This cannot be possible. Election fraud isn’t real, say the libtards and the media

[onawbtngr546]

Except for some odd jobs I've done under the table or for friends, and 'real' job I've had required me to provide ID of some form. This is either a drivers license, or just a state ID card...



Lets re-state that any legally working, functional member of society needs an ID card.

If people don't have it, and they want to be able to vote... well, where do they live? Do they pay taxes? Does their job pay taxes? Are they legally required to work? Are they a citizen?



It sounds like the venn diagram of 'legal citizens who are functional members of society' and 'people who have an ID' are indeed very close to a circle...
Yes, there are some people who can not work, do not work, but are legally able to vote, but they would also qualify for an ID.


So, why is people not having an ID the problem? Change the focus of 'PEOPLE CAN NOT GET IDS!!' to 'we need to help everyone who qualifies get a state ID'.


It's more checks and puts the number of people who are able to vote under the umbrella of people who have IDs. I don't see anything wrong with that. Unless you are undocumented, live off the grid, and pay no taxes, IE living illegally, you should have an ID.


And if you are undocumented, live off the grid, and don't pay taxes... you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Because how can we know if your vote is legitimate?

[anmar85]

Originally Posted by berryberry

You are really stretching. Yes, not every person does every one of those things on that list, but if you are a functioning member of society - from no matter what walk of life, you need an ID for some facet of your life.

And if Voter ID requirements are enacted, states would make efforts for the small minority you say don't have one to be able to obtain one

Being against voter ID enables voter fraud.

Nah, I'm still feeling pretty tense (might be time to go visit one of my favorite grannies). My point is that not only are those all things that either don't require an ID, or someone who doesn't have an ID probably isn't engaging with, but they're also not rights we have as citizens as opposed to voting. The absolute truth in this country is that there are millions of people, citizens who have done nothing wrong, and have committed no fraud who would suddenly find themselves unable to vote in elections if a state issued photo ID was required. Not to mention that to impose something like that on the federal level would trample on a state's right to administer elections how they see fit, and to me that just doesn't seem like a good solution for those reasons, and those reasons alone.

[HDGristle]

That's well said anmar

[onawbtngr546]

Originally Posted by anmar85

The absolute truth in this country is that there are millions of people, citizens who have done nothing wrong, and have committed no fraud who would suddenly find themselves unable to vote in elections if a state issued photo ID was required. .

Stop looking at it like this, and change the narrative to "If the Feds want to mandate photo IDs to vote, the Feds need to put into place programs to help everyone get a photo ID"


Problem solved. Instead of singling out the poor/disabled/under the table demographics because they don't have IDs, you help them get IDs.




Let me flip it around, why are you opposed to the poor/disabled/under the table demographics from being issued photo IDs?

[HDGristle]

The narrative needs to involve funding and a concerted effort to ensure access, otherwise anmar's position is the default.

[anmar85]

Originally Posted by onawbtngr546

Stop looking at it like this, and change the narrative to "If the Feds want to mandate photo IDs to vote, the Feds need to put into place programs to help everyone get a photo ID"


Problem solved. Instead of singling out the poor/disabled/under the table demographics because they don't have IDs, you help them get IDs.




Let me flip it around, why are you opposed to the poor/disabled/under the table demographics from being issued photo IDs?

Oh, I've said a couple of times (but I mean I know these threads can get messy) that I'm totally down with expanding identification access first. Like I think you're definitely trying to think of a proactive solution and I'm fully in support of it.



My only concerns are:
1. Getting everyone on board with a program like that
2. Making sure voter ID laws don't get railroaded in like as soon as a program like that gets started.



Something like that would definitely take years to be successful, so if we wanted to go that route I'd definitely want us to do that first, and then pick up the conversation about voter ID laws. But yeah, I think we're pretty much on the same page with that at least being a better idea with some kind of a plan behind it to try to make sure elections stay pretty free and accessible. Are there better ideas? Probably, but that's why you and I aren't writing the laws on it lol

[onawbtngr546]

Right. It is easy to say "We can't do X because Y! We never had Y before, so we can't do X!"


What should be said and talked about is, "We want to do X, but can't because Y. We should do Z to make Y possible, then we can do X."


Just like how the internet should be regulated as a standard of living like electricity and running water. The internet was never regulated by the government because the internet is new.From the 1770s to the 1990s, a whole 220 years, the government didn't need to regulate the internet.

But as times change and millions of people depend on the internet for work and for school, it is absolutely not something that should be managed by for-profit private companies.


So instead of saying "Online school and work from home shouldn't be done, because the poor and the people who live in the country don't have good internet!"
We should say "Online school and work are something we need to do in the future, and because the poor and people who live in the country don't have good internet, we need to pass legislation to mandate that ISPs provide service to them equal to that of dense population centers"


The same thing can be said for issuing IDs. I've bolded this because it is on topic, and I understand people who don't fully read would think my comment is off topic!


If we mandate photo ID to vote,people who don't have or don't have an easy way to get photo IDs would not be allowed to vote. So we should make it easier to get a photo ID, then we can enforce photo IDs as a requirement to vote.

[anmar85]

Originally Posted by onawbtngr546

Right. It is easy to say "We can't do X because Y! We never had Y before, so we can't do X!"


What should be said and talked about is, "We want to do X, but can't because Y. We should do Z to make Y possible, then we can do X."


Just like how the internet should be regulated as a standard of living like electricity and running water. The internet was never regulated by the government because the internet is new.From the 1770s to the 1990s, a whole 220 years, the government didn't need to regulate the internet.

But as times change and millions of people depend on the internet for work and for school, it is absolutely not something that should be managed by for-profit private companies.


So instead of saying "Online school and work from home shouldn't be done, because the poor and the people who live in the country don't have good internet!"
We should say "Online school and work are something we need to do in the future, and because the poor and people who live in the country don't have good internet, we need to pass legislation to mandate that ISPs provide service to them equal to that of dense population centers"


The same thing can be said for issuing IDs. I've bolded this because it is on topic, and I understand people who don't fully read would think my comment is off topic!


If we mandate photo ID to vote,people who don't have or don't have an easy way to get photo IDs would not be allowed to vote. So we should make it easier to get a photo ID, then we can enforce photo IDs as a requirement to vote.

Yeah, I dig on all of that. Even if we're stepping out of bounds a little bit, I especially agree with making the internet a public service btw. That's like actually using our tax dollars for shit that's useful for us which is something I always wanted to see happen.


And yeah, I think I might have some hesitation to the idea just because I don't trust people to handle it correctly, because like when has anyone in the government, but at least I think what you're saying is a better idea than just saying people need to have IDs to vote. You're like looking at the systemic issue of why that's a problem and trying to think of a way to make it right. Ideas like this are like the exact reason why I didn't really want to have people jumping into stuff like name calling, or just throwing around assumptions and hypotheticals all willy nilly. I feel like there's even more possible avenues on how to address this issue that we as a society haven't even thought of yet, because we're not willing to just sit our asses down and talk about an actual objective issue sometimes. I think it's cool that at least a few of us in this thread are kind of getting somewhere with the conversation though! Hopefully other people find it at least slightly more interesting than the norm around here.

[Jacuzzme]

Don’t think I know anyone without an ID. It’s way to much of a minuscule problem to be worth worrying about. Any other law that adversely effects such a small number of people would pass easily, this only doesn’t because certain politicians want to protect their right to cheat.

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Don’t think I know anyone without an ID. It’s way to much of a minuscule problem to be worth worrying about. Any other law that adversely effects such a small number of people would pass easily, this only doesn’t because certain politicians want to protect their right to cheat.

Another bullshit claim based on a lie. Put up some facts on cheating or stop with the BS. And just cuz you may have seen it on dinesh's movie doesn't make it a fact; I saw Godzilla in the movie theater, and while scary I've never seen one in real life.

[Jacuzzme]

Dude, have you lived in a cave for the last century? Democrats have made a living cheating since their inception, they’re basically spotted 5 points. Ask Richard Nixon, if you’re so inclined.

[berryberry]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Dude, have you lived in a cave for the last century? Democrats have made a living cheating since their inception, they’re basically spotted 5 points. Ask Richard Nixon, if you’re so inclined.

I know - it is laughable how the libs here pretend the Democrats don't cheat in elections when all the evidence has shown otherwise.

And as you note - the only people without an ID are those who don't want one. You can't go thru life and do many of the things people want to do without an ID. That is on them.

If they don't want an ID or are too lazy to get off their ass and get one, fine. But don't cry about voting if / when voter IDs are required.

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Dude, have you lived in a cave for the last century? Democrats have made a living cheating since their inception, they’re basically spotted 5 points. Ask Richard Nixon, if you’re so inclined.

Richard Nixon died in 1994. Is that how you get your fax information about lying and cheating, through a Ouija board? You have no facts to back up these allegations of cheating at all. If you have some facts then State them otherwise- just more mental masturbation of the reptard clan

[berryberry]

Fetterman wants to cheat in elections (just like all Democrats do)

Watch:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1561507296106143750

[eyecu2]

PA laws; you need some sort of acceptable ID to register, BUT NOT when you vote- I normally produce my ID, but it's not required. What if someone's ID expires, or is lost. Should they loose the right to vote? PA constitution says nope. And that is Fetterman's point. I know many people who have lapsed on ID, registrations etc, and while inconvenient, it's not a point to make you lose your voting priveledges. Only people pushing that stone up a hill are REPTURDS who need a lynch-pin to try to keep this voting fraud charade up. It's old, it's fake, and there are no large scale indications of fraud in the last 4 states where it mattered to a significant figure. But yet, the small minded easily manipulated minds on the right keep soldiering on in the name of Trump and his big lie. What total horseshit.