quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe

The simple proof of rampant voter fraud was the uproar over photo ID requirements. Had there been no voter fraud in the first place nobody would have complained about presenting a valid voter ID. It's really that simple yet the Mensas on the left cannot see that or willfully ignore it. Everyone has forgotten the axiom from Florida 2000: Democrats want every vote counted. Republicans want every vote counted accurately.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi
I agree, but I still haven't seen anyone address the question. Why does it prove that the right has an evil agenda when they do it, but not the left. And voter fraud doesn't have anything to do with that question.

It's probably due to the fact that the "left" hasn't (as yet) had an unelected President put into power by the supreme court after a rash of voter fraud in a Florida election that ended with recounts being stopped illegally. Something like that happening with the Democrats rather than the GOP orchestrating it might lead to people feeling that fiddling American elections was less of a partisan thing.

Sorry, but all that does is point out that there is voter fraud out there. It doesn't answer the question of why one action is ok if the left does it, but evil if the republicans do it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe
The simple proof of rampant voter fraud was the uproar over photo ID requirements. Had there been no voter fraud in the first place nobody would have complained about presenting a valid voter ID. It's really that simple yet the Mensas on the left cannot see that or willfully ignore it. Everyone has forgotten the axiom from Florida 2000: Democrats want every vote counted. Republicans want every vote counted accurately.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe
The simple proof of rampant voter fraud was the uproar over photo ID requirements. Had there been no voter fraud in the first place nobody would have complained about presenting a valid voter ID. It's really that simple yet the Mensas on the left cannot see that or willfully ignore it. Everyone has forgotten the axiom from Florida 2000: Democrats want every vote counted. Republicans want every vote counted accurately.

If Republicans REALLY wanted the vote counted....accurately....we would have had Vice President Al Gore for President in 2000. Let's call it a 'hunch' that Republicans will overlook vote accurately when it serves their purpose(s).

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dom4subssub4doms

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

Not the same at all. The Left does not demand ID for VOTING. I think this was mentioned earlier in the thread. Can you not see the inconsistency in your position?

What difference does it make what it's for? If the only reason a republican can ask for id is to oppress people, then why is it any different for the left? If it had been a republican caucus and they said you have to have id, I am willing to bet the same conclusions would have been drawn about their motives.

But I do have good news for the left. All of the 20 people that showed up in Southfield voted to have him run.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120505/NEWS15/120505013/Southfield-union-vote-for-Obama-unanimous

I don't know which is sadder. The blatant hypocrisy or the fact that only 20 people showed up. Way to support your guy.

actually in primaries where VOTING takes place the "left" doesnt have an id law. You seem to confuse caucus activity with an election, Again where is the fraud that makes it neccessary to spend millions on ID laws?

I wasn't talking about primaries, I was talking about the motives behind requiring ids for anything. But I have said that many times in this thread and asked for some reasoning. Instead I get the same thing over and over.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: LizDeluxe
The simple proof of rampant voter fraud was the uproar over photo ID requirements. Had there been no voter fraud in the first place nobody would have complained about presenting a valid voter ID. It's really that simple yet the Mensas on the left cannot see that or willfully ignore it. Everyone has forgotten the axiom from Florida 2000: Democrats want every vote counted. Republicans want every vote counted accurately.

If Republicans REALLY wanted the vote counted....accurately....we would have had Vice President Al Gore for President in 2000. Let's call it a 'hunch' that Republicans will overlook vote accurately when it serves their purpose(s).

quote:

The media reported the results of the study during the week after November 12, 2001. The results of the study showed that had the limited county by county recounts requested by the Gore team been completed, Bush would still have been the winner of the election. However, the study also showed that the result of a statewide recount of all disputed ballots could have been different. The study was unable to review the ballots in Broward and Volusia that were counted as legal votes during the manual recounts thus analysis included those figures that were obtained using very loose standards in its calculations. Since these recounts resulted in a sizable net gain for Gore (665 net Gore votes) they have no bearing on the assessment that Bush would likely have won the recounts requested by Gore and ordered by the Florida Supreme Court. They do however play a major role in the assessment that Gore could have won a recount of the entire state if overvotes were taken into account. Without these votes Gore would have lost a recount of the entire state even with all overvotes added in. Unless 495 or more of those votes were actual votes then Gore still would lose. Note these figures also do not take into account a dispute over 500 asbentee ballots that Bush requested to be added to the certified totals. If found to be legal votes that would put Gore totally out of reach regardless of any manual recount standard.

