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.

(Google) NewsFlash Judge decides illegal immigrants and dead people still allowed to vote in PA   (google.com) divider line 995
    More: NewsFlash, voter ID, dead people, League of Women Voters, provisional ballots, illegal immigrants, Pennsylvania Republicans, swing states, Tom Corbett  
•       •       •

13303 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Oct 2012 at 11:12 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

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

Archived thread

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-02 01:32:51 PM

mrshowrules: You realize that giving your word/swearing is exactly how you get the VoterID card right?


*Facepalm*

I seriously did NOT know that.

you are correct then.

So why don't we have open borders yet?
Right..GOP
 
2012-10-02 01:33:07 PM

you have pee hands: mr lawson: Whoa...wait right there! Go back and look at what i said. I said POTENTIAL! I even bolded it to avoid this very type of attack.

Because in the absence of any sort of actual statistics regarding fraud it's just a big number for shock value which is senseless fearmongering.


And without strict voter ID laws, how do we know how much fraud is really out there? People could be voting UNLIMITED number of times, multiplied by the number of people in this country, plus all the dead and phony names used!

AAAAAAAARG!!!

TRUE FACT: There are only about 10,000 people that actually vote once in their own name! The rest of the millions of votes cast are duplicates and dead people, cast by an unknown number of people!

Prove that wrong! If you can't, then it must be true!
 
2012-10-02 01:33:11 PM
We can prove that voter ID laws disenfranchise legitmate voters at significant levels..

We cannot prove that illegal voter fraud is occurring at a significant level.

Therefore, voter fraud is a problem and must be stopped.

/Republican logic.
 
2012-10-02 01:34:17 PM

Leeds: 2wolves: Leeds: Has anyone pointed out that the numbers of illegals currently voting hasn't been tabulated? And has anyone mentioned that the reason is that up until this law there was no way to know how widespread this fraud has been?

Because that's sort of key to understanding this entire debate.

Has anyone mentioned that Mr. Obama has deported more illegals in one term than Mr. Bush, the Lesser did in two?

Perhaps you are right and GWB was nicer to illegals. But the fact remains that they tend to support the Dems regardless of who would treat them better.


No, it's exactly because Dems treat them better. Many latinos are very relgiious and would otherwise vote for the Republcans, if they weren't actively attempting to treat them as subhuman.
 
2012-10-02 01:34:29 PM
Y'know, until recently, you haven't had to show an ID to vote. I'm sure Republicans can prove that the sort of voter fraud that a photo ID would prevent was just RAMPANT until now, right?
 
2012-10-02 01:34:36 PM

justtray: snocone: You might want to take a look at the sourse of that there derp.
Like AGW, there is no longer any way to get actual data.

So it must be happening! Right?


Lemme see ya do ANYTHING helpful for either.
Let it go, 'cause it is gone.

/that cloud, i will shout at it
 
2012-10-02 01:36:08 PM
Alright- Raise your hand if you believe the following: The government is perfectly within it's right to force you to buy insurance that fits into a strict set of guidelines, but it out of bounds asking you to prove you are legally able to vote in a particular area.

If they cannot ask for ID to vote, how can they ask for ID to fine me for not having insurance?
 
2012-10-02 01:37:11 PM

Leeds: 2wolves: Leeds: Has anyone pointed out that the numbers of illegals currently voting hasn't been tabulated? And has anyone mentioned that the reason is that up until this law there was no way to know how widespread this fraud has been?

Because that's sort of key to understanding this entire debate.

Has anyone mentioned that Mr. Obama has deported more illegals in one term than Mr. Bush, the Lesser did in two?

Perhaps you are right and GWB was nicer to illegals. But the fact remains that they tend to support the Dems regardless of who would treat them better.


Doesn't mean they are voting illegally. A - B - C - M?
 
2012-10-02 01:37:28 PM

justtray: 1) We can prove that voter ID laws disenfranchise legitmate voters at significant levels..

2) We cannot prove that illegal voter fraud is occurring at a significant level.

3) Therefore, voter fraud is a problem and must be stopped.

/Republican logic.


Allow me to retort.

Point 1 is total bullshiate. Even the court ruled in previous months that this would not disenfranchise anyone. Even the people that the ACLU put on the stand as examples of people who would not be able to vote have ALL since found the 10 minutes required to pick up their free ID's. Seriously, every single one of them.

