Will Trump win again???

[AMEHigh]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Does anyone else like Castro?

I’m bummed that he’s not doing well in polling. He has a good agenda and has been talking to people genuinely throughout the country from all walks of life. I want to look back at his accomplishments while mayor too.

I guess name recognition with the top 3 now just had him done in from the beginning?

 

[deleted643396]

How would you know if there were widespread voter fraud in an anonymous voting system where no ID is required? Maybe there is widespread voter fraud and we just have no way to detect it.

I have an idea- universal free worker/voter ID. We could solve illegal immigration, voter fraud, and disenfranchisement lickity split!

Free? Is that like free healthcare?

 

[deleted87051]

How would you know if there were widespread voter fraud in an anonymous voting system where no ID is required? Maybe there is widespread voter fraud and we just have no way to detect it.

I have an idea- universal free worker/voter ID. We could solve illegal immigration, voter fraud, and disenfranchisement lickity split!

Voting is supposed to be universal. Instead of voter fraud, people would complain about some fictitious worker/voter ID fraud and put up barriers to getting the ID.

 

[radsisrad]

Voter ID requirements are commonsense and about as "moderate" as proposals get - the radical position is the one that advocates the ability to vote without a document that I need when I'm buying a 6-pack or withdrawing money at a bank desk.

If "democracy" is as sacred as Leftists have been shrieking for the last three years, why are they so opposed to measures designed to protect the integrity of the process?

 

[vector2]

Voting is a right enumerated in the Constitution. Buying a 6 pack or withdrawing money from the bank are not. Overly restrictive gun laws are struck down for the same reason.

 

[radsisrad]

Voting is supposed to be universal. Instead of voter fraud, people would complain about some fictitious worker/voter ID fraud and put up barriers to getting the ID.

Voting is not supposed to be "universal." It's supposed to be theoretically available to all citizens, but it's been recognized for centuries (if not millennia) that one of the weaknesses attendant to democracy is that low-information citizens, as well as those who pursue policies unhealthy for the country for the long term, have the same say at the polls as more productive members of society.

Not every citizen ought to vote. They are all allowed to, but some really shouldn't.

 

[radsisrad]

Voting is a right enumerated in the Constitution. Buying a 6 pack or withdrawing money from the bank are not. Overly restrictive gun laws are struck down for the same reason.

Yeah, for citizens. So prove your citizenship and identity in order to fill those ballots.

This isn't rocket science.

 

[deleted87051]

Voting is not supposed to be "universal." It's supposed to be theoretically available to all citizens, but it's been recognized for centuries (if not millennia) that one of the weaknesses attendant to democracy is that low-information citizens, as well as those who pursue policies unhealthy for the country for the long term, have the same say at the polls as more productive members of society.

Not every citizen ought to vote. They are all allowed to, but some really shouldn't.

Disagree. Even conservatives should vote.

 

[vector2]

Yeah, for citizens. So prove your citizenship and identity in order to fill those ballots.

This isn't rocket science.

Hmmm, it’s so simple and yet only repub controlled states with large minority dem voter populations have done it. For some reason deep red states with essentially no minorities (WY and UT) don’t feel the need to protect their voters with strict photo id laws. Holy smokes Batman, it is a mystery!!


It’s also so crazy that these laws aren’t rocket science and yet they keep getting struck down over and over as unconstitutional..


“In July 2016, a federal appeals court found that a 2011 Texas voter ID law discriminated against black and Hispanic voters because only a few types of ID were allowed; for example, military IDs and concealed carry permits were allowed, but state employee photo IDs and university photo IDs were not.[15] In August 2017, an updated version of the same Texas voter ID law was found unconstitutional in federal district court; the district judge indicated that one potential remedy for the discrimination would be to order Texas election-related laws to be pre-cleared by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).[16] The court also ruled that the law would force some voters to spend money traveling to a government office to update their identification information; the court compared this provision to a poll tax.[17]”

 

[electropartyogram]

Hmmm, it’s so simple and yet only repub controlled states with large minority dem voter populations have done it. For some reason deep red states with essentially no minorities (WY and UT) don’t feel the need to protect their voters with strict photo id laws. Holy smokes Batman, it is a mystery!!


It’s also so crazy that these laws aren’t rocket science and yet they keep getting struck down over and over as unconstitutional..


“In July 2016, a federal appeals court found that a 2011 Texas voter ID law discriminated against black and Hispanic voters because only a few types of ID were allowed; for example, military IDs and concealed carry permits were allowed, but state employee photo IDs and university photo IDs were not.[15] In August 2017, an updated version of the same Texas voter ID law was found unconstitutional in federal district court; the district judge indicated that one potential remedy for the discrimination would be to order Texas election-related laws to be pre-cleared by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).[16] The court also ruled that the law would force some voters to spend money traveling to a government office to update their identification information; the court compared this provision to a poll tax.[17]”

In Texas, where I am from, non-citizens can be students at universities. Why would you allow a non-citizen to vote in a U.S. election? That is the reason university IDs are now allowed.

State employee photo IDs are different. But if you are a state employee, you most likely have some other form of identification. It is hard to see that common sense is unconstitutional.

 

[deleted126335]

This is not an issue where you can "both sides" it, and you have to be ignorant of 150 years of US history to state that disenfranchisement is not something to be concerned about. Listen, if there were evidence of widespread voting fraud in the US like there is in many parts of the globe, I would be the first one to join them in strengthening the laws to make sure the voting process is being followed legally and fairly, but currently all the evidence suggests that voter impersonation or dead people voting or illegal immigrants voting is statistically an almost never-event given the hundreds of millions of votes that were legitimately cast.

Ultimately, it is not a coincidence that these laws have primarily been enacted in Republican controlled states with high numbers of minority Democrat voters.

I don't think that there is any appreciable voter fraud.

I believe that Republicans are playing the "security" card to prevent people who live on the fringes of society from voting. Might make a difference in a close election.

I also believe that the Democrats are not above encouraging and facilitating people who are living on the edge to vote. Statistically they are more likely to vote Democratic. This serves their particular values and again might make a difference in a close election.

No question that US history is replete with disenfranchisement.

 

[electropartyogram]

Overly restrictive gun laws are struck down for the same reason.

Yeah, tell that to California. But we don't see you advocating against restrictive gun laws as heavily as you are advocating for more relaxed voter ID laws.

 

[vector2]

In Texas, where I am from, non-citizens can be students at universities. Why would you allow a non-citizen to vote in a U.S. election? That is the reason university IDs are now allowed.

State employee photo IDs are different. But if you are a state employee, you most likely have some other form of identification. It is hard to see that common sense is unconstitutional.

Yes, the ominous foreign non-citizen student (who makes up a teeny tiny fraction of the population) is the reason you'd like to give, but we all know the reality is that university students overwhelmingly lean liberal and this is a convenient group to suppress.

 

[deleted927529]

We can have a voter ID requirement when the people proposing said requirement also propose a federal photo ID free and easily obtainable to anyone entitled to it. Of course, that wouldn't help them win elections, so they won't Some Republicans Acknowledge Leveraging Voter ID Laws for Political Gain

 

[vector2]

that the Democrats are not above encouraging and facilitating people who are living on the edge to vote. Statistically they are more likely to vote Democratic. This serves their particular values and again might make a difference in a close election.

What does living on the edge mean? There is nothing wrong with encouraging all citizens to vote. If you want to imply that dems have encouraged or succeeded in getting mass numbers of non-citizens to vote then provide a source. Regardless, 30 some cases out of 1 billion votes or ~1200 cases since 1979 is a joke.

As for the other side, my evidence for suppression with discriminatory intent is the fact that these laws only exist in repub states with significant minority dem populations and the fact that many of these laws have already been found unconstitutional.

 

[electropartyogram]

Yes, the ominous foreign non-citizen student (who makes up a teeny tiny fraction of the population) is the reason you'd like to give, but we all know the reality is that university students overwhelmingly lean liberal and this is a convenient group to suppress.

Sure, they do, but that is not the reason for your supposed "suppression". 18-25 year olds have the weakest voter turnout, and it is not because of a lack of having the correct ID.

How hard is it to understand that you should have to prove who you are, and your status as a citizen, in order to vote in the United States. Every other country with democratic elections requires an ID. If you are 18, you should have some form of identification. Texas at least has a Texas Identification Card, and it is not hard to obtain. Sure, IDs could be more accessible (cheaper), but people need to make an effort to go down to the DMV and get their ID.

Don't even say they're too expensive either. We have 2A yet I still paid $140 for my right to carry concealed. People can pay the cost for their ID to prove who they are in order to vote in a democratic election.

 

[Mikkel]

As for the other side, my evidence for suppression with discriminatory intent is the fact that these laws only exist in repub states with significant minority dem populations and the fact that many of these laws have already been found unconstitutional.

You're saying there opposite of what you think you're trying to communicate.

The reason why Democrat states do not have voter ID laws is because their political class depends on votes with less than certain validity.

Allowing even one illegitimate vote is systematic disenfranchisement of one person.

 

[deleted87051]

Redirect Notice

 

[deleted126335]

What does living on the edge mean? There is nothing wrong with encouraging all citizens to vote. If you want to imply that dems have encouraged or succeeded in getting mass numbers of non-citizens to vote then provide a source. Regardless, 30 some cases out of 1 billion votes or ~1200 cases since 1979 is a joke.

As for the other side, my evidence for suppression with discriminatory intent is the fact that these laws only exist in repub states with significant minority dem populations and the fact that many of these laws have already been found unconstitutional.

To me "living on the edge" means people who have every right to vote, but would not otherwise do so if not encouraged and facilitated. No ability or willingness to travel to a polling place or even request an absentee ballot, and maybe only minimal understanding of what they are voting for.
I am not implying voter fraud, nor di I think that it is a big problem.

You really are looking for cause to be outraged and looking to paint everyone who disagrees with you as racist aren't you?

 

[vector2]

You're saying there opposite of what you think you're trying to communicate.

The reason why Democrat states do not have voter ID laws is because their political class depends on votes with less than certain validity.

Allowing even one illegitimate vote is systematic disenfranchisement of one person.

Wyoming and Utah don't have strict voter laws.

 

[vector2]

To me "living on the edge" means people who have every right to vote, but would not otherwise do so if not encouraged and facilitated. No ability or willingness to travel to a polling place or even request an absentee ballot, and maybe only minimal understanding of what they are voting for.
I am not implying voter fraud, nor di I think that it is a big problem.

You really are looking for cause to be outraged and looking to paint everyone who disagrees with you as racist aren't you?

You originally made a post stating that there is an equivalence between both sides that is purely political. I'm pointing out to you that one side is following the law and encouraging lawful citizens (your so-called edge people, young people, minorities, etc) to exercise their Constiutional right.

The gop is surgically targeting these very same groups with unconstitutional laws and absolutely ridiculous gerrymandered districts and then trying to sell a load of BS that they're enforcing the law, when in fact they're using discriminatory intent to create a "solution" for a problem that doesnt exist.

Your implication that this is some totally partisan "both sides" issue is a false equivalence

 

[Mikkel]

Wyoming and Utah don't have strict voter laws.

All states should have voter ID laws.

 

[vector2]

All states should have voter ID laws.

Sure thing. Pair it with automatic voter registration for citizens and numerous free voter id signup offices/mobile voter id signup capability and I'm onboard with that.

 

[deleted927529]

How hard is it to understand that you should have to prove who you are, and your status as a citizen, in order to vote in the United States. Every other country with democratic elections requires an ID. If you are 18, you should have some form of identification. Texas at least has a Texas Identification Card, and it is not hard to obtain. Sure, IDs could be more accessible (cheaper), but people need to make an effort to go down to the DMV and get their ID.

This just isn't true. The UK and Australia come to mind. Several countries that do have voter ID laws issue IDs automatically and free of charge. We can do that too, but anything less than that presents an obvious obstacle to voting that happens to be weaponized for political gain pretty often

Don't even say they're too expensive either. We have 2A yet I still paid $140 for my right to carry concealed. People can pay the cost for their ID to prove who they are in order to vote in a democratic election.

Why is your position "Other people should have to pay $XXX too" and not "I shouldn't have to pay $XXX"?

 

[electropartyogram]

This just isn't true. The UK and Australia come to mind. Several countries that do have voter ID laws issue IDs automatically and free of charge. We can do that too, but anything less than that presents an obvious obstacle to voting that happens to be weaponized for political gain pretty often

Why is your position "Other people should have to pay $XXX too" and not "I shouldn't have to pay $XXX"?

Okay, I generalized, but we have or federal elections are run by the states, so it is quite different. I agree with free voter registration, but you still need to prove your identity as a U.S. citizen in order to get this voter registration.

I was using the cost as an example. For a constitutional right, I must pay to exercise that right. If I have to pay to carry, then people should have to pay. If I can get my CHL for free, then I'll support free voter registration.

 

[Hamhock]

I'll admit that I think elective abortions should be illegal and should be prosecuted

Would you describe how you feel ectopic pregnancies should be managed?

HH

 

[Mikkel]

Would you describe how you feel ectopic pregnancies should be managed?

HH

Ectopic pregnancy is clearly incompatible with life.

 

[radsisrad]

Hmmm, it’s so simple and yet only repub controlled states with large minority dem voter populations have done it. For some reason deep red states with essentially no minorities (WY and UT) don’t feel the need to protect their voters with strict photo id laws. Holy smokes Batman, it is a mystery!!


It’s also so crazy that these laws aren’t rocket science and yet they keep getting struck down over and over as unconstitutional..


“In July 2016, a federal appeals court found that a 2011 Texas voter ID law discriminated against black and Hispanic voters because only a few types of ID were allowed; for example, military IDs and concealed carry permits were allowed, but state employee photo IDs and university photo IDs were not.[15] In August 2017, an updated version of the same Texas voter ID law was found unconstitutional in federal district court; the district judge indicated that one potential remedy for the discrimination would be to order Texas election-related laws to be pre-cleared by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).[16] The court also ruled that the law would force some voters to spend money traveling to a government office to update their identification information; the court compared this provision to a poll tax.[17]”

The measure of requiring ID and proof of citizenship to vote is a reasonable one, and the only ethical approach. The burden is no more on me to defend such a measure than it is on the government to defend the requirement for a passing grade on a driving test prior to the provision of a driver's license.

WY and UT should also enact such requirements if, indeed, they haven't already done so.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

This just isn't true. The UK and Australia come to mind. Several countries that do have voter ID laws issue IDs automatically and free of charge. We can do that too, but anything less than that presents an obvious obstacle to voting that happens to be weaponized for political gain pretty often

Why is your position "Other people should have to pay $XXX too" and not "I shouldn't have to pay $XXX"?

Australia fines you if you don't vote. Not sure that's the best example to use.

Interestingly, Northern Ireland does require photo ID but England, Scotland, and Wales don't.

 

[Mikkel]

Sure thing. Pair it with automatic voter registration for citizens and numerous free voter id signup offices/mobile voter id signup capability and I'm onboard with that.

Voter registration is already automatic, and there are already mobile registration tools available.

 

[electropartyogram]

This just isn't true. The UK and Australia come to mind. Several countries that do have voter ID laws issue IDs automatically and free of charge. We can do that too, but anything less than that presents an obvious obstacle to voting that happens to be weaponized for political gain pretty often

Why is your position "Other people should have to pay $XXX too" and not "I shouldn't have to pay $XXX"?

Also, I want to add this: I do not believe that the UK and Australia have massive problems with illegal immigration like the U.S. does.

 

[deleted480308]

Would you describe how you feel ectopic pregnancies should be managed?

HH

THAt wouldn’t be an elective abortion

 

[vector2]

Voter registration is already automatic, and there are already mobile registration tools available.

Ony 11 states and DC have automatic registration. Free voter id and mobile voter registration is even rarer.

 

[Hamhock]

THAt wouldn’t be an elective abortion

True.

I honestly didn't know that it was only elective abortion you were against.

So you are OK with abortion of ectopics?

Is abortion of ectopics killing a human being?

HH

 

[deleted50478]

Free? Is that like free healthcare?

Even better, the cost would be more than offset by the savings to the government. To the ID applicant it would be free.

 

[vector2]

. The burden is no more on me to defend such a measure than it is on the government to defend the requirement for a passing grade on a driving test prior to the provision of a driver's license.

No, actually the burden is very much on you because the Constitution says nothing about driving, opening a bank account, or drinking alcohol (s/p 21st amendment). However, it does say something very specific about the right to vote, and therefore the onus is on the states to demonstrate that Constitutional rights are not being violated in the name of "security."

 

[Mikkel]

Ony 11 states and DC have automatic registration. Free voter id and mobile voter registration is even rarer.

39 states do background checks now? I thought you simply submit the relevant documents for voter registration and you're automatically given a voting card.

 

[Mikkel]

California is an automatic voting registration state. So if anyone is given a driver's license, they're registered to vote regardless of eligibility?

 

[vector2]

39 states do background checks now? I thought you simply submit the relevant documents for voter registration and you're automatically given a voting card.

Are we talking about the same thing when I say automatic registration? The 11 states with automatic registration means that if you interact with a state agency to either get a driver's license or other sort of state ID then you are also automatically enrolled to vote if you are a citizen, aka there is no separate process to fill out a voter registration application. Additionally, it kills two birds with one stone because the name on your ID is guaranteed to match the name on the voter rolls.

 

[Mikkel]

Are we talking about the same thing when I say automatic registration? The 11 states with automatic registration means that if you interact with a state agency to either get a driver's license or other sort of state ID then you are also automatically enrolled to vote if you are a citizen, aka there is no separate process to fill out a voter registration application. Additionally, it kills two birds with one stone because the name on your ID is guaranteed to match the name on the voter rolls.

Registration that is made when you've produced the required documents makes sense since you're producing the same documents. The key is document production (and hopefully citizenship), but whether it's automatic by submission or automatic by transmission shouldn't matter.

California is a little more puzzling since illegal aliens can obtain driver's licenses legally. I don't know what safeguards are in place to prevent them from voting, and it's not clear if there's "fraud" if an illegal alien votes with a legal driver's license.

 

[electropartyogram]

California is a little more puzzling since illegal aliens can obtain driver's licenses legally. I don't know what safeguards are in place to prevent them from voting, and it's not clear if there's "fraud" if an illegal alien votes with a legal driver's license.

I believe the term for this is foreign interference with an election.

 

[deleted480308]

True.

I honestly didn't know that it was only elective abortion you were against.

So you are OK with abortion of ectopics?

Is abortion of ectopics killing a human being?

HH

I tend to be pretty consistent about using the “elective abortion” phrase

I’m fine with the standard ectopic treatments

 

[radsisrad]

No, actually the burden is very much on you because the Constitution says nothing about driving, opening a bank account, or drinking alcohol (s/p 21st amendment). However, it does say something very specific about the right to vote, and therefore the onus is on the states to demonstrate that Constitutional rights are not being violated in the name of "security."

The Constitution also doesn't make any provisions about firearms sales being limited to people who are not convicted murderers. In fact, it quite explicitly states, "shall not be infringed."

For the purposes of this discussion, then, I'll abandon my demand for ID and proof of citizenship prior to voting if you agree to a thoroughly anarcho-libertarian approach to the 2nd Amendment.

 

[deleted87051]

The Constitution also doesn't make any provisions about firearms sales being limited to people who are not convicted murderers. In fact, it quite explicitly states, "shall not be infringed."

For the purposes of this discussion, then, I'll abandon my demand for ID and proof of citizenship prior to voting if you agree to a thoroughly anarcho-libertarian approach to the 2nd Amendment.

Have you ever proven citizenship at the polls?

 

[radsisrad]

Have you ever proven citizenship at the polls?

Not to my recollection.

This is a major problem. It should be required for all voters.

 

[vector2]

The Constitution also doesn't make any provisions about firearms sales being limited to people who are not convicted murderers. In fact, it quite explicitly states, "shall not be infringed."

