Voter ID Issue

[icanthearyou 4,463]

Enough with the name calling, folks! Either discuss this like an adult or take your childish a$$ somewhere else.

If you can't get that rule through your thick head you're not as smart as you think you are.

To whom are you referring?

Everyone.

The only post I have seen that included "name calling" was yours. ???????

I guess you calling BG, "bammer" must be blocked from your view.

In the end, they may stop 1 fraudulent vote but at the cost of eliminating hundreds of legitimate votes

How? What reasonable purpose would you have for refusing to show your ID at a polling station?

I have never owned or driven a car and therefore I do not have a license. Will you please accept my social security card as ID? How about my AARP card? Now bammer, answer my question please...

I didn't want to call you out specifically because I hadn't looked at all the posts. I was wanting to put the rule out there before things got worse. That happens quite a bit in this forum if you haven't noticed.

Have a good day.

Thank you for pointing out this infraction. It is a serious violation of the rules and unnecessarily rude. I apologize to you, to the board, and to the bammer in question. Thank you again. I respect your authority and I have always appreciated the excellent job you do moderating this board. Keep up the good work!

Sincerely,

Childish A.

[MDM4AU 332]

Enough with the name calling, folks! Either discuss this like an adult or take your childish a$$ somewhere else.

If you can't get that rule through your thick head you're not as smart as you think you are.

To whom are you referring?

Everyone.

The only post I have seen that included "name calling" was yours. ???????

I guess you calling BG, "bammer" must be blocked from your view.

In the end, they may stop 1 fraudulent vote but at the cost of eliminating hundreds of legitimate votes

How? What reasonable purpose would you have for refusing to show your ID at a polling station?

I have never owned or driven a car and therefore I do not have a license. Will you please accept my social security card as ID? How about my AARP card? Now bammer, answer my question please...

I didn't want to call you out specifically because I hadn't looked at all the posts. I was wanting to put the rule out there before things got worse. That happens quite a bit in this forum if you haven't noticed.

Have a good day.

Thank you for pointing out this infraction. It is a serious violation of the rules and unnecessarily rude. I apologize to you, to the board, and to the bammer in question. Thank you again. I respect your authority and I have always appreciated the excellent job you do moderating this board. Keep up the good work!

Sincerely,

Childish A.

Glad you understand. It's an absolute pleasure having you around. Such an upstanding guy!

[homersapien 11,382]

So, if I saw a vulnerability in a system...be it computer, or physical security at a key facility. Even if I had no evidence that anyone had attempted to exploit the vulnerability, would it be reasonable not to address it and fix it? Yes, of course.I should only move to correct an obvious exploit vector once someone has actually taken advantage of it? That makes no sense.

Photo IDs make it harder to get away with fraud, in all sorts of matters. It seems like a rather obvious thing to fix. I'm not sure I understand the resistance if the various hurdles can be adequately addressed. Because I'm not interested in depriving anyone who has the right to vote of that right. But I am absolutely interested in preventing anyone who doesn't have that right from doing so, or preventing people from manipulating that right to game elections.

The problem is one of balancing the advantages vs. the disadvantages. The advantage is very small. There simply is not a lot of fraud occurring that would be fixed by photo IDs. On the other hand, the introduction of such a procedure will most definitely create a barrier to a lot of poor people. The "fix" is worse than the "cure".

Proving your ID with the sort of documents that even a poor person might already have works fine.

The fact - or at least assumption - that poor people vote Democratic is exactly why Republicans are pushing this. They aren't pushing it because they see a problem with voter fraud. They see a chance to restrict the votes of the opposition.

That's why they also changed some of the early voting and Sunday voting allowances in North Carolina.

[homersapien 11,382]

Ugh - I agree with the bammer.........

Liberals know good and well why the rest of us want ID laws. Racism as an excuse is just plain stupid. If you are over the age of 18 and still have absolutely no form of identification - you probably are not a good candidate to vote anyway. Every year after an election there are articles up about how many "dead" people voted, and if you go on youtube there is a video of a black woman bragging about voting 6 times.

There you have it. Horse's, er Elephant's mouth.

And why don't we hear more about these internet claims of fraud. Seems to me those are ready-made case for Republicans to be investigating. Let's try to quantify the problem and see if it merits putting obstacles to voting for people without a photo ID.

