Guess in which states election laws are tightening?

The flip side of this, of course, is that by requiring a photo ID or a driver's license or whatever, you are empowering some volunteer to turn people away from voting.

If you grandmother comes in to vote for her 80th year in a row and some officious poll worker turns her away because her driver's license expired in 2002, you probably won't be too happy.

 

It was a big midterm election where I live, and I was voting at 6 p.m. or so and they said that was the longest line of the day. For the last two presidential elections I was there when it opened and still had to wait about 30 minutes.

Having to show ID will either reduce the line or make things move even more slowly. I still think it's worth it.

 

People in 34 states can partake of early voting. The other 16 holdout states need to pull their heads out of their asses and get on the wagon. Then, you can't bitch about long lines.

 

Quite possibly the most disingenuous post in the history of this board, and that's saying a lot.

Your comparison is that no one is forced to fly or open a bank account, but that voting is a right. Sorry, but to make your comparison honest, you need to compare being forced to fly or open a bank account with being forced to vote.

The only people who hate Voter ID are the people who know their side cheats and needs to continue to cheat.

 

States are not bound by the 2nd Amendment? Then why are they bound to any part of the Constitution that guarantees the right to vote?

I eagerly await what should be a very interesting answer.

 

Funny, one of the things the righties constantly shriek about (really, there are so many it's hard to keep track of them all) is "the guvvmint" trying to establish a "national ID card" (supposedly Social Security cards are already insidious steps in that direction) yet they are apparently fine with imposing a national ID card as a requirement to vote (although of course maybe only for funny-lookin' people who don't really look like 'real Amurricans').

Although if them funny-lookin' people just didn't bother to vote the problem would be solved.

Then we could concentrate on the next scandal: voters who are picked up by organizers and driven to the polls. Even though there is nothing in the constitution saying there is anything wrong with this, they are deeply deeply concerned about solving this crisis situation.

Maybe a voting requirement to prove full and clear ownership of a new car in running condition.

 

You really need to change your name to Strawman. It's only an additional letter and a transposition. It would be such an honest change.

 

Just come out and say what you really want to say, you reprehensible caricature: Only those who vote Republican/are white should be allowed to vote.

The 1890s called. Go back. Please.

 

You know, if ID is so important, why don't we start requiring firearm owners to have a valid ID?

While we are at it, on the ID it should be noted that this person owns firearms, legally of course, just like it states you height, eye color and DOB.

This sounds like a great plan. Maybe we can have the ID list the number of guns the person owns? That way, every time this fact changes, they have to have it registered.

If you need an ID to vote, something harmless to your fellow man, I would think it only logical that firearm ownership should be listed on there as well.

 

93, you need to post more on the political threads. You're hilarious.

 

DISENFRANCHISEMENT!

 

If you have a problem with showing ID to vote, you support voter fraud. To argue the opposite is dishonest.