Obama Blocks Texas Voter ID Law

If I wanted to counter the Canada Free Press article I'd have to go to Media Matters.....I doubt you would believe that any more than I place a lot of faith in the Canada Free Press.

FYI.....I don't believe in committing voter fraud at all, it's illegal, no matter who it benefits, but if it makes you feel superior to think that only the "other side" would ever be dishonest you go right on believing it. We'll talk later when you pull your head out of the sand.

archer wrote: If I wanted to counter the Canada Free Press article I'd have to go to Media Matters.....I doubt you would believe that any more than I place a lot of faith in the Canada Free Press.

FYI.....I don't believe in committing voter fraud at all, it's illegal, no matter who it benefits, but if it makes you feel superior to think that only the "other side" would ever be dishonest you go right on believing it. We'll talk later when you pull your head out of the sand.

I do not get your point. I am not familiar with Canada Free Press but isn't Media Matters one of those fair and balanced sites that present both sides of an issue without using hate, filth and venom.

I still don't understand how requiring an ID is a racist policy.

This is strictly my opinion,

If according to some there is little to no voter fraud, and seeing how almost anyone can get a state issued photo ID, then it should not be an issue to have some form of a photo ID to vote. Since I have to have a photo ID for check cashing, (they want to make sure it is me), to travel by plane, and alot more, then why not a photo ID to vote.

Requiring an ID in theory should have no issues as navycop7 said. But as with most things in society, we get wrapped up in little issues, and I am really starting to think that it is encouraged so that we don't get wrapped up in big issues. Don't a number of people who are in the US not have ID, these are the lowest income people in the US, not the ones driving state to state to vote a number of times and throw the election....where their votes rarely count anyway. navycop7, you know this. Do we want to live in a place where ID is required....and if you need it to vote, or get to to walk away from a cop, it is required.

If you made a list of the things that unjustly influence elections, would individual voter fraud be at the top...my sense for the thinking man and woman is no:

1. The concept that is widely accepted that you can buy your way into office or that some group of elites somewhere actually decide, when voting is widely covered. The method of funding campaigns and their spending ballance needs to be addressed more than the activities of ordinary citizens.

2. The concept that individual votes do not matter and that it is this electorial college that actually decides for us for the pres anyway...yet we keep talking about it like each vote matters. Perhaps it is time for rules that say it works the way many think it works and most of the rest want it to work anyway, by counting the damn votes and you know with all the energy out there, let's count them 6 times and put any issues to bed fast.

3. The concept that there is little variation in candidates or how they will govern, but yet these issues like abortion, debt ceiling and voter ID - which don't matter nearly as much as most other issues we ignore - dominate the spotlight and these boards. It is so perfect, because if they didn't, we would be on to real issues, with real facts.

Everywhere I go in the country I strike up convos and at some point, if it has not come up, I say, "Hey, what's the voting like around here, do people feel like their voices are counted?" and people come back with the same issues, voter fraud, but no evidence, yada yada. I am sure it is out there, but folks, please take this as an example of how once a seed is planted, it is just programed to grow. You've been duped again. Focus back on real issues - these are things that are directly hurting people or robbing them of their wealth, I mean their are people protesting in the streets, reaction is appropriate....tredding water being part of a nationwide voter fraud posse is just quite sheeplesque, on both sides. Find real issues and address them, call them out specifically.

Gee, in terms of juridiction, which is what we should debate on this issue, I would figure that if the gov of MS can let people who killed people free to walk the street, that the state of TX can decide without the fed who can vote on what, especially for internal TX affairs....the Fed should have the say in fed elections, the state is just handling a fed process in this case. There are often a number of different elections taking place at once, they can have different rules and still be administered by the same group of people - so if I was going to weigh in - let TX decide TX rules for TX things and let the fed decide about US rules for US things. TX can then decide if it is going to administer the fed election, if not they should give a good amount of notice so that the fed can go in and administer the elections directly with Fed rules. See, I just fell for it.

Why would an illegal risk getting caught and deported just to vote in an election?

JSG wrote: Why would an illegal risk getting caught and deported just to vote in an election?

GOP hysteria... Nothing to see here, folks... Move along...

Quit trying to use logic where none exists.

On the other hand, Colorado is apparently going to do something about another form of Voter Fraud:

A proposal to enhance penalties for lying to suppress voting is the latest divisive voting measure to hit Colorado’s Legislature.

The Democratic Senate gave preliminary approval Wednesday to a bill making it a felony to intentionally lie about an election with the “intent to prevent a person from voting.” Such behavior is already illegal, but Democratic Sen. Irene Aguilar said penalties should be tougher…

I'm SO on-board with this... Blow a hole in the GOP 'dirtry-tricks machine'...

popcorn eater wrote: 2. The concept that individual votes do not matter and that it is this electorial college that actually decides for us for the pres anyway...yet we keep talking about it like each vote matters. Perhaps it is time for rules that say it works the way many think it works and most of the rest want it to work anyway, by counting the damn votes and you know with all the energy out there, let's count them 6 times and put any issues to bed fast.

The Electoral College is what ensures that the government is small "r" republican and not a small "d" democracy. It would be a sad day, and the end of what the founders and framers chose as a means of governing the union, if ever democracy, tyranny of the majority, was the manner in which the union was to be governed. Democracies inevitably fail because it fails to protect the rights of the minority and substitutes in its place the mob rule principles that ultimately lead to discontent and the loss of the consent of the governed. It is well and good that one can lose the popular vote and still obtain the necessary support to win an election to head a republic because a republic is governed by a representative majority, not a physical one.

The purpose of having each state cast votes equal in number to their representation in the union's Congress is to ensure that the executive of the general government, created to administer the sovereignty belonging to the States that they have chosen to share in common, is representative of all of the States in the union and not simply the most populous ones. Our union would cease to exist the day that fewer than 20% of the States are empowered to decide who the executive will be simply because they are the most populous ones. The median population of the States in the union is about 4.6 million. There are 25 states with more than this number and 25 with fewer than this number. There are 10 states which have in excess of double that population and 6 which have triple that number, or more. Conversely there are 14 states with half this number and 10 which have less than a third of that population.

If you are thinking the Electoral College should be gotten rid of and are a citizen of Colorado, you have not stopped to envision what the citizens of California, New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Ohio could do with the power you are so willing to surrender. They do not currently have the power to choose the executive themselves, but they alone would have the power to do so if your wish is granted, even if the rest of the union stood united in opposition to their choice. Something to think about.

How about this angle? Supposedly according to the Dems, there are millions of legal voters without valid photo ID. Wouldn't having ID make life easier on them? They can cash checks, pick up prescriptions, etc. India has even sponsored a billion dollar program to give everyone in the country free photo ID's to help them better merge into society. But here we have the Dems choosing to enable the ID less voters.

BTW: one of the reasons India embarked on this program is to prevent welfare fraud. The contractors running their infrastructure work-fare programs were claiming "ghost" employees.

Typical conservative BS. No one has claimed that there are million of voters without photo IDs. However even a small number of legal voters without photo IDs should not lose their right to vote based on fictitious claims by conservatives. My mother, who at age 90 has not driven in over ten years, no longer has a valid DL. It will cost her several hundred dollars to obtain a new photo ID, as it is difficult to get a copy of the required birth certificate due to record keeping chaos back in the 1920s. Should she be denied the right to vote based on some nonexistent problem?