Point 2 is an important point. Until this law was passed there was zero method to determine how significant this problem is. The law was the fix for this issue as it provided a means of actually gathering the data for the very first time.

Point 3 is of course true.
 
2012-10-02 01:37:44 PM

snocone: justtray: snocone: You might want to take a look at the sourse of that there derp.
Like AGW, there is no longer any way to get actual data.

So it must be happening! Right?

Lemme see ya do ANYTHING helpful for either.
Let it go, 'cause it is gone.

/that cloud, i will shout at it


I don't even understand this. There's a misquote and some nonsense. "If your keys call into lava, just let go, cause man, they're gone."

I expect to less than sheer ignorance and deflection though. Welcome to ignore. This thread has been good for outing you people.
 
2012-10-02 01:38:08 PM

TaskMan: Alright- Raise your hand if you believe the following: The government is perfectly within it's right to force you to buy insurance that fits into a strict set of guidelines, but it out of bounds asking you to prove you are legally able to vote in a particular area.

If they cannot ask for ID to vote, how can they ask for ID to fine me for not having insurance?


No one is forcing you to buy insurance. What fine?

Turn off Fox News.
 
2012-10-02 01:38:39 PM

mainstreet62: If I may interject, I just adopted 2 kittens yesterday, I needed to show photo ID


You probably adopted yours from the pound. I adopted mine from a co-worker, and she never asked for ID.
 
2012-10-02 01:38:51 PM

mr lawson: theknuckler_33: Throwing around that 7-20 million number as a number of ballots cast is disingenuous... and that is being kind

Whoa...wait right there! Go back and look at what i said. I said POTENTIAL! I even bolded it to avoid this very type of attack.


I didn't read every one of your posts, but that word wasn't in the quote I used, but fair enough.

Someone earlier posted lmgtfy link for "ILLEGAL alien voting" (I thought the all caps for "illegal" was cute) as 'evidence' of illegals casting ballots and I clicked the first link just for shiats and giggles.

It stated that the GAO found that "up to" 3 % of people called for jury duty in one district court (people called for jury duty come from voter registration lists) over a 2 year period were not US citizens.

It goes without saying that being registered and casting a ballot are two completely different things. Not to mention that not being a US citizen is not the same thing as an illegal alien. That article doesn't say where that district court was, but I'll assume it was Florida since a big chunk of that article discusses Florida. Now I'm not sure how things are in Florida, but in Pa. you can register to vote when you get your driver's license. I'm pretty sure non-US citizens who are legal residents (presumably a lot of people in Florida) can get a driver's license and it is certainly plausible that many of them just fill out the registration part of the form thinking it is required to get their driver's license.

None of this indicates that these non-US citizens (again, not necessarily illegals) are actually casting ballots.

Later, the article states "the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has prosecuted more non-citizen voting cases in Florida than in any other state." without any numbers or citations.

Even this article warning of the dangers of illegals voting suggests that "Thousands of non-citizens are registered to vote in some states, and tens if not hundreds of thousands in total may be present on the voter rolls nationwide."... again, not illegals, just non-US citizens. Not that it would be better for legal US resident non-citizens to vote, just making the distinction since it is perfectly legal for legal resident non-US citizens to get picture IDs like driver's licenses. But even so, clearly they are suggesting the number of these non-US citizens is nowhere NEAR the magnitude of millions.

And the rest is just a screed on the inefficacy of current laws, etc. No evidence of non US citizens casting ballots except a vague reference to the DOJ prosecuting more non-citizen voting cases in Florida that any other state without any references to numbers, time frames, etc.

Granted, that was only one article that I looked at, but the burden of proof of this supposedly wide-spread activity of non-US citizens voting is on the accuser trying to implement laws that could disenfranchise actual legal US citizens from voting and that should be entirely avoided.
 
2012-10-02 01:38:52 PM

Leeds: justtray: 1) We can prove that voter ID laws disenfranchise legitmate voters at significant levels..

2) We cannot prove that illegal voter fraud is occurring at a significant level.

3) Therefore, voter fraud is a problem and must be stopped.

/Republican logic.

Allow me to retort.

Point 1 is total bullshiate. Even the court ruled in previous months that this would not disenfranchise anyone. Even the people that the ACLU put on the stand as examples of people who would not be able to vote have ALL since found the 10 minutes required to pick up their free ID's. Seriously, every single one of them.

