Stewart: Voter ID laws like leash laws for unicorns

The Republican national lawyers association is against it. It does nothing about absentee voting or voting by mail.

It stinks to high heaven the Republicans are pulling this now, when the election appears to be so close. If it were such a problem why didn't they bring it up before? Gotta get that .65 case of voter fraud in the state.

I’d love to see the evidence of a single election in the last quarter of a century in which in person impersonation voter fraud using dead people affected the outcome of an election.

I would support no longer allowing voting by mail. Very easy to take the ballots of other people in the house and vote them. Or steal ballots.

Actually voter ID would do something about absentee voting. If you don't have photo ID in the state, you can't get an absentee ballot.

And if you had proof of ID when you registered, that should be sufficient to get a mail-in ballot for the rest of your life.

Voting is not a "privilege"--It's a RIGHT. It took the GOP to try to make it otherwise.

Democracy4Sale wrote: And if you had proof of ID when you registered, that should be sufficient to get a mail-in ballot for the rest of your life.

Voting is not a "privilege"--It's a RIGHT. It took the GOP to try to make it otherwise.

It is a right that can be temporarily revoked, for felony crimes, and for lack of a photo ID.

We'll see if "lack of a photo-ID" stands up in court... It ain't over yet.

BearMtn, your argument that it can't be proven that voter fraud isn't happening is invalid. It is an argument from ignorance, http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance , and is faulty logic. Or it's a shield to hide your knowing support of the effort to target and disenfranchise segments of the population perhaps more likely to vote liberal.

plaidvillain wrote: BearMtn, your argument that it can't be proven that voter fraud isn't happening is invalid. It is an argument from ignorance, http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance , and is faulty logic. Or it's a shield to hide your knowing support of the effort to target and disenfranchise segments of the population perhaps more likely to vote liberal.

Disagree there. It can be very advantageous to either party to cover up or report very low voter fraud. Essentially the foxes guarding the henhouse. No problem here move along.

Not a matter of whether you agree or disagree...the argument is a logical fallacy. If you build or support your political opinions on logical fallacies, then you are admitting you don't care about logic. The lie of the argument supports the conclusion you want...and that's all that matters?

When you can't win with ideas.....cheat.