cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:34 am
@firefly,
How many people visit their library?
JPB
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:35 am
@cicerone imposter,
Especially the non-driving elderly?
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:38 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
How many people visit their library?

How many people don't even bother to vote?

The library is a good nearby resource for those who don't own computers, or know how to use them, if they need to print out something that's online.
Whether they want to use the resource is up to them.

My public library is well utilized.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:41 am
@JPB,
Quote:
Especially the non-driving elderly?

Senior citizen centers have computers also--and people who will print things out for you. They also provide transportation for non-drivers where I live.

How do senior non-drivers get to the polls to vote?

0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:41 am
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

Quote:
So, while its said that this photo ID will stop voter fraud, IMHO, it will also disenfranchise perhaps thousands of retirees who no longer drive.

It shouldn't disenfranchise anyone. When you turn in your driver's license, you can request they issue you an official state photo I.D. that you can use in place of a license anywhere a photo I.D. is required. It looks very much like a driver's license.

Where I vote, they never request any sort of I.D., they simply glance at your signature in the sign-in book to see if it matches the previous one. I think requiring a photo I.D. is a good idea.


If you don't have a State-issued ID, you can get a small passport that fits into your wallet. I've got one and it's very handy.
Miller
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:42 am
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:

are you required to have a drivers license to operate a horse and buggy?

Is that an Amish question?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:42 am
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:

indeed...
I like my amish neighbors better'n my redneck ones.

So you discriminate based on neck color?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:49 am
@Mame,
Mame wrote:



I think it's an excellent idea and have long wondered why they let us vote with just our name. I could be anyone posing to be someone else and vote their vote before they got there just on my say-so. We don't sign anything at our voting booths, just announce who we are and where we live.


I agree with Mame, it's a wonderful idea. Imagine the voters in Chicago... Now they'll be able to vote only once for Obama when Chicago passes the new law.

Romney might be able to take Illinois...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:09 pm
@JPB,
That too, but firefly is also correct in the question about "how many bother to vote."

0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:13 pm
Quote:
Robert A. Pastor, co-director of the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University, who was executive director of the Carter-Baker commission, said the voter identification fights of recent months pale when compared with some of these other issues, especially voter registration. Only half of eligible voters in the country are registered and few of them lack photo IDs, he said.

“The proponents of voter ID are adamant that it is essential to stop electoral fraud even though there is hardly any evidence of voter impersonation, and the opponents are sure that it will lead to voter suppression even though they haven’t been able — until Pennsylvania — to point to a single instance where a voter could not vote because of a lack of ID,” he said. “I did a survey of Indiana, Maryland, and Mississippi and found only about 1.2 percent of registered voter did not have photo IDs. The problem remains registration — not IDs — in reducing voting participation. To quote Jorge Luis Borges on the Falklands war, ‘It’s a fight between two bald men over a comb.’ ”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/us/voting-systems-plagues-go-far-beyond-identification.html?pagewanted=all
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:32 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
GUESS WHAT demographic is the least connected and least cyber savvy?

Democrats?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:33 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
How many people don't even bother to vote?
Thats their decision. However, the elderly have been a constant voting bloc and to try to remove this group from the roles just before a heated election based upon NO EVIDENCE THAT A PROBLEM EVEN EXISTS, is manipulation to try to control the outcomes.

Of course the GOP wants us to see this as a "solution to a problem that is widespread", Its just not so however. Its another attempt at manipulation .
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:35 pm
@farmerman,
Are there any honest conservatives who speaks out against such manipulation?

I haven't heard of one!
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:38 pm
@Miller,
This ID card should be implemented between the election cycles, not made a condition of eligibility just before a big election.
It had only been talked up since Romney was the candidate and was rushed into being by the Pa Legislature wtha quick signing by the governor. No hearings , nothin.
Its the party in control making the calendar work for them.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:39 pm
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
(Oh, and Penn has admitted that the law will not prevent even ONE frauduent vote since they have no record of any.)

No, Penn has not admitted that.

I'm sure you will agree that not having a record does not mean it does not occur.
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:41 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Lustig Andrei wrote:
Tico must be right. This new law has nothing to do with disenfranchising voters.

Please read what I type more carefully.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:46 pm
@Ticomaya,
Quote:

I'm sure you will agree that not having a record does not mean it does not occur.


It means there's no evidence of it occurring. That gives you nothing to point at in court as proof that the onerous poll tax is necessary.

I'm sure you'll agree with me that this will be a problem for the state's defense of the law.

Cycloptichorn
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 12:46 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Are there any honest conservatives who speaks out against such manipulation?

Only a dishonest conservative could do such a thing.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 01:01 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
The voter registration process should eliminate most voting fraud.
Voters are able to vote by absentee ballots or by showing up at the voting place established in all communities. Voters must sign and write down their mailing address to vote.
The only other exposure for fraud is how the voting machines are secured.

As we know, the other problems stem from unclear voting ballots, and the intrusion of the SC, but these are not considered "fraud" issues.


0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 01:01 pm
@Ticomaya,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Are there any honest conservatives who speaks out against such manipulation?
Ticomaya wrote:
Only a dishonest conservative could do such a thing.
A "dishonest conservative" is an oxymoronic contradiction-in-terms.

If a man deviates from the truth,
then he fails to conserve it, failing to be orthodox.


The essence of liberalism is deviation & distortion.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 05:26:25