Point 2 is an important point. Until this law was passed there was zero method to determine how significant this problem is. The law was the fix for this issue as it provided a means of actually gathering the data for the very first time.

Point 3 is of course true.


Ignore listed for disseminating lies.
 
2012-10-02 01:39:42 PM

xaratherus: Cataholic: xaratherus: Only one of those is a Constitutionally-guaranteed right - and the party that predominantly supports voter ID law (Republican) has a history of fighting fervently against the gun control laws that require you to go through a thorough identification process and background checks before purchasing a firearm.

And that is hypocrisy, plain and simple.

Getting a marriage license isn't a constitutionally guaranteed right?

Nope, it's not, actually. Marriage is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.


Well...there goes Roe v. Wade.

/ZablockiI v. Redhail would also like a word with you.
 
2012-10-02 01:40:17 PM
 
2012-10-02 01:40:33 PM

Marine1: You know... let's take a look at all you need an ID for:

Driving Don't
Purchasing a firearm LOL
Carrying a firearm See above
Cashing a check ATM deposit
Opening a bank account Opened before my DL expired
Using a debit or credit card Never been checked. Ever.
Opening a line of credit See bank account
Boarding a commercial flight Don't fly that often
Going to college (you may or may not need one for registration, but they will make you get one from them when you're on campus) Id expired after college. Also, college ID would probably. not qualify for voting
Getting a passport Didn't need to go abroad
Buying tobacco Don't smoke (used to)
Buying alcohol This is the one where you come closest to catching me, but most liquor stores and bars accepted my expired license
Buying medical marijuana (in states that allow it) Really niche market there....
Going over the border into Canada or Mexico See above
Transferring large amounts of cash (thank the PATRIOT Act for that) Again, pretty niche
Apply for a job at a government institution (they're going to want to make sure you're here legally) See above
Being shown an apartment you're considering a lease on Lots of folks, especially lower income, sublet

With all of that in mind... just who the fark is going around without an ID? Forget whether or not these people could vote if that law had been passed... how much of a disadvantage are these folks at in their every day lives without one? How about we focus on that?


Spent a year and a half without a valid ID. The whole time I was an employed, fully functioning citizen who voted in every election. Eventually, my wallet got stolen and I didn't even bother replacing the license because it had been expired and I rarely drive. I had the money and time and leisure to replace it and I didn't bother, what about folks who don't?

Not saying that my situation is universal, but since lots of people seem to be saying "I don't know anyone without an ID," I figured I might as well throw that out.
 
2012-10-02 01:40:45 PM

super_grass: '"Simpson ordered the state not to enforce the photo ID requirement in this year's presidential election but will allow it to go into full effect next year."

"The constitutionality of the law was not a question before Simpson."

You'll have a year or so to get an ID, get on it.'



In other words, Democrats got exactly what they wanted: a bureaucratic stay of enforcement on a perfectly constitutional law, which stays in effect just long enough to keep a loophole open through the November election.

Meanwhile, picture an equivalent scenario:
An person walks into a liquor store and asks for a bottle of vodka. Instead of the customer having to show photo ID, the liquor store has a registry of people who are of age and may legally buy alcohol. The clerk asks the customer his name, and he answers, "Hunter S. Thompson." "That's funny," says the clerk, "I could swear I read that someone with that name had died...do you have any form of photo identification?" The customer, of undetermined age, answers, "You silly man, you know it's illegal for you to require that I show ID before making my purchase. Look me up on your list, my name is there." ...And sure enough, it is. The clerk has no legal choice but to take the customer's word, and his money, and send him out with the vodka.

None of you -- especially those with teenage children -- would ever accept this honor-system paradigm for something as trivial as buying a six-pack of beer. Why would you accept it in a matter as important as deciding the leadership of the country?
 
2012-10-02 01:40:54 PM

iheartscotch: Lionel Mandrake: iheartscotch: Lionel Mandrake: iheartscotch: I also said; Ids are required for a lot of important things. Why not voting?

Where there's no problem, no solution is needed.

Make the IDs free and easy to obtain and there is no problem.

This seems to come up every election; the laws tend to make replacing a lost Id free and easy. It's almost as though everybody procrastinated 4 or 2 or whatever number of years. Would you prefer blood scans as aposed to a physical id that you can loose?

