This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
It seems like all the same arguments would apply to Voter IDs for caucuses and regular voting. Or are you asking what we think of caucuses generally? If it's the latter, then I think they're a bad idea for a lot of reasons.
Yeah, it's the latter....I hadn't paid much attention to them before because I've never really had any interest in any of the dem or repub options. This time around I have interest and started reading about them and getting explanations on how they work and was left wondering WTF. I don't even know how they are legal given their potential ability to discriminate. We never hear people up in arms about these things (at least I haven't)...more intrusive than voter ids, but I don't really want to compare the two. I think the caucus discussion could stand on it's own merits.
At the very least a pilots license. Who doesn't have one of those?
Colorado seems to have a reasonable system in place. Even poors, minorities, and the elderly should have at least one of these laying around the house.
I think it's common sense to have some form of ID, but if you do that, it's also common sense to make sure that the public is educated and it's also common sense to provide funding for that and to provide funding to get people proper ID. I think the major political parties have inventive to provide support and volunteers in their GOTV efforts
I got a TWO fliers in the mail concerning this, so I don't know what they are talking about. And WI Voter ID has been around for, like, 5 years now so you would have to be living in a cave to NOT know you need an ID. In fact, we had elections already where you needed Voter ID a couple years ago before it was held up in court.
Do you always come to conclusions without reading facts then tell everyone they can go screw themselves? Seems a weird way to go through life.
I'll bite. So are we equating proper identification with white privilege? Do I need to feel guilty that I carved out 3-4 hours on a one-time basis to wait and get proper state issued identification?
They're different issues, though. The voter ID thing is about who we allow to vote in general elections, not just for the presidency but down the ballot and on referenda and whatnot. Caucuses are just how the parties choose their presidential nominees.
I'm against the caucuses. Frankly, our entire voting system seems largely inefficient and outdated. We should be moving to an online system. Voters having to wait hours on end at polling stations is another form of voter suppression.
hmmm...hadn't thought about it that way. I guess I was so taken aback by how wrong caucuses are and how little they are discussed that I hadn't considered the larger picture. I don't think, for me anyway, the scope change helps me accept the concept though. From my perspective it's worse to say "no you can't vote for that person" than "yes, you can vote for whoever you want as long as you have this ID", but I fully admit that I don't buy into the argument of it being incredibly difficult to get said ID. I think there are plenty of ways we could get IDs into the hands of those who need them. I'm not rehashing that though. I just wanted everyone to know how much I think the caucus concept absolutely sucks. That is all.
This seems to ignore the long history of voter suppression in Democratic primaries in the segregated South. Sometimes the primary is where the "real" election happens.
But is that sort of thing still going on in the Democratic primaries? And to the extent that it still happens with either party, I would still consider that partially a party problem. Still worth condemning to be sure, but wouldn't the condemnation be directed at the party rather than the state legislators?
omg. Must have fallen off the wagon that night ...Have you ever watched the John Oliver segment on voter ID laws? Worth checking out. Sums up the argument against these laws nicely. Plus you don't have to read through any BS!
I still see no reason that a person shouldn't have to prove who they are before voting. Just not at the aforementioned level.
My sincere apologies for my tone.
Interesting.
It appears you are okay with given up a valued right in order to maintain some semblance of security, whether that needs to be validated or not.
Really?
And anyone who is against Voter ID is FOR corruption and fraud. So stop YOUR
and just admit that you approve of fraud and corruption.Except that there is overwhelming evidence that the Voter ID laws are a way to game the system and suppress the vote among certain groups (there's even an admission on that Oliver video). Meanwhile there's no evidence of a voting corruption/fraud problem that would be rectified by voter ID laws.And anyone who is against Voter ID is FOR corruption and fraud. So stop YOUR
See...I can generalize too.
Oh really? Interesting. Very interesting.
First off, you link to think progress which can be IMMEDIATELY ignored since they are a far left wing site that spews hate and misinformation and outright lies. That article is complete and utterTobiasFunke said:
, I had to stop reading about halfway thru with all the lies in that thing.My reply was to a post that claimed "not a single recorded instance of someone's vote being disenfranchised." The links prove that was false.First off, you link to think progress which can be IMMEDIATELY ignored since they are a far left wing site that spews hate and misinformation and outright lies. That article is complete and utter
The other two articles you site actually confirms that the voter ID law is working AS DESIGNED - The voter who staged a protest did NOT have an ID. That's his fault. WI Voter ID has been known since 2011. I bet if you detail this guy a bit more he probably did this on purpose to get the media come running. It's blatently obvious he most likely did since he's holding up KKK sign. NO reason he shouldn't have had one.
Two, Bradley herself is vehemently opposed to Voter ID so this comes as no surprise that her uncle "suddenly" couldn't vote. Did she not know her uncle didni't have a valid ID? I blame Bradley herself. I bet dollars to donuts she knew about this and purposefully didn'thelp her uncle so she could cry "foul" and the media would come running. Why does Bradley hate her Uncle?
So, in summary, no issues with Voter ID, but many issues with media whores.
Sorry, but "disenfranchised" doesn't include voters who are either a) too lazy to get off their ### to get an ID or b) Didn't get one to prove some kind of nonsensical point. And I include Bradley in my 2nd point because I believe she KNEW her Uncle didn't have a valid ID and did nothing to help the 90 year old out so she could complain to the media.
OK, fine. Forget about the people mentioned in the links (and the lower voter turnout). Let's just talk about the law more generally.
I tried to give you a cordial reply and ask reasonable questions, sorry some other folks got a little more heated
Four days a year? Yes, that's ridiculous.
A fair point on voter impersonation. So let's try common sense. Voter fraud is a crime for which you may potentially face fines and/or jail time. To get away with it in a manner that would be deterred by a Voter ID law you would have to do research to find a name of someone who is eligible to vote at a particular location, go to that location, give the volunteers that person's name, hope that person hasn't already voted (if they have you're already busted), and then vote and get away and hope you don't otherwise get caught. Your reward for taking this substantial risk is that you get to cast one vote that almost certainly will not change any result, federal state or local.
You're taking the tack that Voter ID stops the lone wolves like Tim that would go to every precinct and vote Hillary. I'm talking voter fraud on a large scale with data-mined lists. Dead voters, invalids, no longer state residents...the list goes on. You're thinking that it's just one or two hyper partisans, I'm thinking it's an organized effort of true believers orchestrating massive fraud.
Fear, fear, and more fear. Since it could happen, it already is/has happened. Don't you see the absurdity of this reasoning?
No worse of a supposition than saying this is just a disguised effort to deny black people the right to vote
It's not just black people though. It could be the poor, elderly, immobile (people without a means to get somewhere), other multitude of reasons. Take in to account our history of keeping people from voting and this just screams as another means to keep people from voting. Use all the hyperbole possible, those still do not justify the actions being taken. This past week, the Wisconsin legislature kept up the restrictions. It's sickening and sad.
Prevention of voter fraud is one of the things we elected them to enact legislation toward. I applaud their efforts. I feel my vote, and the vote of my fellow Wisconsinites, are much safer now. Still not 100% voter fraud free, but I'll take it.
What voter fraud was there to begin with? There has to be a documented problem with voter fraud, not just scare tactics of an idea of voter fraud.
