Voter ID laws appear to be working to suppress Democrat votes

They even made me show ID to get inside of Sam's Club.

 

There is no other reason for requiring ID to vote, we've already established that voter fraud is insignificant. Unless you can describe to me what "wrong people" are, then you are not making a compelling argument, which is not surprising coming from you, but still.

 

I really wish these right-wingers would use as much passion to protect the right to vote as they do to protect the right to bear arms.

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421292/voter-id-other-countries-require

For a party that claims to be Progressive, I do find this stance by liberals very regressive. Countries around the world provide National ID cards that can be used for a myriad of reason, including voting. Foreign individuals get confused that a nation like ours, would be OK to vote without using IDs!

PS...we need IDs for every other damn thing in this country... enough with this BS about it being a hindrance to the liberal party. Frankly, its idiotic.

Spoiler

http://www.newstalk1130.com/onair/common-sense-central-37717/a-long-list-of-things-you-12320312/
You don’t need a photo ID to vote, but you do need one to buy alcohol and cigarettes.
You need one to open a bank account, or to apply for a job to fill that bank account.

You also need an ID to file for unemployment, and to apply for welfare, and Medicaid, and food stamps.

You need a photo ID to apply for Social Security

And to buy a home, and apply for a mortgage, or to rent a home.

You need a photo ID to drive a car, you need one to buy a new car, to buy a used car, heck, you even need one to rent a car.

You need a photo ID to get on an airplane, and you need one to get married, and you need one to check into a hotel room for your honeymoon.

You need a photo ID to buy a gun, and to apply for a hunting license and a fishing license, and even to adopt a pet.

You need a photo ID to pick up a prescription, you need one to buy certain kinds of cold medicine, and you need one to donate blood.

You need a photo ID to enter a casino, and you need one to buy lottery tickets.

You need one to buy a video game that’s rated M for Mature, and you need one to see a movie rated NC-17.

You need a photo ID to buy a cell phone and apply for a coverage plan and, in perhaps the greatest irony of the entire Voter ID debate, you need a photo ID to hold a rally or protest, such as a rally or protest against requiring a photo ID to vote.

Spoiler

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/voter-id-proponents-point-to-laws-in-other-countries/2012/07/12/gJQAVlGCfW_blog.html

 

The only reason for requiring an ID to vote is to prevent fraud.....the same reason you require ID to do damn near anything in this country. You are yet again taking an indefensible position.

If there's no voter fraud, like some claim, then requiring Id to vote shouldn't be a problem.

 

There are a few problems with the way we're doing it here.

One, at the same time as requiring these IDs, Republican Govs are shutting down locations and reducing days that the ones still in operation are operating on.

The second major problem is that these IDs then expire. If the USA could figure out a way to get every adult a photo ID that never expires, costs nothing to the individual and can be acquired without driving to and waiting at a location, I'd have no problem with it at all.

 

Democrats should push through a national drivers license program with federal standards. As a part of that backdoor in the national ID and higher driving safety standards. Raise the cost of testing significantly but free for anyone under 200% poverty.

 

If you are over 60, the id never expires and costs 6 bucks, if you are under 60, it lasts for 6 years and costs 16 bucks.

People acting like having an id card is some kind of unfair burden are just ridiculous.

 

It is a burden. That's the whole point of why the Republicans are using it as a strategy and why it is working as a strategy.

 

LOL, well I'm fine with anyone that thinks it's too much of a burden to bear not being able to vote. That 0.01% of the population isn't a part of society anyway. Even a bum living on the streets could easily get an ID card.

 

It's the elderly that are also widely affected by this. But they're probably just worthless losers in your view as well.

 

The "elderly" have to go once ever to get an ID and it costs 6 bucks and it never expires. Again, that's not a serious burden.

 

I know that at one point Nelson Rockefeller looked into the idea of being able to buy votes. The argument was that the money received was more useful for poor people and that people should have the right to free enterprise.

It didn't go far.

 

Plain and simple... You want to require a picture ID to vote? Then make this picture ID as easily attainable as a voter's registration card and free of charge.

Until that happens, these laws are unconstitutional.

 

Elderly folks are quite resourceful and find ways to get things done. To suggest that they would be incapable of getting it done...is just not accurate...

 

What are you talking about? In no way did I just insult the elderly...

http://www.aarp.org/politics-societ...012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

 

I agree on the student ID. It's a bad argument that hurts the credibility of opponents of voter ID laws.

The inclusion of republicans in the graph makes sense to show that the voter suppression effect impacts Democrats more than it impacts Republicans. The problem with the graph is that it implies something instead of measuring. Voter turnout for Democrats is down from the Obama nomination process -- a high water mark for Democratic turnout. Meanwhile, the Republicans in 2016 see a bump from having Cruz and Trump in the race, so likely also not typical and probably drowning out any suppression effect on Republicans. It would be much better to look at the population that was turned away and count how many were refused a Democratic ballot and how many were refused a Republican ballot.

I would love to see a Federal ID that we can load up with all our various licenses and government accounts. I think we don't do one because it smacks of the USSR's internal passport. If it was a subject that came before Congress to debate, the fiercest opponents of it would be conservatives claiming it's a preamble to Emperor Obama taking our guns, spying on our churches, and selling us as slaves to ISIS.

 

NOT True...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Marion_County_Election_Board

 

Fair enough, in order to do so you'll have to raise a ton of cash to pay for it all. How about we just jack up sales taxes and let poor people pay a whole lot more for the same thing?

 

Just want to reiterate that the academic research out there says that these Voter ID Laws are not suppressing votes. It basically has been symbolic, but ineffective at impacting anything practically.