It's not free and easy, especially for the elderly who, in addition to having a generally difficult time getting places and waiting in lines, often do not have or long ago lost their birth certificates, meaning more money and lines. I think young(er) people assume that because it's pretty easy for them, it must be no big deal for everyone, which is not true. But, still, and I can't stress this enough, voter ID laws address a problem that does not exist. Set a long-term goal to get everyone a photo ID card that is available to all free of charge, and we have no problem. Still, there is also no "problem" that it will solve.

/ also; have you been denying them your essence, mandrake?

For now, but one of these days I'm going to unleash all my essence at once. Boy will the wife be surprised.

Maybe we need to do the purple finger thing. I can see how it would be hard for old people. My granny would probably not have been able to replace an id.

I'd have to disagree; I think voter fraud happens. Wether it takes the form of extreme pressure from a boss or religion; or actual fraudulent votes I don't know; but the election is too important to some people for it never happen ever.

/ it's only paranoia if I'm wrong

// you should definetly unleash your essence all at once; your ham sandwich ratio will probably increase as a result


I'm sure fraud happens. Where doesn't fraud happen? I don't think succumbing to pressure from your boss counts unless you are filling out your absentee ballot with him looking over your shoulder for some reason. It is illegal to pay someone to vote a certain way, but to pressure/shame them? I don't know. In any case it would be very few, it wouldn't favor one side over the other, and ID laws wouldn't stop it.

If we did the purple finger thing it would serve only one purpose: to somehow make people feel better about something that isn't a problem.

This 'toon is from TX, but applies to every state:

i159.photobucket.com

A LOT more eligible voters would loose their vote than fraudulent voters. By factors in the thousands.

Calm down, everyone, the Republic is safe...we can take our time with this.
 
2012-10-02 01:41:21 PM
The funniest part is, there's only one side attempting to perpetrate voter fraud, and it's the ones who are "concerned" about non stats as opposed to the real ones.
 
2012-10-02 01:41:57 PM

mrshowrules: Mercutio74: jabelar: The US has got to be the only Western democracies that doesn't require ID to vote. It is really asinine that you wouldn't. I'm as liberal as they come, and grew up in Canada, and even those commies hosers require ID.

Actually, that's not true.

http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=ind e x&lang=e

All you need is a fellow elector who knows you to vouch for you and swear an oath.

Actually in Canada, if you have your voter registration card, you don't need ID and you get your registration card in the mail without presenting ID. Effectively, if you don't have a mail box you need ID but It doesn't have to be photo ID. When you vote, you name is scratched off of a list so it is impossible for two votes to be placed against the same name. Very simple process and a very solid paper trail is left of who voted from what address.


Yeah, when I said ID I meant some level of proof of who you are and record of whether you've already voted. It is totally different when I vote here in California. In last election, I just walked in, they asked my name and address and crossed it off the list -- they didn't look at *anything*. If I had known the name and address of other people, I could have voted for them provided I got to the polling station first.

I really wonder what they would do if you showed up and they already had your name crossed off the list as having voted -- I mean they couldn't really let you "vote again" but it wouldn't be right to deny your vote (especially if you could produce ID to prove who you were).

Anyway, there is absolutely nothing stopping someone from going from polling station to polling station and putting in multiple votes here.
 
2012-10-02 01:42:19 PM

mr lawson: theknuckler_33: You're freedom protecting GOP poll

ROFLMAO...
MY what?!?!?!

Libertarian dude.
/believes in total open borders


It wasn't meant to imply your party affiliation as much as to answer your question. The GOP overwhelmingly favor these voter ID laws because of the apparently widespread voting by illegals. There is (or should be) a GOP poll watcher at every polling location. It is a bit shocking that, if non-citizen voting is so widespread, that these poll watchers have not been able to challenge more ballots than what appears to have been reported since... I really haven't been able to find any cases myself of in-person vote fraud at all (of any kind).
 
2012-10-02 01:43:00 PM

elchupacabra: cptjeff: Joe Blowme: Valid photo identification is required for the things that follow:

So the people without id to vote never do any of these thigs either, right?

Let's edit, shall we? Strikethrough on stuff that's wrong, stuff that doesn't apply to poor people deleted outright.

[snip]

Basically, your list is completely wrong. There are a hell of a lot of people who manage to live without photo ID, and the fact that you can't recognize that not everyone lives the same way you do does not speak well of your mental ability.