The Florida Supreme Court had ordered "counting of the legal votes contained within the undervotes in all counties where the undervote has not been subjected to a manual tabulation." The U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Florida Supreme Court and stopped their recount via an unsigned "per curiam" opinion in Bush v. Gore, with three Justices (Rehnquist joined by Scalia and Thomas) concurring in a separate opinion. Four Justices (Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer) each wrote their own opinion with various combinations of the other three joining.

The media recount study found that under the system of limited recounts in selected counties as was requested by the Gore campaign, the only way that Gore would have won was by using counting methods that were never requested by any party, including "overvotes" — ballots containing more than one vote for an office. While some of these ballots recorded votes for two separate candidates, a significant number (20 percent in Lake County, for example) were cases of a voter voting for a candidate and then also writing in that same candidate's name on the write-in line.

The New York Times did its own analysis of how mistaken overvotes might have been caused by confusing ballot designs. It found that the butterfly ballot in heavily Democratic Palm Beach County may have cost Gore a net 6286 votes, and the two page ballot in similarly Democratic Duval County may have cost him a net 1999 votes, each of which would have made the difference by itself.[7] The rest of the media consortium did not consider these because there could be no clear determination of a voter's intent.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

Why do you keep bringing up that blatant LIE?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

May I point out something? To get a job you need a photo id AND social security card. I can see a problem if they are requiring a passport but they are not doing that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dom4subssub4doms

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

Not the same at all. The Left does not demand ID for VOTING. I think this was mentioned earlier in the thread. Can you not see the inconsistency in your position?

What difference does it make what it's for? If the only reason a republican can ask for id is to oppress people, then why is it any different for the left? If it had been a republican caucus and they said you have to have id, I am willing to bet the same conclusions would have been drawn about their motives.

But I do have good news for the left. All of the 20 people that showed up in Southfield voted to have him run.

http://www.freep.com/article/20120505/NEWS15/120505013/Southfield-union-vote-for-Obama-unanimous

I don't know which is sadder. The blatant hypocrisy or the fact that only 20 people showed up. Way to support your guy.

actually in primaries where VOTING takes place the "left" doesnt have an id law. You seem to confuse caucus activity with an election, Again where is the fraud that makes it neccessary to spend millions on ID laws?

I wasn't talking about primaries, I was talking about the motives behind requiring ids for anything. But I have said that many times in this thread and asked for some reasoning. Instead I get the same thing over and over.

Because voting is a right damn it, everything else is a privilege! Except for convicts, ex convicts, and the military serving overseas apparently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dom4subssub4doms

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

May I point out something? To get a job you need a photo id AND social security card. I can see a problem if they are requiring a passport but they are not doing that.

a job isnt a right. If there were fraud it would be justified. As fraud is negligible the disenfranchisement and denial of a constitutional right based on the premsie the id is needed to prevent fraud is the fraud. Since it will not elimiante non exixtent fraud what does it do effectively other than deny some their right to vote?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dom4subssub4doms

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

May I point out something? To get a job you need a photo id AND social security card. I can see a problem if they are requiring a passport but they are not doing that.

a job isnt a right. If there were fraud it would be justified. As fraud is negligible the disenfranchisement and denial of a constitutional right based on the premsie the id is needed to prevent fraud is the fraud. Since it will not elimiante non exixtent fraud what does it do effectively other than deny some their right to vote?

For that matter, for welfare help, you need a photo ID as well as other forms of ID to get the help.

The point I am making is that the poor and minorities should have a photo ID to begin with. You cannot get any government aid without them.

However, in the state of texas, if you dont have your ID when you register to vote, you have to show it when you go to vote. I have to show mine since I Forgot my wallet when I registered.

And finally, I am a democrat.

quote:

Personally, I agree that some felons should never get the right to vote back. By committing a crime they forfeited their rights.