Should voters be required to show ID? (1 Viewer)

[s&m]

So what happens when someone uses a fake or stolen id? Then what?

I have no problem with showing id when voting. However if someone wants to commit fraud and vote with or without ID they will find a way.

Either way this is a minor issue, that the Republicans keep trying to push through.

Exactly. You can get ID's for 100.00 that will pass DHS at the airport inspection much less the retired lady sitting at the polling place. Stupid. It's just meant to increase Republicans chances of getting elected. Cut and dry, pure and simple.

Well then the cost of buying votes for voter fraud and the elections would be much steeper with a $100 fake I.D. fee attached. Even the Chicago machine would think twice about $100 to $200 per vote cost. At that rate one billion dollars wouldn't go so far, nor return so much. But at least the President could claim they are finally creating printing jobs in this economy! Winning

 

[NCCommish]

So what happens when someone uses a fake or stolen id? Then what?

I have no problem with showing id when voting. However if someone wants to commit fraud and vote with or without ID they will find a way.

Either way this is a minor issue, that the Republicans keep trying to push through.

Exactly. You can get ID's for 100.00 that will pass DHS at the airport inspection much less the retired lady sitting at the polling place. Stupid. It's just meant to increase Republicans chances of getting elected. Cut and dry, pure and simple.

Well then the cost of buying votes for voter fraud and the elections would be much steeper with a $100 fake I.D. fee attached. Even the Chicago machine would think twice about $100 to $200 per vote cost. At that rate one billion dollars wouldn't go so far, nor return so much. But at least the President could claim they are finally creating printing jobs in this economy! Winning

Well since, as a practical matter, voter fraud doesn't exist here there is no cost per vote right now. Oh and the IDs come from China.

 

[s&m]

So what happens when someone uses a fake or stolen id? Then what?

I have no problem with showing id when voting. However if someone wants to commit fraud and vote with or without ID they will find a way.

Either way this is a minor issue, that the Republicans keep trying to push through.

Exactly. You can get ID's for 100.00 that will pass DHS at the airport inspection much less the retired lady sitting at the polling place. Stupid. It's just meant to increase Republicans chances of getting elected. Cut and dry, pure and simple.

Well then the cost of buying votes for voter fraud and the elections would be much steeper with a $100 fake I.D. fee attached. Even the Chicago machine would think twice about $100 to $200 per vote cost. At that rate one billion dollars wouldn't go so far, nor return so much. But at least the President could claim they are finally creating printing jobs in this economy! Winning

Well since, as a practical matter, voter fraud doesn't exist here there is no cost per vote right now. Oh and the IDs come from China.

If there is no fraud why would they need to buy fake I.D.'s. But if they would need the fake I'D.'s then it appears the Prsident wants to export all those printing jobs overseas. Thats not good at all. Why does the President hate the american worker so much?

 

[Topes]

Too bad the New World Order was unsuccessful in implementing the Federal Biometric Real ID tattoo plan.

Had they succeeded, this would all be moot. We'd just show our barcode, and the computron would compare that against the Registry of the Mark of the Beast, and we could all just get on with voting.

Instead, we get this.

 

[Biabreakable]

I can see why the Republicans are worried about voter fraud since it seemed to happen a lot during their primaries.

The vote fraud in the Republican 2012 primary has been exhaustively documented by both mainstream and alternative outlets. Simply do a search on the words Ron Paul vote fraud and Ron Paul vote fraud blackboxvoting. Also see these links:

Both in New Hampshire and Iowa, Ron Paul supporters allege foul play

Ron Paul Vote Fraud, Mike Rivero Is Angry

MAJOR VOTING FRAUD AT IOWA CAUCUS ROBS RON PAUL

Ron Paul's Iowa finish biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia primary

Iowa Vote Fraud official

http://libertyfight.com/articles/2012/Four_years_later_Trotsky_memo_vote_fraud.html

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

A new voter ID law in Pennsylvania is being challenged in court. Trial started last Wednesday, apparently, and may last all of next week.

There are a few points that have been raised that people on both sides may be interested in.

