you have to pay $13.50 to vote in pennsylvania

[beardo]

That dude looks like he could be my Mexican half brother

 

[UncleBuck]

Aww, somebody lost yet another argument in a long string of defeats. It MUST be time to start posting jpegs. You can ALWAYS count on liberals to try to marginalize their opponents when they have been trounced.

 

[ChesusRice]

Looks like edward james olmos

 

[Red1966]

No Red I am not. there are legitimate ways of determining who does not have ID. What numbers would you prefer? Tell me Red,, what would it take to convince you that: 1. A significant number of voters do not have ID 2. Changing voting times in states inhibit voters from voting 3. There is little if any voter fraud in this country

Something better than copy and pasting from liberal sources whose honesty is suspect, at best. Loretta Sanchez, JFK, and Al Frankin were all elected through voter fraud. Al Frankin was the 60th seat Obama needed to get his filibuster-proof Senate. Small injustices create larger ones. Fewer voting days with longer hours as done in Ohio and proposed in Florida is an attempt to INCREASE voter turnout, not inhibit it. I could argue that increasing the number of days while shortening the hours is voter suppression. Voters who don't have ID can easily acquire them. Assuming that everyone who has been too irresponsible or too lazy to get ID is suddenly going to show some gumption and go vote is illogical. How anyone can function in modern society without ID remains a mystery to me. So far, the only examples I've heard of, were people who DON'T function, they just leach. Frankly, this constant whining that EVERYTHING somehow hurts the Democrats is wearing thin.

 

[Red1966]

That's great, you offer no rebuttal, just "that's a whole page of bullshit". I suspect you can't support that particular contention.

Nothing you posted had any facts to support it. It was all just opinion presented as fact.

 

[ChesusRice]

Something better than copy and pasting from liberal sources whose honesty is suspect, at best. Loretta Sanchez, JFK, and Al Frankin were all elected through voter fraud. Al Frankin was the 60th seat Obama needed to get his filibuster-proof Senate. Small injustices create larger ones. Fewer voting days with longer hours as done in Ohio and proposed in Florida is an attempt to INCREASE voter turnout, not inhibit it. I could argue that increasing the number of days while shortening the hours is voter suppression. Voters who don't have ID can easily acquire them. Assuming that everyone who has been too irresponsible or too lazy to get ID is suddenly going to show some gumption and go vote is illogical. How anyone can function in modern society without ID remains a mystery to me. So far, the only examples I've heard of, were people who DON'T function, they just leach. Frankly, this constant whining that EVERYTHING somehow hurts the Democrats is wearing thin.

My grandma needs to show up in a texas court and petition to have her 90 year old birth certificate changed
Alot of people dont even have birth certificates becuase they were born at home and a BC was never necessary
I am sure a lot of things are a mystery to you
Like racial harmony and and open mind

 

[Red1966]

Try me Red. Show us the hundreds of thousands of cases of Voter fraud commited each election cycle in the U.S. Show me that. I see a case of projection brewing here.

You keep demanding proof of "hundreds of thousands of cases of Voter fraud commited each election cycle in the U.S." There is no need to meet what you think is required. You also claim MILLIONS will be disenfranchised, but lack any proof and do not have the ability to foretell the future. Regardless, SCOTUS and lower courts have already ruled against you. They did not see any need for proof of even ONE case of voter fraud. So your whole argument is irrelevant.

 

[Red1966]

Here again is a case of equality of opinions. IS your opinion equal to the Allegheny County Controler in this matter Red?

My opinion is consistent with that of the Supreme Court. Pretty much trumps anything you got.

 

[canndo]

Something better than copy and pasting from liberal sources whose honesty is suspect, at best. Loretta Sanchez, JFK, and Al Frankin were all elected through voter fraud. Al Frankin was the 60th seat Obama needed to get his filibuster-proof Senate. Small injustices create larger ones. Fewer voting days with longer hours as done in Ohio and proposed in Florida is an attempt to INCREASE voter turnout, not inhibit it. I could argue that increasing the number of days while shortening the hours is voter suppression. Voters who don't have ID can easily acquire them. Assuming that everyone who has been too irresponsible or too lazy to get ID is suddenly going to show some gumption and go vote is illogical. How anyone can function in modern society without ID remains a mystery to me. So far, the only examples I've heard of, were people who DON'T function, they just leach. Frankly, this constant whining that EVERYTHING somehow hurts the Democrats is wearing thin.

