Voter ID controversy

[Eddie Teach]

Oh right.

Though everybody who actually gives a fuck seems to be against it. 

Silent majority ftw?

[Razgovory]

Have you made a poll?

No, just a wild guess.

But seriously, yes: http://languish.org/forums/index.php/topic,7301.0.html

It's always fun to look back at old threads.  Great quote from Yi

Jake: where are you picking up this demonization of the poor?

[derspiess]

Oh right.

Though everybody who actually gives a fuck seems to be against it. 

Silent majority ftw?

No, just Seedy stirring shit up.

[CountDeMoney]

Oh right.

Though everybody who actually gives a fuck seems to be against it. 

Silent majority ftw?

No, just Seedy stirring shit up.

I stir nothing up.  I simply traffic in the truth.

Besides, you're actually going to expect a poll on democratic processes to have any validity with a board full of so many Europeans?  They don't understand democracy.  Hell, I bet half of them weren't even born into it.

[Sheilbh]

Oh right.

Though everybody who actually gives a fuck seems to be against it. 

Silent majority ftw?

Lots of Euros with compulsory ID laws didn't understand the idea of voting without showing their papers

[Ed Anger]

In Poland, they scratch the name of the candidate they want on a piece of black bread and drop it in the village well. Then they throw the Jews down the well.

[Barrister]

In Poland, they scratch the name of the candidate they want on a piece of black bread and drop it in the village well. Then they throw the Jews down the well.

Silly Ed.

There are no Jews left in Poland.

[Eddie Teach]

No, just Seedy stirring shit up.

From Seedy and Raz it's to be expected, but Berkut also seems to think it's like they're bringing Jim Crow back.

[CountDeMoney]

From Seedy and Raz it's to be expected, but Berkut also seems to think it's like they're bringing Jim Crow back.

Any rational observer can understand what's going on with all this.

[katmai]

Seedy, Raz and Berkut rational?!?

[DontSayBanana]

Why don't we flip the question around?  What's the compelling interest in forcing additional ID?  You have to register to vote, you need to bring your voter registration card, and you need to sign in, so you can only vote once per registration anyway.  And for some reason, we only hear about fraudulent registrations in groups coming from orgs like these True the Vote whackjobs.  Why don't we just take them out of the equation and leave the IDs alone?

[merithyn]

No, just Seedy stirring shit up.

From Seedy and Raz it's to be expected, but Berkut also seems to think it's like they're bringing Jim Crow back.

Aren't they?

The point of the Jim Crow laws were to prevent blacks from voting against what the whites wanted, ie integration laws, etc. The point of these laws is to prevent minorities from voting against what the whites want, ie re-electing Obama.

If this were an across-the-board process that involved more states than the swing states, I'd understand it better. Not agree with it, but understand it. But it's not. How many Democrats have been thrown off the voting dockets versus how many Republicans based on "problems" like new addresses, typos, etc? Given that this is spear-headed by the Republicans, I'm going to guess that there's quite a discrepency there. Why the rush to get these laws into place just before the election? Why are there no Republicans out driving people to help them get their IDs to vote in the poorer sections of town?

[merithyn]

Why don't we flip the question around?  What's the compelling interest in forcing additional ID?  You have to register to vote, you need to bring your voter registration card, and you need to sign in, so you can only vote once per registration anyway.  And for some reason, we only hear about fraudulent registrations in groups coming from orgs like these True the Vote whackjobs.  Why don't we just take them out of the equation and leave the IDs alone?

It's not necessary to bring your voter registration card to vote in Illinois. You need only to register in advance, show up at the polls, and sign in. If you have your card, it's easier on the poll-workers to find the right ballot, but certainly not required.

And even in Illinois - the capital of Fraud - there have never been significant numbers of people showing up pretending to be someone else in order to vote. That alone says something.

[garbon]

Why don't we flip the question around?  What's the compelling interest in forcing additional ID?  You have to register to vote, you need to bring your voter registration card, and you need to sign in, so you can only vote once per registration anyway.  And for some reason, we only hear about fraudulent registrations in groups coming from orgs like these True the Vote whackjobs.  Why don't we just take them out of the equation and leave the IDs alone?

We'd already flipped the question around before.

And in a more sensible fashion as we didn't assume that all states require you to bring a voter registration card (which I've never done before).

[garbon]

No, just Seedy stirring shit up.

From Seedy and Raz it's to be expected, but Berkut also seems to think it's like they're bringing Jim Crow back.

Aren't they?

The point of the Jim Crow laws were to prevent blacks from voting against what the whites wanted, ie integration laws, etc. The point of these laws is to prevent minorities from voting against what the whites want, ie re-electing Obama.

If this were an across-the-board process that involved more states than the swing states, I'd understand it better. Not agree with it, but understand it. But it's not. How many Democrats have been thrown off the voting dockets versus how many Republicans based on "problems" like new addresses, typos, etc? Given that this is spear-headed by the Republicans, I'm going to guess that there's quite a discrepency there. Why the rush to get these laws into place just before the election? Why are there no Republicans out driving people to help them get their IDs to vote in the poorer sections of town?

Except that you're the one making it about race. I think it is more about preventing those poor individuals, the one's who traditionally vote dem, from voting.  That's still pretty reprehensible but the goal isn't that they don't want minorities voting...but rather that they don't want people voting for the "wrong" party.

Also, I'll note that I think it's generally pretty bad to vote someone for an office just because they happen to belong to a particular race.