Romney 2012?

@snood,

Do really believe you know their intentions? We saw a good deal of fraudulent voter registration activity by Acorn and other like organizations in the last election. Stated have the right to administer the registration and identification of eligible voters as they see fit? On what basis would a requirement to show a valid ID andf proof of residence be an unfasir hindrence to voting? It is an inconvience at most.

1 Reply

@snood,

I don't believe that's true.
There is nothing to indicate that, and since the left loves to use outlandish scare tactics, I will have to see some hard evidence before I believe it.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

george, I'm surprise at you! This is from FactCheck.

Quote:

But so far ACORN itself has not been officially charged with any fraud. Aside from the heated charges and counter-charges, no evidence has yet surfaced to show that the ACORN employees who submitted fraudulent registration forms intended to pave the way for illegal voting. Rather, they were trying to get paid by ACORN for doing no work. Dan Satterberg, the Republican prosecuting attorney in King County, Wash., where the largest ACORN case to date was prosecuted, said that the indicted ACORN employees were shirking responsibility, not plotting election fraud.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

"and since the left loves to use outlandish scare tactics"...

you mean like making laws to stop the rampant voter fraud that has not been found to exist?

or calling obama a terrorist. muslim. foreign born dude...

0 Replies

@snood,

Snood, I answered above. You are beating a dead horse on this topic. This is not an attempt to thin out anyone but illegal voters. If the Dems want people too stupid to get an ID to vote for them, then they should endeavor to get them ID's. What are YOU doing to help get these poor people their ID's?

2 Replies

I don't see how anyone could doubt the thinning of Democratic voters as the motive for the ID laws. You don't see any states lead by Democrats making these kinds of laws and there is a good reason why they don't. There is virtually no voter fraud of the kind ID laws are said to contain. The real fraud and nobody is doing much about it is computerized voting machines that don't leave a paper trail.

1 Reply

@McGentrix,

What illegal voters are voting?

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

You can find a list of all the states considering the legislation here.

2 Replies

@Irishk,

I found a site that stated that Rhode Island is the one Democratic state that did so.

1 Reply

@Irishk,

Thanks for the link. However, what disdains me more is the fact that the Supreme Court is not acting on this illegal legislation that suppresses citizens to vote in direct contradiction of the US Constitution.

They are a lame duck Supreme Court with too many republicans.

4 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Which is why we need a Democrat to nominate the next few justices.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Didn't they rule on the Indiana Voter ID law? I seem to remember they did...6-3 to uphold if memory serves.

I suppose I should consult The Google lol.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

I found a site that stated that Rhode Island is the one Democratic state that did so.

The DOJ approved Virginia's legislation today. It's a bit different from the laws they're challenging in Texas and S. Carolina, though.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

What part of the country do you live in. Where I live conservative writers are 6 t0 1 liberals. We dont have a liberal radio station at all. Every once in a while a lib will appear on a station for 30 min and the host than spends 5 or 6 hours knocking him. Liberal my ass!

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Found it on The Google.

Quote:

In a 6-3 decision in 2008, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the photo ID requirement, finding it closely related to Indiana's legitimate state interest in preventing voter fraud, modernizing elections, and safeguarding voter confidence.

2 Replies

@Irishk,

I am not surprised you were able to find it so quickly.

0 Replies

@Irishk,

We all know about the 2008 Supreme Court who stepped in the Florida elections to give it to GW Bush.

The Supreme Court should know that there is no "voter fraud." They are party chumps who don't understand the US Constitution which they swore to uphold.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

Quote:

Snood, I answered above. You are beating a dead horse on this topic. This is not an attempt to thin out anyone but illegal voters.

I find it interesting that you think people that can legally vote are illegal voters.

0 Replies

I believe I've gotten all the answer I'm going to from the right-leaners here. They think the new thrusts for voter-id laws are just fine. I guess I was looking for some thoughts about the principles involved, since there has proven to be no legitmate reason for the new efforts other than aid the republicans' chances.
Looking for principle in all the wrong places, I suppose.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

They are a lame duck Supreme Court with too many republicans.

I think that's pretty much the prevailing opinion because the 5-4 votes always get the most publicity. Statistically, though, one-vote majority opinions are fairly rare -- around 16% or so going back 60 years.

Chief Justice Warren's court hold's the record for the lowest percentage (11%) of 5-4 splits and Chief Justice Rehnquist had a career percentage of 20.2%. Chief Justice Roberts leads with 22.2%, but for the past 3 terms has been hitting at below 20%.

I think if you examine the numbers, the current court issues more 9-0 decisions than 5-4 decisions, often substantially so.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know