GAO: Voter ID laws suppress voting, not fraud

Page 3 of 11 [ 166 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11  Next

beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

10 Oct 2014, 4:53 pm

The_Walrus wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
It makes sense to me that residency must be established, because they put local taxing/bond issues on these presidential/congressional ballots. If someone is voting on property taxes for a local community, then it should *only* be the people with residency in that community.

For example:
"Elected officials across California salivated at the prospect of putting their favorite tax measures on the Nov. 4 presidential election ballot
"The Los Angeles Community College District has prepared its own $3.5-billion property tax increase to repair and replace aging campuses"
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/12/local/me-tax12

If there is no ID and thus no residency check, then why not go in and vote to raise taxes on people in another community - who cares :) Or do they resolve this somehow ? But how could they if no ID is required to show residency ?

In the UK, in order to be issued with your ballot paper, you must give your address and then confirm that you are one of the people registered there. No need to show any ID. If you're at the wrong station, you will (I believe) be sent away. The system works.

I imagine a similar system could be implemented in the US with no trouble at all.


When I worked as a pollworker back in 2002 in the USA, as an assistant precinct registrar, I remember that we had to deal with people whose addresses had changed and who had moved either into or out of the precinct. I think, for people moving into the precinct, I had to write their new addresses in the book that had voter registrations. I was under the impression that another election commission official would go through the book after the election and update the voter registration with the information I wrote in the book.

I remember worrying that my bad handwriting might have messed up someone's voter registration and tried to be as clear as I could with it. :oops:


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

10 Oct 2014, 6:23 pm

Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Since you are foreign perhaps you have a poor understanding of what Grandfather laws in the Jim Crow south were all about, the grandfather clauses in the south were made to specifically exempt whites from the literacy tests and poll taxes of the time

Please elaborate on this.

The Grandfather clauses exempted people eligible to vote before the Civil War and their descendents from poll tax and literacy tests thus protecting poor and or illiterate Southern whites right to vote.

Source, please.

first one that shows up on google other than wikipedia http://www.blackpast.org/aah/grandfathe ... -1898-1915

From your link, Mr. Ayak:

Quote:
The Grandfather Clause was a statute enacted by many American southern states in the wake of Reconstruction (1865-1877) that allowed potential white voters to circumvent literacy tests, poll taxes, and other tactics designed to disfranchise southern blacks.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

10 Oct 2014, 6:55 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Since you are foreign perhaps you have a poor understanding of what Grandfather laws in the Jim Crow south were all about, the grandfather clauses in the south were made to specifically exempt whites from the literacy tests and poll taxes of the time

Please elaborate on this.

The Grandfather clauses exempted people eligible to vote before the Civil War and their descendents from poll tax and literacy tests thus protecting poor and or illiterate Southern whites right to vote.

Source, please.

first one that shows up on google other than wikipedia http://www.blackpast.org/aah/grandfathe ... -1898-1915

From your link, Mr. Ayak:

Quote:
The Grandfather Clause was a statute enacted by many American southern states in the wake of Reconstruction (1865-1877) that allowed potential white voters to circumvent literacy tests, poll taxes, and other tactics designed to disfranchise southern blacks.


Mr. Ayak? Really dude? f**k off.

Also I don't know what the point of what you're highlighting there is. Considering you keep continuously insulting me I'm just going assume you're a bit dim with an inflated sense of self worth so you feel you have to get the last word in here for some reason. Do you have a good handle of the English language? Maybe there is something lost in translation.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,453
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

10 Oct 2014, 7:04 pm

Dare I ask - - what's a Mr. Ayak?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

10 Oct 2014, 7:14 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Dare I ask - - what's a Mr. Ayak?

Are You A Klansman? It is a Ku Klux Klan code word.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

10 Oct 2014, 7:25 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Mr. Ayak? Really dude? f**k off.

Also I don't know what the point of what you're highlighting there is. Considering you keep continuously insulting me I'm just going assume you're a bit dim with an inflated sense of self worth so you feel you have to get the last word in here for some reason. Do you have a good handle of the English language? Maybe there is something lost in translation.

As your apperception of the interlocution escapes your acumen, perhaps it would be prudent for you to elucidate a somewhat more germane retort.

And please do not project your intellectual deficits unto others. That is rude.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

10 Oct 2014, 7:34 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Mr. Ayak? Really dude? f**k off.

Also I don't know what the point of what you're highlighting there is. Considering you keep continuously insulting me I'm just going assume you're a bit dim with an inflated sense of self worth so you feel you have to get the last word in here for some reason. Do you have a good handle of the English language? Maybe there is something lost in translation.

As your apperception of the interlocution escapes your acumen, perhaps it would be prudent for you to elucidate a somewhat more germane retort.

And please do not project your intellectual deficits unto others. That is rude.


*tips fedora* :lol:

I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

10 Oct 2014, 7:48 pm

Jacoby wrote:
I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.

Are you referring to the "Mr. Ayak" reference or the "disfranchisement of southern blacks" reference?

I highlighted both in recent posts in this thread....



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

10 Oct 2014, 7:55 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.

Are you referring to the "Mr. Ayak" reference or the "disfranchisement of southern blacks" reference?

I highlighted both in recent posts in this thread....


I already responded to your Mr. Ayak remark and perhaps I should expand on it but yes, what is the point of highlighting the "disfranchisement of southern Blacks" in relation to my post?



