Compared to what ?
|
Compared to what ?
You can buy stuff on a secure server with a credit card but we can't vote on line? I registered to vote on line, bought my ID on line but can't vote online??
You talk fraud, I say it's a smoke screen to hide discrimination. A hunters license is good enough to vote with, but a student ID isn't? A utility bill isn't an acceptable form of ID? One voting station to service 6500 people but one in the city to service 40,000, isn't discrimination?
The real fraud is the tricks and traps to suppress votes of citizens. Doesn't matter which side does it.
You can get all your information hacked and stolen on line . How do you guarantee that your vote isn't being made by someone else... I already commented that registration without the requirement to prove eligibility creates a situation ripe for fraud. So no ,I don't think that online registration the way it is currently set up is sufficient to prevent fraud.Quote:
You can buy stuff on a secure server with a credit card but we can't vote on line? I registered to vote on line, bought my ID on line but can't vote online??
You can see what you want to see. That race card line of cr@p is always the left's argument of last resort .Quote:
You talk fraud, I say it's a smoke screen to hide discrimination.
Of course no one has heard of electronic signatures, like they don't make bank transactions on line
Rich guys can use a computer without worrying about fraud, why can't voters? You can get a banking app, but not a voting app?
My bank just set up a system whereby I have to give answers to FIVE security questions in order to get into my account onlineQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Can I call 'em or what?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Yeah right... there is a whole industry that has grown to combat computer fraud and theft .Quote:
Rich guys can use a computer without worrying about fraud, why can't voters? You can get a banking app, but not a voting app?
And if applied to voting it would be considered suppression no doubtQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Of course, that would be a burdensome barrier for blacks, poor and elderly or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I'm elderly and don't consider it suppression.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
How about being required to show an ID?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Well when I see the reaction to the request for any form of proof that someone is eligible to vote and then think that someone would need to answer security questions before voting ;I predict that system won't fly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
If you could do it from home and not stand in the heat/cold/rain/snow I think its do able. One of the reasons the right justifies ID's was you need one to have a bank account.
Across the globe people die for the right to stand on that line.Quote:
If you could do it from home and not stand in the heat/cold/rain/snow I think its do able
Hello again, tom:
Banks used to be that way too. If the only way to get my money was to wait in line, I'd DIE for the right to stand in that line.. But, it ain't that way anymore.Quote:
Across the globe people die for the right to stand on that line.
I'm CONVINCED that a country who can create secure online banking, can create secure online voting...
Excon
Like I said ;on line theft and fraud prevention and security is a big business and hardly 100% reliable .
Are you secretly Amish Tom?
Hello again,
Our right wing friends tell us voter ID is to prevent voter fraud. But, once in a while they tell us the truth.
Last year, Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai (R-PA) admitted that voter identification efforts were designed to suppress Democratic votes, telling a Republican Steering Committee meeting that Voter ID “is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”
He was telling the truth.
Romney ended up losing the state, but Republicans still believe that they successfully kept Democrats from supporting President Obama. As Pennsylvania's GOP Chairman Rob Gleason told Pennsylvania Cable Network earlier this week, the party “cut Obama by 5 percent” in 2012 and “probably Voter ID had helped a bit in that.”
He's telling the truth too. It's not for voter fraud. It's to give Republicans an unfair advantage.. I guess they think their IDEAS won't win 'em anything at the ballot box.. That's why they have to cheat..
excon
You're always asking the wrong questions on this. The question is why do Democrats get so many fraudulent votes?
If these people are so poor they can't afford to get an ID... how did they manage to apply for and get Welfare and food stamps without an ID?
Hello again, Steve:
Ok, let's talk. Look.. I want a clean election too. But, I HEAR about all these fraudulent votes, but I don't SEE any prosecutions. If we can COUNT these cheaters, why can't we CATCH them?? If they're REAL, and not just a figment of your imagination, point me to a website that DOCUMENTS the cheating... If it's happening, I REALLY, REALLY want to know about it.Quote:
The question is why do Democrats get so many fraudulent votes?
Now, Steve... Don't come back with one guy and say, LOOKIE here...
Besides that, do you know anybody who would stand in line for 8 hours TWICE just to vote a second time??
Excon
You keep saying you want a clean election but you're against any ideas to get there. Just like you guys keep saying you want fewer abortions but have a stroke over any restriction, even at 5 months. I don't care if the fraud is on my side or yours, 1 or 10,000, someone who voted lawfully is disenfranchised.
What's a person supposed to think about the motives that move you to make certain laws when it's the guy's who make the laws telling us it was to skew the election and make their side win?
I'm mean GEEEEEEEEZ!!! They admitted it. Not once but TWICE!!! What more do you need?
As if your side's motives for amnesty and blocking voter ID laws are pure. Give me a break, Tal, we see right through you.
Hello again, Steve:
I don't know. Once your guys, ADMIT that the purpose of voter ID is to CHEAT, it's pretty hard to say that being OPPOSED to cheating is impure. Yet, you did.Quote:
As if your side's motives for amnesty and blocking voter ID laws are pure
You ARE to be commended though. Like your friends in PA, you just ADMITTED that these laws are for the purpose of CHEATING.. You justify it by accusing the left of CHEATING for wanting to give amnesty to the 11 million illegals..
I don't quite get that.. One is cheating.. The other is politics..
