JFK never should have been President

[El Gallo]

Notice that liberals who claim that it's "racist" to require ID to vote always cite how difficult it supposedly is to get an ID, yet they never propose fixing that situation. Instead, they use it as an ongoing excuse for why ID should not be required to vote.

This is because these same liberals know that, no matter how easy the process becomes to acquire an ID, some people still won't bother. And since those without an ID overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they don't want to lose those people from the polls.

Bottom line is that the entire voting process is a farce unless some effort is made to prevent fraud.

"Fix," what problem though? Conservatives have invented a boogie man that doesn't exist. There is No evidence of any widespread voter fraud anywhere. They can find a few examples but nothing that had any mathematical significance. It's not a racist initiative, but it is certainly being proposed in order to suppress votes. The more people that vote the more likely Democrats win. The fewer voters, Republicans win. What would be worse .0004% of votes being fraudulent, or 8% of a population (7.9% of them poor) not able to vote.

[MumblesBadly]

Notice that liberals who claim that it's "racist" to require ID to vote always cite how difficult it supposedly is to get an ID, yet they never propose fixing that situation. Instead, they use it as an ongoing excuse for why ID should not be required to vote.

This is because these same liberals know that, no matter how easy the process becomes to acquire an ID, some people still won't bother. And since those without an ID overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they don't want to lose those people from the polls.

Bottom line is that the entire voting process is a farce unless some effort is made to prevent fraud.

Druff, please provide a credible objective source that indicates how much voter fraud there is that the photo ID laws are intended to prevent. At the same time, research and report on how many people have been unfairly denied being able to vote because of these laws.

No, wait. Let me mumble up a credible objective source that discusses the matter.

Which happens more: People struck by lightning or people committing voter fraud by impersonation?
(Pssst! The answer is "struck by lightening".)
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...tning-or-peop/

[abrown83]

Notice that liberals who claim that it's "racist" to require ID to vote always cite how difficult it supposedly is to get an ID, yet they never propose fixing that situation. Instead, they use it as an ongoing excuse for why ID should not be required to vote.

This is because these same liberals know that, no matter how easy the process becomes to acquire an ID, some people still won't bother. And since those without an ID overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they don't want to lose those people from the polls.

Bottom line is that the entire voting process is a farce unless some effort is made to prevent fraud.

"Fix," what problem though? Conservatives have invented a buggy man that doesn't exist. There is No evidence of any widespread voter fraud anywhere. They can find a few examples but nothing that had any mathematical significance. It's not a racist initiative, but it is certainly being proposed in order to suppress votes. The more people that vote the more likely Democrats win. The fewer voters, Republicans win. What would be worse .0004% of votes being fraudulent, or 8% of a population (7.9% of them poor) not able to vote.

Let's spin this in a different direction.

Should you be required to have an id to collect government assistance?

[El Gallo]

"Fix," what problem though? Conservatives have invented a buggy man that doesn't exist. There is No evidence of any widespread voter fraud anywhere. They can find a few examples but nothing that had any mathematical significance. It's not a racist initiative, but it is certainly being proposed in order to suppress votes. The more people that vote the more likely Democrats win. The fewer voters, Republicans win. What would be worse .0004% of votes being fraudulent, or 8% of a population (7.9% of them poor) not able to vote.

Let's spin this in a different direction.

Should you be required to have an id to collect government assistance?

I think it depends. People are going to abuse the system either way and I'm fine with that as long as every other person or family truly need food or other forms of assistance. We've had people that we've employed who took the job as a waitress so they could get off of food stamps and instead feed thier family for free at the restaurant (we allow family members to eat for free). We also have some that would take the job, keep their tip money unreported and continue with government assistance. As long as we are truly helping at least half of the people then I don't care who you are.

[Dan Druff]

Notice that liberals who claim that it's "racist" to require ID to vote always cite how difficult it supposedly is to get an ID, yet they never propose fixing that situation. Instead, they use it as an ongoing excuse for why ID should not be required to vote.

This is because these same liberals know that, no matter how easy the process becomes to acquire an ID, some people still won't bother. And since those without an ID overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they don't want to lose those people from the polls.

Bottom line is that the entire voting process is a farce unless some effort is made to prevent fraud.

"Fix," what problem though? Conservatives have invented a buggy man that doesn't exist. There is No evidence of any widespread voter fraud anywhere. They can find a few examples but nothing that had any mathematical significance. It's not a racist initiative, but it is certainly being proposed in order to suppress votes. The more people that vote the more likely Democrats win. The fewer voters, Republicans win. What would be worse .0004% of votes being fraudulent, or 8% of a population (7.9% of them poor) not able to vote.

Nothing is being suppressed. Everyone has a right to vote if they are eligible. The ID would simply prove that.

Otherwise, the entire voting process is a farce and it might as well have no rules.

Want to vote 2 times? 5 times? 10 times? Have at it!

We already have a real-life example of a President who won thanks to voter fraud.

It could happen again in a close election, where smart operatives exploit the non-ID requirement.

It is foolish to react only after a huge vulnerability is exploited with disasterous results.

Here's a better idea: Fix the system.

If it's too difficult or expensive for poor people to get ID, make it easier. Then require it for voting or anything else where ID should be necessary to prevent fraud.

There is too much focus on this issue with WHO gets affected, rather than its fairness.

Yes, I know why Republicans want it (to get fewer votes against them).

Yes, I know why Democrats don't (to get more votes).

That shit isn't important.

What's important is the fairness of the situation.

If we make it easy for everyone to get an ID, and they STILL choose not to, then it's their fault that they can't vote.

[El Gallo]

Are you claiming Obama won because of voter fraud? If you are, you would be very, very mistaken. Here is a breakdown of that nonsense. http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/voting-conspiracies/

[Sanlmar]

Somewhere at the Cali Nevada border.

Druff: "My papers and my cell phone officer."

Druff is a statist & a sadist.

Light regulation & peace out.

[Jayjami]

Notice that liberals who claim that it's "racist" to require ID to vote always cite how difficult it supposedly is to get an ID, yet they never propose fixing that situation. Instead, they use it as an ongoing excuse for why ID should not be required to vote.

This is because these same liberals know that, no matter how easy the process becomes to acquire an ID, some people still won't bother. And since those without an ID overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they don't want to lose those people from the polls.

Bottom line is that the entire voting process is a farce unless some effort is made to prevent fraud.

As I have asked ad nauseum, please cite one instance where voter fraud ever influenced the outcome of an election. (Sound of crickets chirping). BTW, Judge Posner is a legal God.

[MumblesBadly]

Notice that liberals who claim that it's "racist" to require ID to vote always cite how difficult it supposedly is to get an ID, yet they never propose fixing that situation. Instead, they use it as an ongoing excuse for why ID should not be required to vote.

This is because these same liberals know that, no matter how easy the process becomes to acquire an ID, some people still won't bother. And since those without an ID overwhelmingly vote Democrat, they don't want to lose those people from the polls.

Bottom line is that the entire voting process is a farce unless some effort is made to prevent fraud.

As I have asked ad nauseum, please cite one instance where voter fraud ever influenced the outcome of an election. (Sound of crickets chirping). BTW, Judge Posner is a legal God.

P.S. Also agree re Posner's legal godhood.

[limitles]

Yeah, imagine what a world it might have been , as compared to today's porta-poti that remains unserviced. The list of those who were allowed in are exemplified by this robot and what we don't know would likely curl your toes.

[LarryLaffer]

We already have a real-life example of a President who won thanks to voter fraud.

.

a republican president. anything else?