1. There have been estimates that as many as 9% of registered voters in Pennsylvania currently lack ID required under the law. That's too high. The estimate was based on the number of registered voters who don't have state IDs, but there are several problems with it. First, sometimes people move to different states but are still technically registered in Pennsylvania (since Pennsylvania doesn't know that they moved). Accounting for this factor brings the estimate down to about 7%. Second, some names on the state's ID list and its voter registration list are mismatched due to variances in spelling. This makes it look like there's a Joe Blow on the registration list but not on the ID list, even though he does have an ID. I don't know how big a factor this is. Third, some people who don't have state IDs nonetheless do have valid IDs that would allow them to vote, such as federal military IDs. I don't know how big a factor this is, either. Fourth, and perhaps most importantly (at least in terms of numbers), most people without valid IDs don't vote anyway. Kansas recently enacted a voter ID law. In the county and local elections since its enactment, according to the Kansas Secretary of State, about 0.1% of all voters showed up at the poll without a valid ID. (I'm not sure how he collected those data. Assuming the figure is accurate, it is possible, but I think highly unlikely, that many would-be voters without IDs stayed home because they were aware of the law.)

2. It really is difficult for some people to get IDs, though perhaps it is a very small minority of people. The Pennsylvania plaintiffs have put a few such people on the stand to tell their stories. One elderly woman, for example, has never driven a car or owned a driver's license. She's always voted. She tried to get a state ID when this law was passed. She didn't have her birth certificate (a precondition to getting an ID), so she requested a new one. She got it, but it didn't help because it had her maiden name on it and she's registered to vote under her married name. Another elderly non-driver has made multiple attempts to get her birth certificate, but it's been a frustrating and unsuccessful process so far. Moreover, she can't use a utility or phone bill as proof of her residence because she lives with her daughter's family (so her name isn't on the bills).

3. Pennsylvania has conceded that, to its knowledge, there's never been a case of in-person voter fraud, in Pennsylvania or in any other state, of the sort that would be prevented by the voter ID law; and it has no evidence that the law will prevent such fraud in 2012. (The state argues that just because it doesn't know of any such fraud doesn't mean it's never occurred; and anyway, the law's purpose is to increase public confidence in the election system, which it can do whether or not it actually prevents fraud.)

Stories here, here, here, and generally here.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Fourth, and perhaps most importantly (at least in terms of numbers), most people without valid IDs don't vote anyway. Kansas recently enacted a voter ID law. In the county and local elections since its enactment, according to the Kansas Secretary of State, about 0.1% of all voters showed up at the poll without a valid ID. (I'm not sure how he collected those data. Assuming the figure is accurate, it is possible, but I think highly unlikely, that many would-be voters without IDs stayed home because they were aware of the law.)

Why do you think it's "highly unlikely?" Assuming the ID law is well-publicized, I wouldn't expect people without IDs to show up to vote.

 

[MaxThreshold]

I can see why the Republicans are worried about voter fraud since it seemed to happen a lot during their primaries.

The vote fraud in the Republican 2012 primary has been exhaustively documented by both mainstream and alternative outlets. Simply do a search on the words Ron Paul vote fraud and Ron Paul vote fraud blackboxvoting. Also see these links:

Both in New Hampshire and Iowa, Ron Paul supporters allege foul play

Ron Paul Vote Fraud, Mike Rivero Is Angry

MAJOR VOTING FRAUD AT IOWA CAUCUS ROBS RON PAUL

Ron Paul's Iowa finish biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia primary

Iowa Vote Fraud official

http://libertyfight....vote_fraud.html

Great. Glad you're on board with voter ID then to stop all the republican fraud. Who said VoterID was targeting Democrat voters in the first place?

 

[MaxThreshold]

So what happens when someone uses a fake or stolen id? Then what?

I have no problem with showing id when voting. However if someone wants to commit fraud and vote with or without ID they will find a way.

Either way this is a minor issue, that the Republicans keep trying to push through.