Let's be fair, here. Even with your strikethroughs, most of those items are still a PITA to do without ID. I agree with your assessment, but still think that living life without an ID is just making your life tougher in most cases. I think that was the original context of the statement -- not calling shenanigans, just admitting that life without ID was a bit astounding to contemplate.


Agreed, doing those things without an ID is a PITA, and while it boggles me that there are people out there who can get by without it, I know at least one guy who did so for 6 years and still worked.
 
2012-10-02 01:43:43 PM

justtray: Leeds: justtray: 1) We can prove that voter ID laws disenfranchise legitmate voters at significant levels..

2) We cannot prove that illegal voter fraud is occurring at a significant level.

3) Therefore, voter fraud is a problem and must be stopped.

/Republican logic.

Allow me to retort.

Point 1 is total bullshiate. Even the court ruled in previous months that this would not disenfranchise anyone. Even the people that the ACLU put on the stand as examples of people who would not be able to vote have ALL since found the 10 minutes required to pick up their free ID's. Seriously, every single one of them.

Point 2 is an important point. Until this law was passed there was zero method to determine how significant this problem is. The law was the fix for this issue as it provided a means of actually gathering the data for the very first time.

Point 3 is of course true.

Ignore listed.


Ah, the sign of a weak mind- you choose to ignore those who correct your mistakes. You're a creationist, aren't you?

The point stands though. Every single witness that testified in this trial has gotten their ID's. It was all over the news when that story broke last month. Most of us thought that it meant that this case was over and that the ID law would stand. It seems that in the end, the evidence that no disenfranchisement was occurring was not a strong enough argument to leave the law alone.
 
2012-10-02 01:44:17 PM

jabelar: Anyway, there is absolutely nothing stopping someone from going from polling station to polling station and putting in multiple votes here.


And if that was happening in more than .0004% of votes you'd have a point.
 
2012-10-02 01:44:18 PM

bhcompy: Fabric_Man: Judge decides illegal immigrants and dead people the poor still allowed to vote in PA

I know it's sarcasm, but still

I never understood this. Why does being poor prohibit you from having a state issued ID?


Er, um, it costs money they don't have?
 
2012-10-02 01:44:31 PM

darkedgefan: Yea, it is OK to ask people for IDs for alcohol and smokes, but not to vote!


Can I live in this imaginary land you live in where smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol is a right that would qualify as an unconstitutional tax if I had to pay for an ID to get them?
 
2012-10-02 01:45:57 PM

2wolves: jabelar: Anyway, there is absolutely nothing stopping someone from going from polling station to polling station and putting in multiple votes here.

And if that was happening in more than .0004%the margin of victory of votes in the closest election ever you'd have a point.


FTFY
 
2012-10-02 01:46:06 PM
Leeds:

Still waiting for your proof that illegals are voting en masse, let alone voting straight D.
 
2012-10-02 01:46:11 PM

SpiderQueenDemon: So yeah. The vagaries of party politics, assumed fraud and miscellaneous kerfuffle are no match for my Grandma.


Internet high five to your grandma.
 
2012-10-02 01:46:17 PM

organizmx: The lawmakers who passed this came flat out and said they were doing so to help Romney win PA, so good.

If laws like this HAVE to be implemented, do it now for the election four years from now, so everyone has plenty of time to get an ID. Not a month before the election.


EXACTLY. Make the law go into effect on Nov. 7, and at the same time start issuing state ID cards for free to anyone who doesn't have a license. Then I won't have a problem with it. But between the timing and the statements made by Republican lawmakers, it's pretty damn obvious what the real intent was.
 
2012-10-02 01:46:32 PM

lordjupiter: And without strict voter ID laws, how do we know how much fraud is really out there? People could be voting UNLIMITED number of times, multiplied by the number of people in this country, plus all the dead and phony names used!

AAAAAAAARG!!!

TRUE FACT: There are only about 10,000 people that actually vote once in their own name! The rest of the millions of votes cast are duplicates and dead people, cast by an unknown number of people!

Prove that wrong! If you can't, then it must be true!


Well, presumably if millions of people were voting fraudulently instances where two people attempted to vote under the same name or people attempted to vote under the names of people who are dead would be pretty common. They're not.

Votes are generated inside the machine by a random number generator. The button you push has no affect. Prove that wrong.

/if you're gonna do voter fraud, that's how you'd do it
 
2012-10-02 01:46:37 PM
My uncle in Philly was a staunch conservative and voted a straight-line Republican ticket until the day he died.