If I don't agree with it, if it doesn't comport with my world view, it must be a lie right Red? Show me some of those non-lying sources that prove that Sanchez, JFK and Franken were elected through voter fraud (and not election fraud - an entirely different thing).

How is fewer voting days designed to increase voter turn out? during the 08 election lines were hundreds of yards long. The change in days and hours decreased the lenght of those lines and fewer people didn't simply leave in disgust - that change was in '10. Now you are claiming that closing the polls sundays will increase turnout? You are claiming that another adjustment which decreases the days will improve things? How.

Voters who don't have Id cannot "easily aquire them" as there are few places where they can obtain them, requirements for suporting documentation necessitates even more travel or more correspondence and many times that supporting documenation is impossible to get at all. You seem to believe that the old can easily just jump in their cars and go where they need to in order to get that ID.

Now, in PA (I believe) many voters - voters who have used their present ID for years, will no longer be able to use that ID and many of them don't even know that yet. They will be turned away - how exactly will that increase turnout?

You are proposing even more, that the lazy and the irresponsible are not entitled to vote and there should be some sort of test established, an obstacle course set up to winnow out those who don't really want to vote. This is not how america operates. It is supposed to be easy to vote.

Because you can't imagine how anyone can function in a modern society without ID has no relevence. That others have different situations than you is not a reason to deprive them of their chance to vote.

You still have not managed to show us this massive voter fraud that we should all be guarding against, even at the cost of legitimate voters rights.

 

[Grandpapy]

Last year I made $210,000 (gross). This year I lost my health, my house, my savings, kids collage, all gone!
I have been unable to work since Jan. and will have to file bankruptcy if I cant sell off my assets.
Now you want 13 dollars.....Do I have to wheelchair myself down to City Hall or will you come by and pick it up?

 

[Red1966]

No, he is just the house majority leader in the state of Pa, that's all, he doesn't represent all republicans, just the republicans in power in a swing state. You don't manage to explain what he said, did you Red? I put what he said in context. "gonna allow governor Romney to win the state of PA - DONE" If he does not mean that they enacted the rules in order to give Romney the state, what did he mean Red?

No, he was representing his own opinion. Why should I explain what he said? You can read can't you? Whether Romney wins Pa is unknown at this point.

 

[canndo]

You keep demanding proof of "hundreds of thousands of cases of Voter fraud commited each election cycle in the U.S." There is no need to meet what you think is required. You also claim MILLIONS will be disenfranchised, but lack any proof and do not have the ability to foretell the future. Regardless, SCOTUS and lower courts have already ruled against you. They did not see any need for proof of even ONE case of voter fraud. So your whole argument is irrelevant.

there are two cases now of Republican officals stating that the intent of these new laws is to keep certain classes of people from voting. You don't address this in any meaningful way.

As many as 7% of United States citizens – 13 million individuals – do not have ready access to citizenship documents.​

​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Seven percent of the American citizens surveyed responded that they do not have ready access to U.S. passports, naturalization papers, or birth certificates.[SUP]2 [/SUP]Using 2000 census calculations of the citizen voting-age population, this translates to more than [/FONT][/FONT]13 million [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]American adult citizens nationwide who cannot easily produce documentation proving their citizenship.[SUP]3 ​

[/SUP][/FONT][/FONT]

Citizens with comparatively low incomes are less likely to possess documentation proving their citizenship.​

​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Citizens earning less than $25,000 per year are more than twice as likely to lack ready documentation of their citizenship as those earning more than $25,000.[SUP]4 [/SUP]Indeed, the survey indicates that at least [/FONT][/FONT]12 percent [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]of voting-age American citizens earning less than $25,000 per year do not have a readily available U.S. passport, naturalization document, or birth certificate.[SUP]5 ​

[/SUP][/FONT][/FONT]

Documentation proving citizenship often does not reflect the citizen’s current name.​

​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Many of those who possess ready documentation of their citizenship do not have documentation that reflects their current name. For example, survey results show that only 48% of voting-age women with ready access to their U.S. birth certificates have a birth certificate with current legal name[SUP]6 [/SUP]– and only 66% of voting-age women with ready access to [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]any [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]proof of citizenship have a document with current legal name.[SUP]7 [/SUP]Using 2000 census citizen voting-age population data, this means that as many as [/FONT][/FONT]32 million [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]voting-age women may have available only proof of citizenship documents that do not reflect their current name. ​

[SUP]2 [/SUP]
[/FONT][/FONT]Brennan Center for Justice.

