the bagger appropriate use of .com for a government connected website)

In short, they've made it much more difficult than it used to be. So it is a barrier to those who never needed a DL before. And what demographics never needed to DLs before? Maybe the elderly, retiring here from a blue state. Maybe people too poor to afford a car? Maybe people who live in a big city and use public transportation? Do you associate those demographics with a strong GOP voter turnout?

I don't think the GOP does.

Smart ALECs.


The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.

The bottom line is in order to have free and fair elections, states need to find out who people are and where they live. That isn't Jim Crow and the SCOTUS ruling on Crawford Vs. Marion county doesn't think so either.

Also, I lived in FL for 24 years...it isn't that bad.
 
2012-06-05 02:13:33 PM

UnspokenVoice: rewind2846: cause they're smart like that

I probably shouldn't...

If they're smart like that, why are they unable to get an ID?

/wouldn't recommend voting Republican
//you seem lacking in either logic or debate skills
/it's okay, someone will take care of you


And obviously you lack the cognitive skills to see the big picture.
This entire issue is not about ID, it's about the republican effort to purposely reduce the number of people who vote, especially those people who don't vote republican.
When voter turnout is low, the odds of winning favor republican candidates and causes.
When voter turnout is high, the odds of winning favor democrat candidates and causes.
This is why all those republican assholes were able to take over local elections in 2010, and should serve as a lesson to democrats... when you don't vote, sh*t like Wisconsin's Scott Walker happens. Sh*t like Arizona's 18th week abortion bill happens. And sh*t like these new voter ID restrictions happen in places they never had before.

All to appease the boogeymen of people like you.

/how's that for logic
//or maybe you'd like this explanation in the form of a picture book
 
2012-06-05 03:10:18 PM

o5iiawah: The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.


Oddly enough, the way you describe it it seems 100% more arduous. If it took X amount of effort to vote, it will now take X effort to get an ID, and X effort to vote (time off work,travel, waiting, etc). Total, 2X.

But I guess a 2X effort is insignificant, eh?
 
2012-06-05 03:24:54 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: o5iiawah: The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.

Oddly enough, the way you describe it it seems 100% more arduous. If it took X amount of effort to vote, it will now take X effort to get an ID, and X effort to vote (time off work,travel, waiting, etc). Total, 2X.

But I guess a 2X effort is insignificant, eh?


People just can't be expected to go through all that trouble in their lives to participate in such an insignificant process...there's TV to be watched and Doritos to be eaten.
 
2012-06-05 03:39:22 PM

Silly Jesus: People just can't be expected to go through all that trouble in their lives to participate in such an insignificant process...there's TV to be watched and Doritos to be eaten.


Too bad you can't sign up for Cable TV or buy Doritos with your ATM card without an ID, eh?
 
2012-06-05 04:15:15 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: o5iiawah: The act of gathering a few documents and getting on a bus, walking or driving to your local government agency to get an ID or license doesn't represent a serious deviation from the act of voting itself.

Oddly enough, the way you describe it it seems 100% more arduous. If it took X amount of effort to vote, it will now take X effort to get an ID, and X effort to vote (time off work,travel, waiting, etc). Total, 2X.

But I guess a 2X effort is insignificant, eh?


It is, if the person disposes of their ID after each election and then has to go to the DMV/office to get another. The smart person however will hold onto it until the ID expires which in most states is 6-10 years.
 
2012-06-05 04:19:58 PM

Vlad_the_Inaner: Silly Jesus: People just can't be expected to go through all that trouble in their lives to participate in such an insignificant process...there's TV to be watched and Doritos to be eaten.

Too bad you can't sign up for Cable TV or buy Doritos with your ATM card without an ID, eh?


Tee-hee-hee
 
2012-06-05 04:54:51 PM
So, since nobody has really read the story nor been keeping abreast of all the events, here is some more info:

1) The story is *just* about these two men because they freely admitted to the voter fraud.

2) As reported in the Washington times:


-2,700 non-citizens have been uncovered so far NOT TWO

-58% of those are hispanic. This is not due to racism, but do to the fact that most illegal aliens in Florida are hispanic.

-Of the 2,700 above, 1,600 have registered to vote.

-Of the 1,600 registered to vote, it has been found that 2/3 (a bit over 1,000) have cast ballots.

-The above stats are for Miami-Dade county only


So for the lot of you, get your facts right first before running around and pointing fingers. 1,000 votes in a single county is relevant, even one as large as Miami-Dade. These are also incomplete numbers as the purge is nowhere near complete. That 1,000 votes could easily grow to a much larger number.
 
2012-06-05 05:07:07 PM

Sniper061: -2,700 non-citizens have been uncovered so far NOT TWO


Hmm, Google finds news stories citing such numbers associate them with the phrase "POTENTIAL non-citizens".

Wonder why you know with more certainty than them.

Why are people asking for DHS database access if it so sure?
 
2012-06-06 12:59:17 AM

GT_bike: Subby: they found sufficient evidence for charges for these two, NOT only two have been found.

Good jorb you jackwagons, make this about Democrats and Republicans not about honesty and integrity in elections.

If your chosen party has as their strategy relying on dead and inelligable voters for it's electoral results then you need to rethink your outrage and your grasp on reality.


How dare you use the words of Coach Z in your troll?

If your party relies on scrubbing legal voters off the rolls to win, then you run with cheaters.
 
2012-06-06 05:53:42 AM

Zasteva: So what's the big deal about leaving voting the way it is?


I haven't a problem with it the way it is. I was merely questioning your attack. It lacked logic.

rewind2846: And obviously you lack the cognitive skills to see the big picture.


Your tinfoil hat is askew. "Oh, I can point out some things that aren't correct! Your entire premise is invalid!!!" (That is not a valid defense nor an acceptable rebuttal by even juvenile standards.)

"Newton didn't get all the math right, gravity doesn't exist!!!"

Yeah, I had kids. They grew up and learned to address the facts. (It's cute that you'd think I'm a conservative. It's adorable really.)
 
2012-06-06 09:35:13 AM

UnspokenVoice: Zasteva: So what's the big deal about leaving voting the way it is?

I haven't a problem with it the way it is.


I'm glad we both agree that there is no need to add new ID requirements for voting.

I was merely questioning your attack. It lacked logic.

It did have logic. You just didn't understand it. Your response above, however, lacks intellectual honesty.

I took the trouble to respond politely to your criticism, and explain the logic of my critique of the Silly Jesus's "Things that require valid ID" graphic. Rather than critique my explanation, you edited it out and simply attacked my post for "lacking logic".

Here it is again, in case you care to actually respond to the logic (or lack thereof) within:

[Me, several posts ago]: No, being wrong on one or even most doesn't invalidate the remainder.

That said, it seemed to me that the intent of the graphic was to show how many ordinary things require an ID, so what's the big deal about using it for voting?

By refuting the vast majority of those points, instead we've shown the opposite. That for nearly everything that people commonly use IDs to facilitate there are workarounds for people who don't have IDs. So what's the big deal about leaving voting the way it is? -- you can show an ID to make it easier, but it's not a requirement written into law.
 
Displayed 205 of 205 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report