Is 2016 the year of the Third Party?

POSTED BY: JEWELSTAITEFAN
UPDATED: Thursday, June 5, 2025 14:21
VIEWED: 11479
PAGE 6 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

6IXSTRINGJACK

Monday, February 6, 2017 5:50 AM

That in itself could mean nothing.

The fact remains that most Democrats are against voter ID laws because the very best case scenario it does nothing at all for them and the worst case scenario it exposes fraud that has been suspected for quite some time now.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

6IXSTRINGJACK

Monday, February 6, 2017 11:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by G:
A total of 33 states have enforced the new voter identification requirements as of February 2016. Of those, 18 states require voters to present photo identification, while 15 accept other forms of identification. In some states, a voter who is unable to present valid identification may still be permitted to vote without casting a provisional ballot – a practise known as, non-strict requirement. In eight states of the 17 states that require a photo ID, the requirement is non-strict, while it is non-strict in 14 of the states that do not require a photo.

That tells me that only 9 states have voter ID laws. If it's going to be "non-strict" there's no point at all.

Still doesn't change the fact that only Democrats are against it and the reasons why are obvious.

I've said it before, but should say it again here...

Along with Voter ID laws, anyone should be able to get a state ID free of charge. Then there is no valid claim of discrimination against minorities.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

1KIKI

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 12:33 AM

Quote:
anyone should be able to get a state ID free of charge

I think to be a rock-solid process, ideally it should be based on either a birth certificate or valid naturalization papers. I don't know what the process is for getting a copy of your birth certificate for all states, but I do know it always involves a state fee.

Quote:
https://www.usa.gov/replace-vital-documents

Vital Records Documents Issued in the United States

Vital record documents consist of birth, death, marriage, and divorce certificates. State government vital records offices issue these documents. To get a copy of a vital record document, contact the vital records office in the state where the event occurred.

Some online services will do the legwork for you, dependent of course on you being online, and paying their fee in addition to the state fee.

Quote:
https://www.vitalchek.com/birth-certificates

But even if you get a copy of a birth record, and even if the voter id is provided free of charge, many states have made the process extremely onerous - you have to have notarized documents and show up in person. That's a barrier to people in poor health, people who work at will or otherwise without leave time, people who need to work more than 1 job, and people without transportation.

Believe me, the process has been well thought out to exclude as many people from the wrong demographics as possible.

That's why I think the Dem party needs to take the lead, and overcome as many barriers as possible for those who get shut out of the process. Voter id would keep republican state secys from purging voters rolls - NEARLY 100% OF THE TIME OF DEMOCRATS - as happened in Florida.

But as I posted elsewhere, the Dems are not about to go out of their way for their constituency.

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 3:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by G:
1. The "non-strict" refers to the PHOTO part, not the ID part (you don't have to have a PHOTO on your ID). So this statement is still a statement of fact: "A total of 33 states have enforced the new voter identification requirements as of February 2016."

2. Same here: "Along with Voter ID laws, anyone should be able to get a state ID free of charge. Then there is no valid claim of discrimination against minorities." It's not a claim of discrimination so much as a statement of fact that minorities - traditional Democratic voters - show a lower proclivity in getting an ID if they don't have one, free or not... therefore... there will be less Dem voters. If you want to say, "Well screw them! If they can't drag themselves out of bed and git a free ID then they don't deserve to git to vote!" that's another matter.

1. Exactly. My point is that there is no point to carding for votes if there is no photo on the ID. Why bother even having a law then? My guess is so they can say that a majority of the states have voter ID laws when truthfully only 9 of the states have laws that actually do anything.

2. I think I will exert my right to say "Well screw them! If they can't drag themselves out of bed and git a free ID then they don't deserve to git to vote!" Assuming the State ID was valid for as long as a drivers license is valid. They'd only have to take time out of their busy day once every two presidential elections to do it. There's really no excuse if it's free.

Nobody can buy booze or go into most bars these days without a photo ID. They've got those employees so afraid of losing their job and getting fined that I saw what was obviously a retiree turned away at the liquor store because he wasn't able to provide photo identification for his booze.

I think it's funny that everybody who wants to buy booze can get a photo ID to buy booze, but when we're talking about voting it's suddenly racist.

I think if the law said you needed an ID to vote that minorities would get the ID to vote. I think it's racist to assume that they'd be too lazy to get the ID, actually.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

1KIKI

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 5:07 AM

interesting list at these links

http://www.voteriders.org/voter-id?gclid=CI7I68nP_NECFQ5Efgod-L0LJA
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx

Wisconsin seems to have gone out of its way to disenfranchise voters, as did Texas, Tennessee, Mississippi, (at least) :

IDs that are NOT VALID for voting in Wisconsin include:

Non-Wisconsin driver’s licenses
Student ID from an accredited WI university, college, or technical college that does NOT contain the student’s name, signature, picture, date the card was issued and expiration date (maximum two years) plus SEPARATE proof of enrollment.

Groups impacted by the voter ID law are those who may not have a current WI driver’s license: students, older adults, people with disabilities or low income, and voters of color. Women’s right to vote is also at risk because 90% change their names upon marriage. Wisconsin requires that the name on your photo ID “conform to the voter’s name on the poll list,” although “an exact match is not necessary.” Consequently, whether a woman - or any other - voter receives a regular ballot is subject to poll workers’ interpretation.