Exactly. You can get ID's for 100.00 that will pass DHS at the airport inspection much less the retired lady sitting at the polling place. Stupid. It's just meant to increase Republicans chances of getting elected. Cut and dry, pure and simple.

That's just a pure lefty talking point with no basis in fact or logic.And the award for best drama in a forum goes to....NCCommish!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Fourth, and perhaps most importantly (at least in terms of numbers), most people without valid IDs don't vote anyway. Kansas recently enacted a voter ID law. In the county and local elections since its enactment, according to the Kansas Secretary of State, about 0.1% of all voters showed up at the poll without a valid ID. (I'm not sure how he collected those data. Assuming the figure is accurate, it is possible, but I think highly unlikely, that many would-be voters without IDs stayed home because they were aware of the law.)

Why do you think it's "highly unlikely?" Assuming the ID law is well-publicized, I wouldn't expect people without IDs to show up to vote.

I'm just guessing, but I suspect that a fairly small percentage of the population knows about the voter ID law, and that the percentage is even smaller among people without IDs. I could be wrong.

 

[Ursa M]

Fourth, and perhaps most importantly (at least in terms of numbers), most people without valid IDs don't vote anyway. Kansas recently enacted a voter ID law. In the county and local elections since its enactment, according to the Kansas Secretary of State, about 0.1% of all voters showed up at the poll without a valid ID. (I'm not sure how he collected those data. Assuming the figure is accurate, it is possible, but I think highly unlikely, that many would-be voters without IDs stayed home because they were aware of the law.)

Why do you think it's "highly unlikely?" Assuming the ID law is well-publicized, I wouldn't expect people without IDs to show up to vote.

This was my immediate response too. Surely it's highly likely that those without ID wouldn't show up?And, for the record, this whole Voter ID thing is the clearest attempt to suppress voting since Jim Crow.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

It's just meant to increase Republicans chances of getting elected. Cut and dry, pure and simple.

That's just a pure lefty talking point with no basis in fact or logic.

"Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done." —

 

[Biabreakable]

I can see why the Republicans are worried about voter fraud since it seemed to happen a lot during their primaries.

The vote fraud in the Republican 2012 primary has been exhaustively documented by both mainstream and alternative outlets. Simply do a search on the words Ron Paul vote fraud and Ron Paul vote fraud blackboxvoting. Also see these links:

Both in New Hampshire and Iowa, Ron Paul supporters allege foul play

Ron Paul Vote Fraud, Mike Rivero Is Angry

MAJOR VOTING FRAUD AT IOWA CAUCUS ROBS RON PAUL

Ron Paul's Iowa finish biggest fraud since Kennedy stole the West Virginia primary

Iowa Vote Fraud official

http://libertyfight....vote_fraud.html

Great. Glad you're on board with voter ID then to stop all the republican fraud. Who said VoterID was targeting Democrat voters in the first place?

Except that voter ID will not stop it I agree with you. See MT's links or do a search. There have been many people saying this law is designed to suppress voting by those who are not likely to vote R. Why do you think they would be pushing for this so hard while at the same time turning a blind eye to the fraudulent practices during their own primaries?eta- As usual the ones crying fire are the same ones looking to take advantage of the situation.

 

[Boston]

what part of the voter ID system do you mistrust?

It suppresses votes from certain demographics.

I think that's rather insulting to said demographics.

OK then. Still true.

Why wouldn't certain demographics be able to show an ID card?

It's a hassle for old people and for minorities. It's ridiculous and it's a solution looking for a non-existent problem.

Why is it a hassle? So someone that is African-American can't find a way to get an ID card? So all old people are are bedridden and don't ever leave where they live?

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

 

[Christo]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

Let's not assume they aren't driving too.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

Let's not assume they aren't driving too.

Okay, but the rest they can do legally.Nobody cards old ladies at movies or pubs. Buying a house is easier than selling one; if you pay cash, you don't even need to get anything notarized. (Not that getting something notarized without ID is necessarily a problem.) To take out a library book, you need a library card. But even if you needed a state ID to originally get a library card, the library card can still be good after your state ID has expired.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

Let's not assume they aren't driving too.

