Courts strike down voter suppression laws in Texas & Wisconson

Polling places are generally very localized, DPS offices aren't.

Yes, and for someone without transportation options (elderly) or who can't take time off work (poor), this could be a major burden, one that should not exist for such a fundamental right as voting.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...th-voter-ids/2012/07/17/gJQAlrcXsW_story.html

Since I know you won't actually read the article...

"Echoing the Justice Department’s argument that the laws are burdensome, the Brennan Center report found nearly half a million eligible voters in the 10 states do not have access to a vehicle and live more than 10 miles from their nearest state ID-issuing office.

In some areas, the offices that issue IDs maintain limited business hours. Rural areas in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas are served by part-time ID offices. And in an extreme example, the researchers found the office in Sauk City, Wis., is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. That would limit the office to being open just four days this year."

All to combat a problem that doesn't even exist.

Actually, the problem they are trying to combat is that people vote for Democrats, so they have come up with laws that, on the surface, are meant for reasonable purposes, but in practice are meant to disenfranchise the people who are more likely to vote for the other party.

 

Still no one has answered my question:

What if I lose my wallet a day or two before the election? Does that mean I can't vote that year? The Voter ID laws would stop me from voting.

 

so not hundreds then? I am awaiting the response from SamFisher attacking you as a pro voter suppression ToyCen.

 

you could cast a provisional ballot and show ID later

 

Sorry, welcome to my trick question; thanks for playing.

In Texas, I would not be allowed to vote, because it takes longer than 6 days for DPS to reissue me a photo ID. Thus, I lose my right to vote if I lose my ID the week of the election.

Here's the Texas Law on Provisional Voting

"The voter then has six calendar days to present proper identification to the voter registrar for the vote to count. "​

Anyone else want to play.

Next

 

You do know and choose to ignore I assume.

It suppresses turnout, mostly those that vote D. R hasn't kept that a secret.

heypartner just posted what the $1.4m spent in TX to investigate Voter Fraud yield. There has been other investigations and studies for other states. Voter fraud is virtually non-existence.

 

I was going to said... you deserve to not vote. Real people don't lose their wallet.

 

Since you seem to be in the know, I was wondering what happens if I update my address on my voter ID card, but don't update it on my DL. Will they turn me away at the polls because my address isn't consistent?

 

Voter ID laws reduce turnout more among African American and younger voters (link)

vs.

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast (link)

and

Dick Morris: There's proof that over 1 million people voted twice in 2012 (link)

 

The law is a little fuzzy on that. I mean there could be like 2 Juan Valdez's in same voting precincts. And who knows how many Juan Garcia's there are? We will probably have to defer to the discretion of the polling location's election commodore on staff to make a judgement call.

 

Why do they send me two voter registration cards? Did I register twice or do they hate trees?

 

Dude, you need to shred that second one, then eat it, **** it out, dry the feces, then burn it.

Otherwise Texas AG Abbott will prosecute you for Voter Fraud for having two, active registration cards. I kid you not.

 

I already took a picture of me holding both of them along with my DL, CHL and passport. Then I emailed that to everyone. Should I evac Katy?

 

I guess I'm just not that concerned with protecting the vote of the absolute dregs of society. If you can't afford an ID, which is absolutely dirt cheap, I don't see any reason why your opinion about anything should matter to anyone.

Then again, I've always been more a fan of a sort of democratic oligarchy where your vote has to be earned than a system that lets complete morons vote. To each their own I suppose.

 

you're very proud of yourself

I was suggesting a hypothetical legal scheme that would allow you to vote.

 

So, to you, people who vote Democrat, the people who are specifically targeted by these laws according to the admission of Republican officeholders, are "the absolute dregs of society."

The single largest demographic which will be disenfranchised will be the elderly, I suppose they are "dregs" too.

If you are American, your opinion about who will represent your interests in office should matter to election officials, it is your right as a citizen.

I agree, all of the people who religiously watch the liars on Fox "News" should be stripped of their right to vote. They are being led by the nose by shucksters that are bleeding our country dry and don't deserve a voice in our Democracy. The same thing goes for people who watch nothing but MSNBC with no critical thinking (the way most Fox viewers tend to, in my experience).

I suppose that would leave you on the outside looking in, I wonder if your opinion would change then. BTW, congrats for making my sig.

 

I'm not defending SamFisher's argument, I'm presenting the facts, which show that HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CITIZENS could face significant obstacles in their quest to exercise a right granted to them by the Constitution. You are defending laws that would disenfranchise thousands, tens of thousands, or more when the evidence of voter fraud is limited to LITERALLY 31 instances out of over a billion votes cast.

Your opinion seems beyond stupid when you look at the actual facts, but then again, the goal is to disenfranchise Democrat voters and you f***ing well know it.

 

No, it has nothing to do with who they vote for, I said that if you can't afford to purchase an ID, which is dirt cheap at 15 bucks for those under 60 and is valid for 6 years, then I can't see caring about your opinion. I would think that those who can't afford 2.50 a year would be appropriately labeled as the dregs of society.

Those who are over 60 pay 6 dollars and their ID never expires, if they can't afford a one time charge of 6 dollars, they have failed in their life so utterly as to not deserve an opinion.

Sure, that's our system, I don't think it's an optimal system though because far too many incompetent people get to vote. So far it's worked out well enough.

I get it, the concept was too complex for you so you had to make it strictly political. There are people that IMO don't deserve to have a vote in every party. It's adorable that you think that I "religiously" watch either Fox News or MSNBC though.

 

Registering to vote 30 days in advance is another outdated and stupid requirement. But that's another argument.

Anyway, you do agree with the "thimbleful of dirt" requirement since it's free and easy, right?