Now, he votes Democrat.
 
2012-10-02 01:47:02 PM

2wolves: Leeds:

Still waiting for your proof that illegals are voting en masse, let alone voting straight D.


He can't prove it, therefore it has to exist. Why do you have such a hard time following this logic?
 
2012-10-02 01:47:19 PM

IlGreven: bhcompy: Fabric_Man: Judge decides illegal immigrants and dead people the poor still allowed to vote in PA

I know it's sarcasm, but still

I never understood this. Why does being poor prohibit you from having a state issued ID?

Er, um, it costs money they don't have?


Yep, that's the democrat's argument. The free ID's will cost the poor more money than they have.
 
2012-10-02 01:47:27 PM

coeyagi: 2wolves: jabelar: Anyway, there is absolutely nothing stopping someone from going from polling station to polling station and putting in multiple votes here.

And if that was happening in more than .0004% the margin of victory of votes in the closest election ever you'd have a point.

FTFY


I'll live with that edit.
 
2012-10-02 01:47:30 PM

I_C_Weener: PonceAlyosha: OhLuverly: Haven't been following this much so if someone would please clear this up, how is requiring a state issued ID to vote a barrier to poor folks voting?

It is a poll tax and thus violates the constitution. The right to vote is contingent on showing up, nothing else.


Well, showing up and being eligibel to vote...over 18, citizen, that kind of stuff.
 
State should pay for the IDs.  Indiana does.  That is why its ID law remains.


States paying for the IDs undermines their real purpose, which is to disenfranchise those who for whom the time and money involved in acquiring them is a potentially prohibitive obstacle.
 
2012-10-02 01:47:55 PM

dabbletech: My uncle in Philly was a staunch conservative and voted a straight-line Republican ticket until the day he died.

Now, he votes Democrat.


I fail to see how giving a corpse a voter ID card would have prevented that.
 
2012-10-02 01:48:18 PM

elchupacabra: Thanks. So... I can see that throwing a national election using that method is probably infeasible -- although the illegals vote still is a question in my mind. What about regional/local? Governors and stuff.


Illegals voting is a voter registration issue, not a voter ID one. Most states will license you to operate a car regardless of your citizenship status.

And it may be more conceivable to put together enough people to make a dent in a small time local race where vote counts are in the thousands rather than in the millions (and we're not talking governor here- we're talking dogcatcher.), but it's still not going to achieve even close to the same results as getting a few volunteers to drive people to the polls, or getting a church or two to get on a bus to the polls for early voting after services. Black churches for Dems, evangelicals for Reps. 50 people per bus, virtually all of whom will vote for your guy if you pick your targets right, and many of whom might not have been motivated to turn out otherwise, especially in local elections where virtually nobody cares. And perfectly legal.

There are legitimate means for getting more votes, and they're a good bit easier to arrange on a level large enough to matter. You also don't run the risk of one person getting cold feet, blowing the whole thing open, and landing you and the rest of your campaign staff in jail.

There's just no reason to ever try. Every person involved has to falsify a few documents, register to vote with those falsified documents, and then show up, wait in line for an hour, wait in line for an hour again... It's just an utterly preposterous plan. There are way too many steps where people could get in big trouble, way too many places where somebody could blow it open and land everyone in jail, and an incredibly small return.
 
2012-10-02 01:49:14 PM

justtray: 2wolves: Leeds:

Still waiting for your proof that illegals are voting en masse, let alone voting straight D.

He can't prove it, therefore it has to exist. Why do you have such a hard time following this logic?


I'm a patient fellow.

He'll respond fully and factually any moment now.
 
2012-10-02 01:50:17 PM

cptjeff: elchupacabra: Thanks. So... I can see that throwing a national election using that method is probably infeasible -- although the illegals vote still is a question in my mind. What about regional/local? Governors and stuff.

Illegals voting is a voter registration issue, not a voter ID one. Most states will license you to operate a car regardless of your citizenship status.

And it may be more conceivable to put together enough people to make a dent in a small time local race where vote counts are in the thousands rather than in the millions (and we're not talking governor here- we're talking dogcatcher.), but it's still not going to achieve even close to the same results as getting a few volunteers to drive people to the polls, or getting a church or two to get on a bus to the polls for early voting after services. Black churches for Dems, evangelicals for Reps. 50 people per bus, virtually all of whom will vote for your guy if you pick your targets right, and many of whom might not have been motivated to turn out otherwise, especially in local elections where virtually nobody cares. And perfectly legal.