Excon
I admitted no such thing. I stand on what I've said all along, "I don't care if the fraud is on my side or yours, 1 or 10,000, someone who voted lawfully is disenfranchised." You're the one that keeps saying you want a clean election but refusing to support any standards to ensure one and this Tranter guy does not speak for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
But until your side is ready to have an honest conversation about race, welfare and immigration you have no moral high ground from which to hammer us on voter ID, an idea both sides should support.
Where is your outrage that two of your own say they are going to cheat with the voting laws they want to implement?
Where is the outrage that the same rules a federal judge ruled discriminatory in Texas before are being reintroduced?
I don't know who this Tranter guy is or really care, but it is not cheating to protect my vote from being negated and make sure every vote is legitimate.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
My prediction was spot on, there would be no instance in which you would accept voter ID in spite of all the yammering about how you guys would be for it if only... if only... if only...Quote:
Where is the outrage that the same rules a federal judge ruled discriminatory in Texas before are being reintroduced?
I am for voter ID, ID's period. Biometric is better. What part of your implementation of a good idea sucks is it you have a problem understanding?
Late term abortions are horrific, a six week gynecologist visit is something I would pay for. The day after pill should be free. Two years to comply with upgrading women's health clinics to ambulatory standard is doable.
Making a 92 year old woman, who has voted for 50 years, get a birth certificate for an ID is stupid, and allowing a hunters license or conceal and carry permit to vote while a college ID can't, is discrimination.
BUT NOOOOOOO! The right doesn't think that way. And get mad when you take 'em to court over it. Keep hollerin' and throwin' rocks and trying to stick stuff up a woman's stuff without asking them first.
Right, the first thing Americans are going to jump at the opportunity to do is open the door to more government intrusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Go for it, I don't want my tax dollars contributing to any abortion. I refuse to pay for infanticide.Quote:
Late term abortions are horrific, a six week gynecologist visit is something I would pay for. The day after pill should be free. Two years to comply with upgrading women's health clinics to ambulatory standard is doable.
I think I've asked before, how many eligible voters don't have ID? Let's have some numbers. And by the way, I'm all for providing assistance to get that ID and furnishing them free of charge if necessary.Quote:
Making a 92 year old woman, who has voted for 50 years, get a birth certificate for an ID is stupid, and allowing a hunters license or conceal and carry permit to vote while a college ID can't, is discrimination.
BUT NOOOOOOO! The right doesn't think that way. And get mad when you take 'em to court over it. Keep hollerin' and throwin' rocks and trying to stick stuff up a woman's stuff without asking them first.
Why Millions of Americans Have No Government ID : NPR
The ID Divide | Center for American ProgressQuote:
And it turns out that more than three million Americans actually don't own a government-issued picture ID. That's according to a recent study by New York University's Brennan Center for Justice.
Quote:
◾The legally blind or disabled to the point where it is difficult or impossible to drive
◾Older Americans who no longer drive
◾Teenagers who can't afford the cost of acquiring a driver's license
◾Poor families without the means to afford the costs associated with maintaining a driver's license
◾Millions of urban Americans living in cities with public mass transit systems who do not have driver's licenses
Communities of Color are also significantly less likely to have government-issued IDs. According to a 2006 survey by the Brennan Center, 25 percent of voting-age African Americans nationwide have no current government-issued photo ID, compared to eight percent of white voting-age citizens. In a Georgia study, Hispanics were twice as likely as whites not to have a government-issued photo ID.
First of all I said I'm all for assisting people in getting IDs and making them free if necessary. Second of all you're talking about less than 1 percent (0.96279%) of Americans that don't have an ID. It's time they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
A whole 3 million ? Wow! There are reasonable ways to handle all the issues these people have. Do you know how many of them bother to vote now ? Nope .Presumably since less than half the eligible vote in elections except perhaps when the Presidency is contested what you are saying is that on average perhaps there are 30,000 per state that do not have id now (including teens that would not be eligible to vote anyway) . A very solvable problem if you ask me. This is just more proof that your side will throw out any BS to prevent a system that verifies and guarantees the integrity of the vote.
Did you even read any of the links I provided before you engaged in your partisan tirade? Interest groups have been registering and help many who will need ID's to vote get them if the states cannot. Even republicans are helping their constituents get ID's.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
I am for voter ID, ID's period. Biometric is better. What part of your implementation of a good idea sucks is it you have a problem understanding?
You screamers for integrity of the vote overblow the problem and are short on logistic support, and a reasonable timetable, and that's why you fail in court because the plan of implementation is always flawed.
I mean darn it, hollering voter fraud and proving it in a court of law is NOT a right wing strong point because for all the noise, you have no proof.
You know and I know that in the districts where voter fraud is likely to occur that the political machines have a vested interest in the status quo. Not only that ,but the US justice dept won't bother seriously investigating voter intimidation in Philly . So what's the chance of a serious investigation ? Besides they have to save their resources to combat efforts against legitimate verifiable voter id.
If Philly had a case, they would be in court, and we both know it.
Ummm the Philly Dems were not going to take that case forward . You know that don't you ?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
They're too busy recruiting snoops for their Zimmerman tip line.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Holder dropped a case of voter intimation that was as clear cut as it gets.Quote:
If Philly had a case, they would be in court, and we both know it.
But no surprise, Holder is in solidarity with the NBP..Quote:
The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:21 AM. |