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

10 Oct 2014, 8:11 pm

Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.

Are you referring to the "Mr. Ayak" reference or the "disfranchisement of southern blacks" reference?

I highlighted both in recent posts in this thread....

I already responded to your Mr. Ayak remark and perhaps I should expand on it but yes, what is the point of highlighting the "disfranchisement of southern Blacks" in relation to my post?

The point is that even your own link demonstrates that you know very little about American history.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

10 Oct 2014, 8:15 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Again, I said I had no problem with transportation being provided, not that it be a requirement.

But when you want to make it a government provided service a requirement is implied. You can't just call any government entity and request a ride to the polls. The task would have to be assigned to an agency to provide or arrange and that would be driven by a requirement.

Quote:
As for voter suppression laws... er, I mean voter fraud laws not really being motivated by racism - considering that a great many of them are enacted within those states that have had long histories of racial discrimination, the charge is hardly far fetched, and is in fact very probable.

For the millionth time this is 2014, not 1964. Outside of a small part of one state you have demonstrated to have very little knowledge of the world beyond. Your sources of information on the outside world are obviously filtered.

Quote:
And no, I don't accuse all conservatives of racism, just those who have had a preexisting history of it.
But what you post illustrates something different. Not to worry, though, because accusations of racism, homophobia, trollery, thuggery, and general asshattery from the left only serve as indicators that we must be doing something right. :P


Kraichgauer wrote:
Your obsession with my suggestion that it would be okay if transportation were provided for individuals in need is... interesting... but your turning it into a strawman.

Hardly a strawman or an obsession since that's what you did say you wanted. The only obsession is yours over "voter suppression".

Quote:
And sure, it's 2014, not 1964, but that doesn't mean racism isn't alive and well in some place still, and that career politicians aren't going to use existing racism to keep the opposition from voting.
And until they die off they will be doing what they do which is not as much as you'd like to believe.

Quote:
And I don't need to be out of state to realize that that's the case.

If your sources of information are slanted then you don't really know what case is what.

Quote:
Joking or not, racism and homophobia aint anything to brag about.

As a gay black man, which you've bent over backwards to convince me that you are, I'm sure you have more of a vested interest than I.....


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

10 Oct 2014, 8:17 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.

Are you referring to the "Mr. Ayak" reference or the "disfranchisement of southern blacks" reference?

I highlighted both in recent posts in this thread....

I already responded to your Mr. Ayak remark and perhaps I should expand on it but yes, what is the point of highlighting the "disfranchisement of southern Blacks" in relation to my post?

The point is that even your own link demonstrates that you know very little about American history.


And what did I say that was incorrect?



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,880

10 Oct 2014, 8:37 pm

Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.

Are you referring to the "Mr. Ayak" reference or the "disfranchisement of southern blacks" reference?

I highlighted both in recent posts in this thread....

I already responded to your Mr. Ayak remark and perhaps I should expand on it but yes, what is the point of highlighting the "disfranchisement of southern Blacks" in relation to my post?

The point is that even your own link demonstrates that you know very little about American history.

And what did I say that was incorrect?

I do not recall claiming that you were incorrect. Your blatant intellectual dishonesty mostly manifests itself as selective reports of history, not outright false ones.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

10 Oct 2014, 9:03 pm

GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
GGPViper wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
I would like to hear you explain your highlight in the previous post, you seem quite convinced it means something.

Are you referring to the "Mr. Ayak" reference or the "disfranchisement of southern blacks" reference?

I highlighted both in recent posts in this thread....

I already responded to your Mr. Ayak remark and perhaps I should expand on it but yes, what is the point of highlighting the "disfranchisement of southern Blacks" in relation to my post?

The point is that even your own link demonstrates that you know very little about American history.

And what did I say that was incorrect?

I do not recall claiming that you were incorrect. Your blatant intellectual dishonesty mostly manifests itself as selective reports of history, not outright false ones.


I think in your enlightened euphoria you jumped the gun, if you're implying I was discounting the racial discrimination that prevented blacks in the Jim Crow South from voting then you are wrong. The grandfather clauses were used to exempt whites from the poll taxes and literacy tests which were obviously used to disenfranchise blacks, I don't know how you misinterpreted what I said but whatever. The rest of the post which you cut out says its silly comparison to what I was arguing about in the first place which was that voter ID is not an undue burden specifically on blacks or youths. The grandfather clauses in combination along the poll taxes and literacy tests obviously discriminatory and unfair to black voters who not only at the time as they did not have access to education and live abject poverty but most whites who could not meet these requirements were exempted. Do any of these voter ID laws exempt whites or Republicans(who were ironically was the party they were disenfranchising in the Jim Crow South)?

Instead of illustrating why voter ID is unfair and discriminatory specifically against blacks you proceed to call me Klan member and say that I want to return to the Antebellum South. I feel like you are the one being dishonest here. Do you think that these laws are discriminatory in Canada or the Netherlands or any other country that has them which many do?



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

10 Oct 2014, 9:06 pm

/\

Isn't it about time the two of you got a room, already?
Image

:roll: :roll:


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

10 Oct 2014, 9:23 pm

What's voter ID imply? Like a card with your name on it that's swiped and then you go and vote immediately after? Seems like a good way to stop fraud if it works that way. You know, making sure one person votes once (or not at all if that's their choice).

Here in Oz, you show up and they sign your name off, and then you vote.