[homersapien 11,382]

It just seems to me that the sensible position is not to oppose photo IDs, but to make sure that such requirements have plenty of lead time to allow voters without IDs to acquire them, make sure that locations and means to get them are available to people who work all day (such as having some DMVs open into the evening and weekends), making sure that the cost is not prohibitive for the poor and so on. "Let's get every legal voter a photo ID" ASAP, not "Let's pretend photo IDs aren't necessary."

And let's not pretend voter photo IDs are necessary without some good hard data to back it up. I thought you guys were all for a leaner, more efficient government.

[homersapien 11,382]

A lot of the people the liberals are concerned about already have photo IDs. They need one to get their food stamps, free cell phones, etc.

Tell us about all about those "free" cell phones.

And I don't see a problem with making people jump through a few extra hoops to get assistance with their food purchases.

[homersapien 11,382]

Enough with the name calling, folks! Either discuss this like an adult or take your childish a$$ somewhere else.

If you can't get that rule through your thick head you're not as smart as you think you are.

To whom are you referring?

Everyone.

The only post I have seen that included "name calling" was yours. ???????

That was funny. "Stop name calling or take your childish ass out of here!"

Irony blindness is pervasive around here.

[homersapien 11,382]

Enough with the name calling, folks! Either discuss this like an adult or take your childish a$$ somewhere else.

If you can't get that rule through your thick head you're not as smart as you think you are.

To whom are you referring?

Everyone.

The only post I have seen that included "name calling" was yours. ???????

I guess you calling BG, "bammer" must be blocked from your view.

In the end, they may stop 1 fraudulent vote but at the cost of eliminating hundreds of legitimate votes

How? What reasonable purpose would you have for refusing to show your ID at a polling station?

I have never owned or driven a car and therefore I do not have a license. Will you please accept my social security card as ID? How about my AARP card? Now bammer, answer my question please...

I didn't want to call you out specifically because I hadn't looked at all the posts. I was wanting to put the rule out there before things got worse. That happens quite a bit in this forum if you haven't noticed.

Have a good day.

Thank you for pointing out this infraction. It is a serious violation of the rules and unnecessarily rude. I apologize to you, to the board, and to the bammer in question. Thank you again. I respect your authority and I have always appreciated the excellent job you do moderating this board. Keep up the good work!

Sincerely,

Childish A.

[MDM4AU 332]

I forgot defending a rival fan would raise the ire of you two AE guys. Both of you are such an asset to this board. I really mean that. Seriously.

[telling tiger 156]

Did you forget to go moderate the bammer fan in the threads he demands answers from others in a rude arrogant manner while calling them a troll? Wouldn't want you to be remiss in your duties, you too are such an asset and all. If you're to demand kind treatment of him, shouldn't you demand kind treatment from him?

[MDM4AU 332]

Did you forget to go moderate the bammer fan in the threads he demands answers from others in a rude arrogant manner while calling them a troll? Wouldn't want you to be remiss in your duties, you too are such an asset and all. If you're to demand kind treatment of him, shouldn't you demand kind treatment from him?

I'm not a moderator and only speak up in the threads I am participating in or following. And, my initial reponse was to everyone, not just one person. It happen to come after icanthearyou called BG a name but it was not targeted at just him. He just took offense.

[TitanTiger 20,495]

It just seems to me that the sensible position is not to oppose photo IDs, but to make sure that such requirements have plenty of lead time to allow voters without IDs to acquire them, make sure that locations and means to get them are available to people who work all day (such as having some DMVs open into the evening and weekends), making sure that the cost is not prohibitive for the poor and so on. "Let's get every legal voter a photo ID" ASAP, not "Let's pretend photo IDs aren't necessary."

And let's not pretend fixing our computer or secure site vulnerabilities voter photo IDs are necessary without some good hard data to back it up.

That doesn't make any sense. You don't wait to see if people have already exploited the vulnerability before fixing it. You fix it because it's an obvious vulnerability.

Do you really feel that the things that make it more difficult for some poor people to obtain a photo ID are insurmountable? Is it really that hard given enough lead time and other accommodations to get everyone who is a legitimate voter a photo ID in time for an election?