For the purposes of this discussion, then, I'll abandon my demand for ID and proof of citizenship prior to voting if you agree to a thoroughly anarcho-libertarian approach to the 2nd Amendment.

You ever heard the term “whataboutism”? It’s when you can’t actually argue about the point of discussion using the facts at hand so you try to divert to X, Y, and Z tangentially related topic. That’s what you’re doing.

And again, I already said I’m fully in favor of voter id if registration is automatic and voter Id is free and accessible.

 

[Leon'sMom]

On October 1, 2020 passengers on all domestic flights will be required to show either 1) a "Real-ID" drivers license or 2) a Passport as part of a new policy at HLS. Each state is slightly different, but this is how it works in my state:

When it was time to renew my drivers license, in order to get a "verified" license (Real-ID) with a yellow star in the corner, I needed to show certain documents to the DMV (I actually used a AAA office). The renewal paperwork told me exactly which documents I could bring. There were primary documents such as a birth certificate and US passport (these prove US citizenship), SS card, postmarked mail (to prove address). Some states call it something different than Real-ID, but the process may be the same. IF the Real-ID drivers licenses prove US citizenship and have your current address, I do not see why these could not be used as proof of voting rights. If somebody does not drive, I don't see why they couldn't have a similar process to issue Non-driver Real-ID cards. Assuming that these Real-IDs have only been issued to US citizens (And I am not 100% sure of this) using them would cut down on the number of people who need to seek out/pay for an ID.

 

[radsisrad]

You ever heard the term “whataboutism”? It’s when you can’t actually argue about the point of discussion using the facts at hand so you try to divert to X, Y, and Z tangentially related topic. That’s what you’re doing.

And again, I already said I’m fully in favor of voter id if registration is automatic and voter Id is free and accessible.

That's fine. I don't disagree with those proposals.

There's nothing particularly challenging about having proof of citizenship and photo ID in the US. The claim that such requirements pose unconstitutional threats to the right to vote is based solely on political hackery on the part of left-wing lawyers and "civil rights groups" intent on ginning up votes for the Left.

 

[deleted126335]

That's fine. I don't disagree with those proposals.

There's nothing particularly challenging about having proof of citizenship and photo ID in the US. The claim that such requirements pose unconstitutional threats to the right to vote is based solely on political hackery on the part of left-wing lawyers and "civil rights groups" intent on ginning up votes for the Left.

Passports are expensive and unnecessary unless planning on international travel. Driver's licenses can be very expensive to get back. In my state you have to pay off all outstanding traffic violations with interest and penalties. Also if you are behind in alimony or child support you may not be able to get one.

Not sure about other forms of acceptable ID to vote.

 

[AMEHigh]

On October 1, 2020 passengers on all domestic flights will be required to show either 1) a "Real-ID" drivers license or 2) a Passport as part of a new policy at HLS. Each state is slightly different, but this is how it works in my state:

When it was time to renew my drivers license, in order to get a "verified" license (Real-ID) with a yellow star in the corner, I needed to show certain documents to the DMV (I actually used a AAA office). The renewal paperwork told me exactly which documents I could bring. There were primary documents such as a birth certificate and US passport (these prove US citizenship), SS card, postmarked mail (to prove address). Some states call it something different than Real-ID, but the process may be the same. IF the Real-ID drivers licenses prove US citizenship and have your current address, I do not see why these could not be used as proof of voting rights. If somebody does not drive, I don't see why they couldn't have a similar process to issue Non-driver Real-ID cards. Assuming that these Real-IDs have only been issued to US citizens (And I am not 100% sure of this) using them would cut down on the number of people who need to seek out/pay for an ID.

No, REAL IDs are not only offered to US citizens.
I've lived in many states. I have many friends who are not citizens and they all have state IDs (which are now REAL IDs).

So I've already mentioned it multiple times in this thread...having an ID is not proof of citizenship. Therefore, the whole you must show ID to prove you are a citizen is a joke. The only thing having to show an ID does is make it more difficult for people who are eligible to vote do so.