There are legitimate means for getting more votes, and they're a good bit easier to arrange on a level large enough to matter. You also don't run the risk of one person getting cold feet, blowing the whole thing open, and landing you and the rest of your campaign staff in jail.

There's just no reason to ever try. Every person involved has to falsify a few documents, register to vote with those falsified documents, and then show up, wait in line for an hour, wait in line for an hour again... It's just an utterly preposterous plan. There are way too many steps where people could get in big trouble, way too many places where somebody could blow it open and land everyone in jail, and an incredibly small return.


They like conspiracies.
 
2012-10-02 01:50:37 PM

2wolves: Leeds:

Still waiting for your proof that illegals are voting en masse, let alone voting straight D.


I'll assume for a minute that you haven't followed all of my posts, or you somehow forgot about them.

There is no data on how many illegals are voting because no one has ever had any means of checking. This law (the very law that was just postponed for reasons still unclear to us all) was the legislators' method of beginning to track this data.

Perhaps you don't live in PA and perhaps you haven't been following this topic on the radio and tv and newspapers like the rest of us have. But this law is the method for providing data about how many of the 70 million illegals are voting illegally.
 
2012-10-02 01:50:39 PM
If this law were to pass in MO I would go from four eligible ID cards and a number of other eligible ID forms to zero.

I would then be required to purchase a new ID just for voting. The PA card costs $13.50. I'm so broke I can't even afford that right now. Screw you Republicans.
 
2012-10-02 01:50:52 PM

bhcompy: I never understood this. Why does being poor prohibit you from having a state issued ID?


1) Getting the documentation you need costs money.

2) The lower you are on the totem pole, the less able you are to arrange time off from your job when the DMV is open.

3) People who have never owned a car are less likely to already have a drivers license.

4) Elderly people are likely to have let their drivers license lapse, and have been using other forms of ID such as veteran's ID cards that--surprise!--the voting laws do not recognize as legitimate.
 
2012-10-02 01:51:16 PM

cptjeff: There's just no reason to ever try. Every person involved has to falsify a few documents, register to vote with those falsified documents, and then show up, wait in line for an hour, wait in line for an hour again... It's just an utterly preposterous plan. There are way too many steps where people could get in big trouble, way too many places where somebody could blow it open and land everyone in jail, and an incredibly small return.


It's a high risk, low reward crime. All the more reason it's completely laughable that someone who is here illegally would willingly invite the scrutiny of the federal government whilst committing a felony and risking deportation to cast a single vote.
 
2012-10-02 01:51:21 PM

qorkfiend: LineNoise: If you can't make a $6 yearly investment in something that is going to make your life so much easier, well, you probably shouldn't have a say in anything to begin with.

Why do you hate the Constitution?


This. If I can't use an IQ test to DQ stupid people like LineNoise from voting, then LineNoise can't require people to pay for something "necessary" to vote, either.
 
2012-10-02 01:51:29 PM
In the era of the "factpinion", people can just make up anything they want and attach legitimacy to it, until it is 100% disproven (and even then, they may dispute it).
 
2012-10-02 01:52:47 PM

Leeds: was the legislators' method of beginning to track this data.


No. Just plain, no. It was intended to deliver the Electoral College votes to Mr. Romney. The exact quote is stark and leaves no room for spin.
 
2012-10-02 01:53:23 PM

bhcompy: Fabric_Man: Judge decides illegal immigrants and dead people the poor still allowed to vote in PA

I know it's sarcasm, but still

I never understood this. Why does being poor prohibit you from having a state issued ID?


Because if you're working a dead-end job and the DMV is only open from nine to five, you can't take time off work to renew your ID. And if you've been in that situation for a long time, you probably don't have a car or an up-to-date ID, because almost anyone will take an expired ID. This problem is multiplied exponentially if you have a child or some other responsibility.
 
2012-10-02 01:55:14 PM

TaskMan: Alright- Raise your hand if you believe the following: The government is perfectly within it's right to force you to buy insurance that fits into a strict set of guidelines, but it out of bounds asking you to prove you are legally able to vote in a particular area.

If they cannot ask for ID to vote, how can they ask for ID to fine me for not having insurance?


One is a fundamental right (warning: legal term), the other isn't. Thanks for playing!
 
Displayed 50 of 995 comments

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report