Okay, but the rest they can do legally.Nobody cards old ladies at movies or pubs. Buying a house is easier than selling one; if you pay cash, you don't even need to get anything notarized. (Not that getting something notarized without ID is necessarily a problem.) To take out a library book, you need a library card. Even if you needed a state ID to originally get a library card, the library card can still be good after your state ID has expired.

Who buys a house and pays cash, but doesnt have an ID?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

Let's not assume they aren't driving too.

Okay, but the rest they can do legally.Nobody cards old ladies at movies or pubs. Buying a house is easier than selling one; if you pay cash, you don't even need to get anything notarized. (Not that getting something notarized without ID is necessarily a problem.) To take out a library book, you need a library card. Even if you needed a state ID to originally get a library card, the library card can still be good after your state ID has expired.

Who buys a house and pays cash, but doesnt have an ID?

Probably nobody. But if you poll everyone who doesn't buy a house and pay cash, I bet zero of them would cite their lack of ID as the reason. In other words, on Boston's list of things that people are held back from doing when they don't have an ID, I don't think buying a house should be included.

 

[Jules Winnfield]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

The bar down the street cards everyone from 21 to 81. Why? If you have a drivers license they check for alcohol restrictions on the back. Don't have an ID of any sort? There is a reason why so sorry but you're not getting a drink

 

[Jules Winnfield]

what part of the voter ID system do you mistrust?

It suppresses votes from certain demographics.

I think that's rather insulting to said demographics.

OK then. Still true.

Why wouldn't certain demographics be able to show an ID card?

It's a hassle for old people and for minorities. It's ridiculous and it's a solution looking for a non-existent problem.

Why is it a hassle? So someone that is African-American can't find a way to get an ID card? So all old people are are bedridden and don't ever leave where they live?

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

I'm sorry. I missed the part that says you have to be wealthy to have an IDQuite a stretch there

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

The bar down the street cards everyone from 21 to 81. Why? If you have a drivers license they check for alcohol restrictions on the back. Don't have an ID of any sort? There is a reason why so sorry but you're not getting a drink

Seems like an awesome bar to go to if you're underage.

 

[bagger]

so I heard some dude on NPR talking about this a while ago. His care point was this - even if voter fraud is not rampant, voters have to be able to trust the system for people to feel like voting matters. If voters believe it's a rigged game, why bother?From this perspective, it's irrelevant if there has been actual cases of fraud. What matters is the perception that there might be. I'll submit this very thread that some people think that there may be voter fraud. Requiring Voter ID would be a way to ensure confidence in the system. Don't you guys think that's important?

no. because anyone who may have his or her confidence lowered by thinking of something this crazy is too stupid to breathe.what do i win?

 

[bagger]

The bar down the street cards everyone from 21 to 81. Why? If you have a drivers license they check for alcohol restrictions on the back. Don't have an ID of any sort? There is a reason why so sorry but you're not getting a drink

Seems like an awesome bar to go to if you're underage.

10/10

 

[Jules Winnfield]

The bar down the street cards everyone from 21 to 81. Why? If you have a drivers license they check for alcohol restrictions on the back. Don't have an ID of any sort? There is a reason why so sorry but you're not getting a drink

Seems like an awesome bar to go to if you're underage.

Which is a good thing in Anoka countyThey play hardball hereServe a minor and not only do you lose your job but the bar gets fined and the server/bartender gets the same fine and the bar faces a possible suspension of licenseThis covers everyone who serves alcohol at the establishment.City of Blaine does two stings per year for alcohol and tobacco at all establishments that serve alcohol and/or tobacco

 

[Christo]

so I heard some dude on NPR talking about this a while ago. His care point was this - even if voter fraud is not rampant, voters have to be able to trust the system for people to feel like voting matters. If voters believe it's a rigged game, why bother?From this perspective, it's irrelevant if there has been actual cases of fraud. What matters is the perception that there might be. I'll submit this very thread that some people think that there may be voter fraud. Requiring Voter ID would be a way to ensure confidence in the system. Don't you guys think that's important?

no. because anyone who may have his or her confidence lowered by thinking of something this crazy is too stupid to breathe.what do i win?