Alaska link doesn't work, Montana and Arkansas don't explicitly state acceptable identification ...

being pestered by family, unable to finish

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 5:20 AM

Any of those excuses I don't find valid. Nobody is being disenfranchised. I think it's funny that essentially everyone that is not a white male is expected to have difficulty obtaining a valid photo ID. It really says a lot about what the leaders of the Democratic Party really think about their constituency.

Yanno what?

Going to the DMV sucks, even if you're a white male.

And when I'm a senior citizen and they start making me go every 3 years instead of 8 years, it's going to suck 2.5 times as much.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

1KIKI

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 6:32 AM

Quote:
I think it's funny that everybody who wants to buy booze can get a photo ID to buy booze ...

Not really. It's in everybody's interest to skirt the law, the buyers to buy and the sellers to sell. That's what really flimsy fake ids are for, to give the rough appearance of conforming to the law. The seller can claim 'I asked' and the buyers are out the door and on their way into the unaccountable void.

The moral of the story is - everybody wins with a fake id, even a really bad one!

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

1KIKI

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 6:37 AM

jack

Quote:
Groups impacted by the voter ID law are those who may not have a current WI driver’s license: students, older adults, people with disabilities or low income, and voters of color. Women’s right to vote is also at risk because 90% change their names upon marriage.

Quote:
Any of those excuses I don't find valid. Nobody is being disenfranchised.

Aside from merely claiming something, do you have an actual argument with facts to back your opinion up?

How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 6:53 AM

Seems to be lots of confusion and contradictory claims about states with Voter ID laws.

here are some linkys:

https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_identification_laws_by_state#tab=Details
_by_state

http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws_in_the_United_States

To speak reasonably about these, perhaps we should specify which states we are talking about.

The following States seem to have changes in their Voter ID laws between 2012 and 2016:
KS, MS, VA, AL, SD, AR, WI improved their requirements.
AZ, TX, ND, PA lessened their requirements.

Using wikipedia, I find the following current groups:
Require Photo ID (aka honest elections):
(7) WI, KS, IN, MS, TN, GA, VA. Every one of these states counted their votes to carry for the GOP in 2016, except that suburb of ultra-corrupt D.C. known as "Virginia." A total of 63 Electoral Votes are represented by these states with "honest elections." 13 for Dems, 50 for GOP. Hilliary took VA with less than a majority, 49.75% of the "vote." VA voted GOP from 1979 until the infestation of D.C. by liberals following the Rock The Vote Election in 2006.
WI finally was able to enforce it's laws, and went to GOP for the first time since 1984.
KS and MS voted GOP every time since 1979.
IN voted Obama in 2008, otherwise GOP since 1979.
TN and GA each voted Dem twice since 1979.

Require ID, no photo:
(2) AZ, OH. These both voted GOP in 2016. OH voted Obama in 2012, and since 1980 has voted for the eventual victor each election. AZ has voted GOP every time since 1980 save 1996.

Request ID, which must have Photo:
(8) AL, FL, ID, LA, MI, RI, SD, TX. All of these voted for GOP in 2016 except Rhode Island. In 2012 MI voted for Obama.

Request ID, without Photo:
(15) AK, AR, CO, CT, DE, HI, KY, MO, MT, NH, ND, OK, SC, UT, WA. Of this group of 15, 6 went for the Dems in 2016, with 39 Electoral Votes, and 9 went for the GOP with 55 Electoral Votes.

No ID whatsoever (aka most encouraging voting fraud, and thereby disenfranchising honest law-abiding voting electorate):
(19) CA, IL, IA, ME, MD, MA, MN, NE, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OR, PA, VT, WV, WY, DC.
6 of these states went to the GOP in 2016, with 54 Electoral Votes, and 13 (12 States plus DC) went to Hilliary, with 177 Electoral Votes.
In 2012, only PA had different voter ID laws compared to 2016 in this group, yet IA and PA went to Obama, taking 26 EVs - for a margin of 203 to 28 Electoral Votes in this most lawless(literally) group.
This group represents 231 Electoral Votes. 270 Electoral Votes wins an election. With 39 EVs from the prior category, this accounts for 270. Combining the 2 least-honest (most fraudulent) groups of laws, this is 325 Electoral Votes ripe for election fraud.

This last group, subtracting the EVs wrought from Senators, accounts for 195 of the 438 EVs representing population proportion - or about 45% of the population of America.
The prior group accounts for 64 more of the population proportion, giving us 259 or 59% of America governed by the most lax Voter ID laws - and it may be shocking, I say shocking to some that these States end up counting their vote tallies in favor of the Dems.

If we can specify which states we are disputing about from here on, it might make more sense.

6IXSTRINGJACK

Tuesday, February 7, 2017 6:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
jack
Quote:
Groups impacted by the voter ID law are those who may not have a current WI driver’s license: students, older adults, people with disabilities or low income, and voters of color. Women’s right to vote is also at risk because 90% change their names upon marriage.

Quote:
Any of those excuses I don't find valid. Nobody is being disenfranchised.
Aside from merely claiming something, do you have an actual argument with facts to back your opinion up?

It's called the facts of life.

A drivers license/state ID is good for 2,920 days.

If you can't get your fat lazy ass to the DMV on one of them to get a free State ID, then you don't deserve to vote. Period.

Sure, it's just an opinion, but I maintain that it is a valid one that stands on its own.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE