It's a stupid law. Stealing extra votes by walking in after a shift change and pretending to be someone else is the feeblest, most retail-level possible way to try and steal an election compared to manipulating absentee ballots or other wholesale methods. It doesn't happen.
Should there be a law that voters need to have IDs? Maybe, if it means that we can get more rural poor into the system and keep track of them. But the furore over stolen elections is false controversy and scaremongering, and it begs a closer look at why else some people in power might think these laws are so important.
While I agree that one person fraudulently voting as someone else isn't stealing a presidential election, both of us are just speculating. Unless we know every instance of voter fraud, voter intimidation, and/or blatant vote manipulation we're just spouting opinion.
I mean voter fraud does happen. A lot. Go dig up our threads on the previous two presidential elections and you'll see a
LOT of examples, and more than just 1-2 votes stolen. This is indisputable. Both parties cheat, but one party is caught getting the votes of dead people, illegals, ex-cons, and fraudulent voters more than the other by a wide, wide margin. They also happen to be the party against voter ID laws...
The tactics of the people against these laws bother me as well. They immediately play the race card and also the poor card as a double shame whammy. Thus, if you think someone should show ID at the polls, you're a racist, elitist monster. Great tactic. The problem for them is if someone's brave enough to keep pushing the issue, the anti-ID folks' reasoning crumbles really, really fast.
I mean a state ID is free, so how exactly are the poor prevented from voting? Being poor doesn't seem to stop them from signing up for entitlements or voting. Oh wait, they don't have rides to go get their ID, right? Ignore that public transportation exists, and also pretend that each party doesn't bus their voters around on election day to make they get those votes. You're telling me those parties couldn't organize another bus ride to go get IDs? Sure getting an ID might be inconvenient for the single parent working three jobs, but I'm willing to bet he/she doesn't have the same objection to voter ID laws.
On a very related side note, how the fuck are these folks without IDs living day to day? Do they pay for stuff with cash only? How do they open accounts with banks, utilities, etc.? How do they rent or buy cars? How the fuck do they drive? How do they get insurance? How do they get entitlements (if they do)? An ID is a necessity to live and work within our society.
Back to the topic let's cover how it's racist. It's racist because, and these are actual explanations I've heard, minorities are afraid of the government and they have warrants.
I shouldn't even need to point out how stupid these reasons are, but since we're here: You don't trust the government to give you a free ID, but you trust it enough to vote for who is running it, what its laws are, cash its checks, use its services, etc.? As for the warrants, how about dealing with them? If you have warrants that you're running from, perhaps you're not in a place to pick who should be running the country and your community.
Another tactic used in this debate is to talk about it at the presidential level. This is a smart move because tens of millions of votes are cast and who cares about even 100,000 fraudulent votes, right?
First of all, if those votes are in the right districts in the right states, they can absolutely swing a presidential election. Remember, W won his first election without winning the popular vote. It's not about the number of votes, but where you get your votes. That's how our system works. All it would take is some polling data and a knowledge of the electoral college and you'd know exactly what counties you needed to win to swing a tight presidential election.
Secondly, when you start bringing lower elections into the discussion it becomes a much bigger concern. Fewer votes get cast, and that means fewer fraudulent votes are needed to swing an election. I've seen elections be won by a handful of votes as I'm sure we all have, so in those cases aren't those fraudulent votes a serious concern or do we only care about the presidential elections?
People say that the privilege to vote was paid for with the blood of patriots that have fought in all our wars. You'd think that those people would want to ensure the sanctity of that vote.
That's part of why I take this issue personally.
Legit people had their ability to vote taken away because they show up to vote and are told they've already voted. There is no justification for this ever happening. I personally find this to be very, very troubling. I swore an oath to die if needed defending people's right to vote, and to have some piece of shit take that away from someone in a self serving act gets me pissed off. On this point, I have zero tolerance. If you think it's ok that some people have their vote stolen away from them, then there's no point continuing the conversation because I will never understand that viewpoint.
Please make a logical argument for why nobody should care if their right to vote gets taken away due to voter fraud.
In today's technological driven world, there really is no excuse for every voter to not have an ID, be in a system, and have their votes properly counted. The fact that this all isn't happening makes me believe it's because certain folks want a system that they can manipulate.
Oh, and illegals and ex-cons (the big time felons) can go fuck themselves in regards to voting. If you can't take a damn citizenship test, then you shouldn't have a say in who's running the country. And if you can't stop yourself from hurting, raping, or robbing others I don't really care who you want to see as president.
When you steal a second vote, 100% of the time nothing happens.
We can prove voter fraud happens. Again, it's indisputable. Please prove that no election has ever been affected as a result.