The right to vote.

 

[RCon]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

Let's not assume they aren't driving too.

Okay, but the rest they can do legally.Nobody cards old ladies at movies or pubs. Buying a house is easier than selling one; if you pay cash, you don't even need to get anything notarized. (Not that getting something notarized without ID is necessarily a problem.) To take out a library book, you need a library card. But even if you needed a state ID to originally get a library card, the library card can still be good after your state ID has expired.

The fact that theaters, bars, and liquor stores don't card everyone doesn't mean they're not supposed to card everyone. Legally, they are supposed to check ID for everyone, regardless of appearance.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Exactly...it's really unfortunate since the same people who can't vote due to a lack of an ID can not go to an R rated movie, have a beer, drive a car, buy a house or take out a library book...it's really unfortunate that only the wealthy have the means to acquire an ID...this is just another case of America being two worlds...

Many of them can do all of those things except drive a car.

Let's not assume they aren't driving too.

Okay, but the rest they can do legally.Nobody cards old ladies at movies or pubs. Buying a house is easier than selling one; if you pay cash, you don't even need to get anything notarized. (Not that getting something notarized without ID is necessarily a problem.) To take out a library book, you need a library card. But even if you needed a state ID to originally get a library card, the library card can still be good after your state ID has expired.

The fact that theaters, bars, and liquor stores don't card everyone doesn't mean they're not supposed to card everyone. Legally, they are supposed to check ID for everyone, regardless of appearance.

That might be the law somewhere, but it's not the law in any state I know of. It's not true in California, and here's Maine and Virginia as well (the first ones that a Google search turned up).But even if it were the law, the law would pertain to bars and liquor stores, not consumers. So my point would stand: old people without IDs can legally buy booze.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Fourth, and perhaps most importantly (at least in terms of numbers), most people without valid IDs don't vote anyway. Kansas recently enacted a voter ID law. In the county and local elections since its enactment, according to the Kansas Secretary of State, about 0.1% of all voters showed up at the poll without a valid ID. (I'm not sure how he collected those data. Assuming the figure is accurate, it is possible, but I think highly unlikely, that many would-be voters without IDs stayed home because they were aware of the law.)

Why do you think it's "highly unlikely?" Assuming the ID law is well-publicized, I wouldn't expect people without IDs to show up to vote.

This was my immediate response too. Surely it's highly likely that those without ID wouldn't show up?

And, for the record, this whole Voter ID thing is the clearest attempt to suppress voting since Jim Crow.

 

[Sarnoff]

If one were to slip behind the Veil of Ignorance, and design a safe and secure voting system from the ground up, I'm sure some sort of method to ID an eligible voter would be a part of it.

This still makes sense to me.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If one were to slip behind the Veil of Ignorance, and design a safe and secure voting system from the ground up, I'm sure some sort of method to ID an eligible voter would be a part of it.

This still makes sense to me.

Yeah, but there already is "some sort of method." People have to state their names.The question isn't whether we should have some sort of method; the question is what that method should be.

 

[Sarnoff]

If one were to slip behind the Veil of Ignorance, and design a safe and secure voting system from the ground up, I'm sure some sort of method to ID an eligible voter would be a part of it.

This still makes sense to me.

Yeah, but there already is "some sort of method." People have to state their names.The question isn't whether we should have some sort of method; the question is what that method should be.

I think if we were to scrap the current system and design a whole new one, it'd go beyond asking "who are you?" as the screening process.

 

[zed2283]

Is this thread really 27 pages long? How can a discussion last so long about the simple and reasonable requirement that people show (gasp!) ID to be able to vote?

If there is any thread in the FFA that represents how doomed we are in this country, this is the one.

 

[ericttspikes]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Is this thread really 27 pages long? How can a discussion last so long about the simple and reasonable requirement that people show (gasp!) ID to be able to vote?

If there is any thread in the FFA that represents how doomed we are in this country, this is the one.

I would say 15 pages of this are a discussion of how simple and reasonable it is. The other 12 are dedicated to discussion how completely pointless/ineffective it is. And then there's your post which is just saying, "I haven't read 27 pages or the Trevyon/Sandusky threads."

This isn't even the original thread. I think there was another somewhat lengthy thread on this issue.ETA: Here it is. 18 more pages of insight.

 

[Rayderr]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

From the same article...

Problems for Greer began when officials learned about a consulting firm he started, called Victory Strategies LLC, illegally held a $200,000 dollar contract with the party while Greer was chairman, apparently unbeknownst to party officials. According to reports, Greer initially denied ownership of Victory Strategies but later admitted his involvement to party general counsel Jason Gonzalez but threatened to sue anyone who made the accusation.

In the deposition Greer claims he filed a lawsuit against the party and two other party officials in an attempt to collect $130,000 he was promised in a severance agreement.

Back in 2009, Jim Greer made headlines when he accused the president of attempting to indoctrinate schoolchildren with socialist ideas in a speech where the president spoke to school children about the importance of getting a good education and staying in school. The speech was broadcast live on C-SPAN and via webcast in schools.

Don't think he's exactly a credible witness.

 

[ericttspikes]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

From the same article...

Problems for Greer began when officials learned about a consulting firm he started, called Victory Strategies LLC, illegally held a $200,000 dollar contract with the party while Greer was chairman, apparently unbeknownst to party officials. According to reports, Greer initially denied ownership of Victory Strategies but later admitted his involvement to party general counsel Jason Gonzalez but threatened to sue anyone who made the accusation.

In the deposition Greer claims he filed a lawsuit against the party and two other party officials in an attempt to collect $130,000 he was promised in a severance agreement.

Back in 2009, Jim Greer made headlines when he accused the president of attempting to indoctrinate schoolchildren with socialist ideas in a speech where the president spoke to school children about the importance of getting a good education and staying in school. The speech was broadcast live on C-SPAN and via webcast in schools.

Don't think he's exactly a credible witness.

He seems like a total slimeball, as most pols from Flordia are. Why would he perjur himself in a deposition on an unrelated issue? Don't see the upside.

 

[pantagrapher]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

From the same article...

Problems for Greer began when officials learned about a consulting firm he started, called Victory Strategies LLC, illegally held a $200,000 dollar contract with the party while Greer was chairman, apparently unbeknownst to party officials. According to reports, Greer initially denied ownership of Victory Strategies but later admitted his involvement to party general counsel Jason Gonzalez but threatened to sue anyone who made the accusation.

In the deposition Greer claims he filed a lawsuit against the party and two other party officials in an attempt to collect $130,000 he was promised in a severance agreement.

Back in 2009, Jim Greer made headlines when he accused the president of attempting to indoctrinate schoolchildren with socialist ideas in a speech where the president spoke to school children about the importance of getting a good education and staying in school. The speech was broadcast live on C-SPAN and via webcast in schools.

Don't think he's exactly a credible witness.

He seems like a total slimeball, as most pols from Flordia are. Why would he perjur himself in a deposition on an unrelated issue? Don't see the upside.

Not getting murdered by Obama's hit men?

 

[Rayderr]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

From the same article...

Problems for Greer began when officials learned about a consulting firm he started, called Victory Strategies LLC, illegally held a $200,000 dollar contract with the party while Greer was chairman, apparently unbeknownst to party officials. According to reports, Greer initially denied ownership of Victory Strategies but later admitted his involvement to party general counsel Jason Gonzalez but threatened to sue anyone who made the accusation.

In the deposition Greer claims he filed a lawsuit against the party and two other party officials in an attempt to collect $130,000 he was promised in a severance agreement.

Back in 2009, Jim Greer made headlines when he accused the president of attempting to indoctrinate schoolchildren with socialist ideas in a speech where the president spoke to school children about the importance of getting a good education and staying in school. The speech was broadcast live on C-SPAN and via webcast in schools.

Don't think he's exactly a credible witness.