[homersapien 11,382]

It just seems to me that the sensible position is not to oppose photo IDs, but to make sure that such requirements have plenty of lead time to allow voters without IDs to acquire them, make sure that locations and means to get them are available to people who work all day (such as having some DMVs open into the evening and weekends), making sure that the cost is not prohibitive for the poor and so on. "Let's get every legal voter a photo ID" ASAP, not "Let's pretend photo IDs aren't necessary."

And let's not pretend fixing our computer or secure site vulnerabilities voter photo IDs are necessary without some good hard data to back it up.

That doesn't make any sense. You don't wait to see if people have already exploited the vulnerability before fixing it. You fix it because it's an obvious vulnerability.

Do you really feel that the things that make it more difficult for some poor people to obtain a photo ID are insurmountable? Is it really that hard given enough lead time and other accommodations to get everyone who is a legitimate voter a photo ID in time for an election?

No, I assume it's theoretically possible.

For example, we could have someone from the government contact every single voter listed on the voting list to see if they needed to have someone come to them and make a photo ID on site or to be mailed to them.

The real question is it really necessary?

[TitanTiger 20,495]

No, I assume it's theoretically possible.

For example, we could have someone from the government contact every single voter listed on the voting list to see if they needed to have someone come to them and make a photo ID on site or to be mailed to them.

The real question is it really necessary?

I think you're exaggerating to avoid giving a straight answer. There's no need for the government to contact every single voter. You simply make it known well ahead of any national election that a photo ID will be required to vote in the _____ election. Hell, the NAACP or other groups could even alter their voter registration drives to include buses and other things to get people to the DMV or other official location to get their photo ID done. They could streamline the process of applying for financial considerations for those who can't afford it.

[BamaGrad03 0]

Did anyone address this link?

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Dead-and-Still-Voting-177286281.html

Just curious.

And to the person who suggested that you don't have time to take off of work to go get your free ID, I would suggest that you shouldn't need to. If you work in the united states, you already have identification.

[WarEagle1983 2,185]

So, if I saw a vulnerability in a system...be it computer, or physical security at a key facility. Even if I had no evidence that anyone had attempted to exploit the vulnerability, would it be reasonable not to address it and fix it? Yes, of course.I should only move to correct an obvious exploit vector once someone has actually taken advantage of it? That makes no sense.

Photo IDs make it harder to get away with fraud, in all sorts of matters. It seems like a rather obvious thing to fix. I'm not sure I understand the resistance if the various hurdles can be adequately addressed. Because I'm not interested in depriving anyone who has the right to vote of that right. But I am absolutely interested in preventing anyone who doesn't have that right from doing so, or preventing people from manipulating that right to game elections.

The problem is one of balancing the advantages vs. the disadvantages. The advantage is very small. There simply is not a lot of fraud occurring that would be fixed by photo IDs. On the other hand, the introduction of such a procedure will most definitely create a barrier to a lot of poor people. The "fix" is worse than the "cure".

Proving your ID with the sort of documents that even a poor person might already have works fine.

The fact - or at least assumption - that poor people vote Democratic is exactly why Republicans are pushing this. They aren't pushing it because they see a problem with voter fraud. They see a chance to restrict the votes of the opposition.

That's why they also changed some of the early voting and Sunday voting allowances in North Carolina.

+1

[homersapien 11,382]

No, I assume it's theoretically possible.

For example, we could have someone from the government contact every single voter listed on the voting list to see if they needed to have someone come to them and make a photo ID on site or to be mailed to them.

The real question is it really necessary?

I think you're exaggerating to avoid giving a straight answer. There's no need for the government to contact every single voter. You simply make it known well ahead of any national election that a photo ID will be required to vote in the _____ election. Hell, the NAACP or other groups could even alter their voter registration drives to include buses and other things to get people to the DMV or other official location to get their photo ID done. They could streamline the process of applying for financial considerations for those who can't afford it.

That was not meant as an exaggeration, it was a straight answer. Such a process would arguably remove the obstacles a photo ID would create.

And to lay the responsibility on the NAACP to remove these obstacles sort of makes my point doesn't it? (Except that I haven't specified this is a problem for "colored" people. Poor whites will be just as affected.)

Bottom line, if we need to impose obstacles on a particular segment of the voting population we need to make sure it is absolutely necessary. Otherwise, it effectively disenfranchises a particular segment of the voting population which has more to do with affecting the election than reducing the small amount of voter fraud it supposedly occurs.

The Republicans understand this perfectly. Some of them will even admit it.

[homersapien 11,382]

Did anyone address this link?

http://www.nbcbayare...-177286281.html

Just curious.

And to the person who suggested that you don't have time to take off of work to go get your free ID, I would suggest that you shouldn't need to. If you work in the united states, you already have identification.

Wow! I didn't know that!

Gee, and to think, I never got a photo ID until my first professional job with a large corporation.

(This isn't more of your BS is it?)

[TexasTiger 12,940]

It just seems to me that the sensible position is not to oppose photo IDs, but to make sure that such requirements have plenty of lead time to allow voters without IDs to acquire them, make sure that locations and means to get them are available to people who work all day (such as having some DMVs open into the evening and weekends), making sure that the cost is not prohibitive for the poor and so on. "Let's get every legal voter a photo ID" ASAP, not "Let's pretend photo IDs aren't necessary."

And let's not pretend fixing our computer or secure site vulnerabilities voter photo IDs are necessary without some good hard data to back it up.

That doesn't make any sense. You don't wait to see if people have already exploited the vulnerability before fixing it. You fix it because it's an obvious vulnerability.

Do you really feel that the things that make it more difficult for some poor people to obtain a photo ID are insurmountable? Is it really that hard given enough lead time and other accommodations to get everyone who is a legitimate voter a photo ID in time for an election?

Titan, do you honestly believe the jurisdictions passing these new requirements have any sincere interest in making it easy for folks to meet these requirements? All evidence I've seen is to the contrary.

[BamaGrad03 0]

How does one get a job without an ID?

You also avoided my link that provides proof that voter fraud exists.

Titan, do you honestly believe the jurisdictions passing these new requirements have any sincere interest in making it easy for folks to meet these requirements?

They make it easy for people to register to vote, I see no reason why they can't work just as hard and make it just as easy for people to obtain their free state issued ID.

[TexasTiger 12,940]

Did anyone address this link?

http://www.nbcbayare...-177286281.html

Just curious.

And to the person who suggested that you don't have time to take off of work to go get your free ID, I would suggest that you shouldn't need to. If you work in the united states, you already have identification.

Wow! I didn't know that!

Gee, and to think, I never got a photo ID until my first professional job with a large corporation.

(This isn't more of your BS is it?)

BG is exceptionally naive, but he stays that way by choice.

[BamaGrad03 0]

BG is exceptionally naive, but he stays that way by choice.

Name the last job you had where you didn't have to show photo identification.

[TexasTiger 12,940]

BG is exceptionally naive, but he stays that way by choice.

Name the last job you had where you didn't have to show photo identification.

They were minimum wage and sub- minimum wage.

A lot of old folks don't have ID:

http://m.prnewswire.com/news-releases/older-adults-protest-new-voter-id-law-at-philadelphia-rally-163175076.html

[AUDub 11,153]

BG is exceptionally naive, but he stays that way by choice.

Name the last job you had where you didn't have to show photo identification.

I had a job setting up planograms at Lowes working for a 3rd party vendor. Summer and fall 2005. Never ID'd. This was while I also worked at my first job at Sears, which did ask for my ID when I applied.

[BamaGrad03 0]

BG is exceptionally naive, but he stays that way by choice.

Name the last job you had where you didn't have to show photo identification.

They were minimum wage and sub- minimum wage.

A lot of old folks don't have ID:

http://m.prnewswire....-163175076.html

Did you pay taxes?

Just because people say it will pose a burden doesn't make it so. You have an equal burden to prove that there's all these millions of people in the world who - not only don't have ID (bull****) and can't afford to obtain a FREE ID (also bull****) as you keep demanding we prove the presence of voter fraud.

Prove it. And I'm not talking about a single lady who's 85 years old and didn't get to vote. Show a pattern, prove it. I guarantee you for every documented case of an old person who legitimately has no ID, has no need for an ID, never retains government services requiring and ID, and never gets prescription medication and can't afford to reasonably procure a free ID - I can show you 10 cases of dead people voting.

1 in 5 people over 65 don't have an ID? How do they get prescription drugs? Illegally?