 

[ChesusRice]

Mark Red1966 as one of those people who actually know what the law is designed for

and doesnt give a fuck
Becuase in his mind
The ends justify the means

 

[Red1966]

How can you possibly reject that argument? Suppose one hundred thousand people were barred from voting in order that one case of voter fraud were prevented - would this make sense to you?

I dunno, but the Supreme Court rejected it also. ID requirements don't "bar" anyone from voting. The sensibility of a hypothetical situation is irrelevant.

 

[Red1966]

All we are seeing here is the mirror image of how the Reps fought anti-fraud requirements while the Dems pushed for it. Remember Florida?

Yeah, I remember Al Gore trying to and partially succeeding in disenfranchise military voters. I remember that Bush won the election, even though thousands of legitimate absentee military votes were destroyed by Democratic election officials. I remember Democrats demanding dozens of recounts and Bush still won in all seven recounts. I remember Democrats loudly crying "foul" for years, and still do, yet never found any evidence of fraud other than their own. I remember the Democratic Campaign Headquarters in Jacksonville, Florida buying votes from handicapped residents of a group home on the 3200 block of Plymouth St. with beer and cigarettes. I remember the driver of the bus that took them to the polling place going into the booth with them and "assisting" them to place their vote.

 

[ChesusRice]

Yeah, I remember Al Gore trying to and partially succeeding in disenfranchise military voters. I remember that Bush won the election, even though thousands of legitimate absentee military votes were destroyed by Democratic election officials. I remember Democrats demanding dozens of recounts and Bush still won in all seven recounts. I remember Democrats loudly crying "foul" for years, and still do, yet never found any evidence of fraud other than their own. I remember the Democratic Campaign Headquarters in Jacksonville, Florida buying votes from handicapped residents of a group home on the 3200 block of Plymouth St. with beer and cigarettes. I remember the driver of the bus that took them to the polling place going into the booth with them and "assisting" them to place their vote.

Yeah I remember that as well
Something about absentee ballots postmarked after a certain date do not count by Florida law
But the Republican secretary of state wanted to make an exception for military personnel

Yeah i remember that

 

[Red1966]

Show us your numbers then Red. All you have here is your "doubt", and you claim the opinions of officials are of no import but your doubt makes your contentions so?

I don't have to prove your statements wrong, it's you who must prove them correct. My doubt makes YOUR contentions suspect.

 

[canndo]

No, he was representing his own opinion. Why should I explain what he said? You can read can't you? Whether Romney wins Pa is unknown at this point.

And that is the point - his opinion, being in the position he is in, matters. He is giving voice, he is specifying what we all are attempting to prove. We see evidence of misconduct with reference to voting in that state and he just happens to have the same opinion that we do. I consider that confirmation that our observations are correct. I can read - and he knows that PA voted Obama in 08 and it polls for obama with about the same percentage as the percentage forecast to be nullified by these new laws. You don't think this gives any credence to our argument?

 

[Red1966]

1. O'Keefe is generaly recognized (by those who pay attention) as a fraud - but I don't believe in impugning sources. 2. you may have a point, you may have 5,000 non citizens voting. 3. Purging voter rolls has in the past been a path for Republicans to surppress legitimate voters 4. The fact that a few folks were turned away says that..... legitimate voters were dissallowed from voting. Furthermore, it is entirely possible that voters without proper ID simply did not show up at the polls because they knew they would be turned away.

1) You just did. 2) ???? 3)You're claiming your assumption proves your assumption. Not logical. 4)His statement didn't say any folks were turned away, just the opposite. They didn't know they would be turned away, the ones who did show up weren't turned away. It is entirely possible, and much more likely, they were just not inclined to vote.

 

[canndo]

Yeah, I remember Al Gore trying to and partially succeeding in disenfranchise military voters. I remember that Bush won the election, even though thousands of legitimate absentee military votes were destroyed by Democratic election officials. I remember Democrats demanding dozens of recounts and Bush still won in all seven recounts. I remember Democrats loudly crying "foul" for years, and still do, yet never found any evidence of fraud other than their own. I remember the Democratic Campaign Headquarters in Jacksonville, Florida buying votes from handicapped residents of a group home on the 3200 block of Plymouth St. with beer and cigarettes. I remember the driver of the bus that took them to the polling place going into the booth with them and "assisting" them to place their vote.

YNever mind, I'm not going to refight this one.