He seems like a total slimeball, as most pols from Flordia are. Why would he perjur himself in a deposition on an unrelated issue? Don't see the upside.

To get back at the people who got rid of him, and in his mind, owe him $130k? I suppose that it could just be coincidental that his self imposed rule of not talking about anything that really upset him for 2.5 years ended right as all this other stuff is going on.

 

[moleculo]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

I'll grant you - voter suppression is probably a motive that some folks pushing voter ID hold.That doesn't negate other valid reasons for it. it's possible for different people to support an item for different reasons.

IMO, voter suppression is wrong; everyone eligible to vote should be allowed to vote. At the same time, voter fraud is also wrong, the mere threat of fraud undermines the value of the vote in the first place.

 

[ericttspikes]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

From the same article...

Problems for Greer began when officials learned about a consulting firm he started, called Victory Strategies LLC, illegally held a $200,000 dollar contract with the party while Greer was chairman, apparently unbeknownst to party officials. According to reports, Greer initially denied ownership of Victory Strategies but later admitted his involvement to party general counsel Jason Gonzalez but threatened to sue anyone who made the accusation.

In the deposition Greer claims he filed a lawsuit against the party and two other party officials in an attempt to collect $130,000 he was promised in a severance agreement.

Back in 2009, Jim Greer made headlines when he accused the president of attempting to indoctrinate schoolchildren with socialist ideas in a speech where the president spoke to school children about the importance of getting a good education and staying in school. The speech was broadcast live on C-SPAN and via webcast in schools.

Don't think he's exactly a credible witness.

He seems like a total slimeball, as most pols from Flordia are. Why would he perjur himself in a deposition on an unrelated issue? Don't see the upside.

To get back at the people who got rid of him, and in his mind, owe him $130k? I suppose that it could just be coincidental that his self imposed rule of not talking about anything that really upset him for 2.5 years ended right as all this other stuff is going on.

Sure it's to get back at them. But if it is a lie, why lie about voter suppression? It isn't exactly a secret that the GOP doesn't want a lot of people voting in elections. I mean, if you're going risk jail on perjury, go big. Say those guys are pedophiles or do crack. Sounds like a slimeball admitting under oath to being a part of a larger network of slimeballs.

 

[Rayderr]

Jim Greer, ex- Florida GOP chair, says party officials discussed black voter suppression

Jim Greer, the former chair of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance. Greer claims he became uncomfortable with leading the party when an official began to openly discuss voter suppression tactics that would keep blacks from participating in the electoral process.

The Tampa Bay Times is reporting that incident occurred, according to Greer, after he had just completed a December 2009 meeting with party general counsel Jason Gonzalez, political consultant Jim Rimes and Eric Eikenberg, ex-Florida governor Charlie Crist’s chief of staff.

“I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he told the Tampa Bay Times. In the deposition Greer denounced some party officials as liars and “whack-a-do, right-wing crazies”

From the same article...

Problems for Greer began when officials learned about a consulting firm he started, called Victory Strategies LLC, illegally held a $200,000 dollar contract with the party while Greer was chairman, apparently unbeknownst to party officials. According to reports, Greer initially denied ownership of Victory Strategies but later admitted his involvement to party general counsel Jason Gonzalez but threatened to sue anyone who made the accusation.

In the deposition Greer claims he filed a lawsuit against the party and two other party officials in an attempt to collect $130,000 he was promised in a severance agreement.

Back in 2009, Jim Greer made headlines when he accused the president of attempting to indoctrinate schoolchildren with socialist ideas in a speech where the president spoke to school children about the importance of getting a good education and staying in school. The speech was broadcast live on C-SPAN and via webcast in schools.

Don't think he's exactly a credible witness.

He seems like a total slimeball, as most pols from Flordia are. Why would he perjur himself in a deposition on an unrelated issue? Don't see the upside.

To get back at the people who got rid of him, and in his mind, owe him $130k? I suppose that it could just be coincidental that his self imposed rule of not talking about anything that really upset him for 2.5 years ended right as all this other stuff is going on.

