Court Reinstates Texas Voter ID Requirement, Allowing State to Enforce Law This Election

Do you really believe that there is a large population of legal voters who don't have id's or can't afford the 6 bucks it costs to get one for multiple years? If not, what legal vote is being "suppressed"?

 

Not sure how to interpret this half-formed bubbling of emot-tellect. But read this again:

Voter fraud doesn't exist in meaningful way, period. Voter Suppression laws are fake attempts to solve a problem that doesn't exist, via a mechanism that doesn't work. They are real attempts to suppress votes.

 

So in other words, no, there isn't a large population of legal voters who don't have and can't get ID's and this is nothing but a fake controversy? Got it.

 

There are 1 million voters in Texas who don't have a Photo ID, out of 13.4 million total voters.

There were three illegal votes in Texas made between 2000 and 2010 out of 8,000,000 that Photo ID would have prevented.

These facts were from a $1.4M study paid for by Texas AG Abbott (R).

It's OK to admit you want to suppress votes for some anti-Democracy agenda, but just own it then and call it what it is...anti-Constitutional (soon to be illegal) Voter Suppression.

 

Well at least you attempted to answer the question, for that I thank you. The number I saw was 608,000 and while it's possible to register to vote without an ID, I'd bet that a VERY small percentage of those 608k actually register to vote and show up to do so. Without an ID law, all one would have to do is use someone's social to register to vote and show up claiming to be them and you could vote multiple times. I think voting is important enough to require ID at the poll station. It's pretty obvious why some would want to make voter fraud easier, and even more obvious when the party that wishes to do so is represented by a minority of the population. Suggesting that voter fraud doesn't exist is naive...probably intentionally so. It does and has always existed.

 

You are arguing with the US Supreme Courts facts here. You know that right.

Again, in Texas State AG Abbott (R) $1.4m study, only three illegal votes were found in ten years.

People don't show up stealing someone's SSN to make an Illegal Vote punishable by imprisonment. It's not worth it. They will be caught, because the Voter who they are attempting to impersonate has either already voted (thus they get detained immediately) or will soon come in and vote and complain (thus they will be investigated).

Worse and much more stupid is your idea that the illegal voter would actually register for someone. That will definitely be discovered if the real person then try to register after. Yeah, people really risk imprisonment to vote twice. "Yeah, all they have to do is steal someone's identity (name, address and SSN) punishable by years in prison."

No they don't do this. It is proven. You are making this up.

Just say you don't want people to vote who don't have Photo ID. Don't get into an argument of facts on this. You will lose. Study after Study proves the facts, and the US Supreme Court confirms those facts.

 

I disagree with the findings of the study, just because the study didn't find it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Also, I've said before that I don't want anyone without an ID voting, I don't believe that they should. If you can't buy a pack a cigarettes I don't think you should be allowed to vote.

 

I quote a $1.4m study, and now you say that's not good enough, we have to do more. well we have. The US Supreme Court can document many. You're actually saying I have to produce more studies when you haven't produced ANY!

--------------------------------------

Oh, and I will say that your argument is getting more clever over time as you read the facts.

You used to say that stupid people who have made bad life decisions shouldn't be allowed to vote. Now you are actually covering your true motive by claiming facts that don't exist.

You're learning. I'll give you that.

But I respected you more when you actually told the truth about your motives, rather than now hiding your motives.

 

It's a different conversation, if we're talking about those who allegedly can't afford a 6 dollar ID then that's one thing, if we're talking about voter fraud, that's different.

 

So I see you are now moving away from the studies and facts argument.

Good for you. You should. Because you are wrong about Voter Fraud.

10 of millions of people in Texas can buy cigarettes without a Photo ID.

Here's the analogy dude.

• You are registered to vote with proof prior to voting vs You are not registered to smoke at your convenience store
• You cannot go to another precinct to vote without Photo ID vs You can buy cigarettes anywhere.
• You can only vote once every 2 years (for arguments sake) vs You can buy cigarettes daily.
• You face prison time if you illegally vote

The cigarette analogy is bunk. It's a weak-minded argument that is nothing like voting...since you must Register.

 

In a world where someone uses "in a world" to start more than one sentence in a short post, then our biggest focus should be on stopping the excessive screening of movie previews.

There is no evidence that there is a risk of voter fraud becoming a problem. So it isn't about stopping future problems either.

 

Yes, we do.

http://theusconstitution.org/text-history/1621/yes-there-right-vote-constitution

The money shot...

"As Professor Epps makes clear, not only is there a right to vote in the Constitution, but it’s the single right that appears most often in the Constitution’s text – five times in all. In fact, four separate Amendments – the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th – even use the same powerful language to protect it: “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged . . . .” Of course, like every other constitutional right, the right to vote is subject to reasonable restrictions. Nevertheless, it’s just as much a constitutional right as any other embodied in our Constitution."

 

I believe that there is a large population of legal voters who don't have ID (this opinion is supported by every single study to research the issue) and who would choose not voting over jumping through all the hoops required to get an ID, hoops that are far more substantial than the $6 about which you keep crowing.

 

I bought both of my guns without showing ID to anyone at all.

 

No, I'm not "irrelevant." You made the claim that ID is required to exercise your right to buy a gun, I am the personification of the fact that your claim is simply not true.

 

Keep moving the Bar . . . . .

Rocket River

 

Not sure how to interpret this half-formed bubbling of emot-tellect. But read this again:

Voter fraud doesn't exist in any meaningful way, period. Voter Suppression laws are fake attempts to solve a problem that doesn't exist, via a mechanism that doesn't work. They are real attempts to suppress votes.