Sure it's to get back at them. But if it is a lie, why lie about voter suppression? It isn't exactly a secret that the GOP doesn't want a lot of people voting in elections. I mean, if you're going risk jail on perjury, go big. Say those guys are pedophiles or do crack. Sounds like a slimeball admitting under oath to being a part of a larger network of slimeballs.

Well if the bolded is a general perception of the GOP, then it's a very believable lie and one that does a fair amount of damage to the GOP. Plus it's rather difficult too prove him to be lying, unless they have a videotape of the entire meeting.

 

[pantagrapher]

Official In Charge Of Pennsylvania Voter ID Law: ‘I Don’t Know What The Law Says’

RYAN J. REILLY JULY 31, 2012, 3:16 PM 8109

Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth Carole Aichele, testifying Tuesday during a state trial on the state’s controversial voter ID law, said she wasn’t sure about the details of the law, but stood by her unsupported claim that 99 percent of voters had valid identification.

“I don’t know what the law says,” Aichele said under questioning, according to CBS.

Aichele also couldn’t provide any evidence that 99 percent of voters already have a valid form of ID, as the state has claimed. CBS reported that when lawyers cited testimony from a Department of State official calling the number likely inaccurate, Aichele responded “I disagree.”

Aichele also said that ID cards issued by the state’s Department of Transportation are the best choice for voters, though a lawyer seeking to block the law said other valid IDs may be easier to obtain.

The state has agreed it will not argue that there is any evidence of in-person voter impersonation fraud. The Justice Department has launched a separate investigation into the law.

My link

 

[Topes]

The bar down the street cards everyone from 21 to 81. Why? If you have a drivers license they check for alcohol restrictions on the back. Don't have an ID of any sort? There is a reason why so sorry but you're not getting a drink

Alcohol Restrictions? Printed on your ID? WTF country do you live in..?

 

[Sarnoff]

Hey look! Both parties are slimeballs!:

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.

The National Defense Committee reports:

[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.

I think it's unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

If anyone proposes legislation to combat voter fraud, Democrats will loudly scream that the proposal could "disenfranchise" some voter, somewhere. We must ensure, they argue, that voting is easy and accessible to every single voter. Every voter, that is, except the men and women of our military.

Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with prejudice.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Hey look! Both parties are slimeballs!:

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.

The National Defense Committee reports:

[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.

I think it's unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

If anyone proposes legislation to combat voter fraud, Democrats will loudly scream that the proposal could "disenfranchise" some voter, somewhere. We must ensure, they argue, that voting is easy and accessible to every single voter. Every voter, that is, except the men and women of our military.

Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with prejudice.

Which conservative website does this come from? Seems totally unbiased.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Here's a copy of the actual complaint filed in Ohio Might be a slightly better source for what's actually being requested.

 

[RCon]

Here's a copy of the actual complaint filed in Ohio Might be a slightly better source for what's actually being requested.

Cliff's notes?

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Here's a copy of the actual complaint filed in Ohio Might be a slightly better source for what's actually being requested.

Cliff's notes?

Looks like Ohio used to allow early voting for everyone. Then the Republicans took power and decided that wasn't in their interests. So they eliminated the early voting. Oh, except for military folks, because, well, people in the military vote Republican. The lawsuit asks the court to restore early voting for everyone because allowing it for only the military is a violation of equal protection.Somehow Sarnoff's source turned it into "Obama wants to stop the military from voting!"

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Here's a copy of the actual complaint filed in Ohio Might be a slightly better source for what's actually being requested.

Cliff's notes?

Looks like Ohio used to allow early voting for everyone. Then the Republicans took power and decided that wasn't in their interests. So they eliminated the early voting. Oh, except for military folks, because, well, people in the military vote Republican. The lawsuit asks the court to restore early voting for everyone because allowing it for only the military is a violation of equal protection.Somehow Sarnoff's source turned it into "Obama wants to stop the military from voting!"

Actually, I'm not sure all these details are right. The complaint is a bit confusing. The gist of it is right though. Obama's trying to get more early voting for everyone, consistent with what's happened the last few election cycles. He's not trying to stop military people from voting early.