Yahoo/AP: Tough ID laws could block thousands of 2012 votes

[Larry]

Ok I'm back, this is too much fun. You're right. You have exposed me. I was an idiot. You've opened my eyes. I've come to the realization that it's ok to limit people's constitutional rights if it helps prevent a few crimes from being committed.

I understand that this is sarcasm, but I just can't let you mis-state Kilmer's position, this way.

His position is that he doesn't have to show that these laws would prevent a few crimes from being committed. That's it's sufficient to show that some crimes were once committed, which these laws would not prevent in any way, but that's not important.

As to the rest of your post, I beg you to go back and "retroactively not go there". There's enough cliches and sound bites in this thread already.

[Duckus]

What makes someone educated?

Is millionaire businessman and former US Presidential candidate Donald Trump eligible to vote? He thinks Obama is not a US citizen and potentially a Muslim.

Honest question - is he more "educated" than an 18 year old pothead? Not sure.

[Kilmer17]

What makes someone educated?

Is millionaire businessman and former US Presidential candidate Donald Trump eligible to vote? He thinks Obama is not a US citizen and potentially a Muslim.

Honest question - is he more "educated" than an 18 year old pothead? Not sure.

I agree.

[Duckus]

I agree.

We agree!

Actually, I am okay with an education test but it can only include these 4 questions:

1) Do you think Obama a citizen?

2) Do you think Obama is a Muslim?

3) Do you think 9/11 was an inside job (planned by either Bush or anyone else in the government)?

4) Do you think the Clinton's murdered anyone?

[Kilmer17]

We agree!

Actually, I am okay with an education test but it can only include these 4 questions:

1) Do you think Obama a citizen?

2) Do you think Obama is a Muslim?

3) Do you think 9/11 was an inside job (planned by either Bush or anyone else in the government)?

4) Do you think the Clinton's murdered anyone?

I dont think Clinton Murdered anyone. But I think we're all naive about the actions of LOTS of our Presidents people over the years.

[Hubbs]

IE. Would anyone on either side favor a voting system where people could simply log on and vote without any restriction? Of course not. Effort should be, and currently IS required.

Um, if we could somehow have complete, 100% verification that the system was totally secure, and that people were correctly identified and could only vote once, I'm pretty sure that damn near everyone (other than you, apparently) would prefer to be able to vote from home rather than having to go to a polling place. What's next, are you going to come out in favor of requiring voters to first complete an obstacle course and correctly spell the names of at least three countries that end with "stan" before they can cast their ballot?

[Kilmer17]

Um, if we could somehow have complete, 100% verification that the system was totally secure, and that people were correctly identified and could only vote once, I'm pretty sure that damn near everyone (other than you, apparently) would prefer to be able to vote from home rather than having to go to a polling place. What's next, are you going to come out in favor of requiring voters to first complete an obstacle course and correctly spell the names of at least three countries that end with "stan" before they can cast their ballot?

LOL. Making sure a system is totally secure and everyone is 100% verified?

Hmmmm. Sounds like a great idea. Maybe one party will start passing laws to require things like that.

[Burgold]

LOL. Making sure a system is totally secure and everyone is 100% verified?

Hmmmm. Sounds like a great idea. Maybe one party will start passing laws to require things like that.

I think he's going science fiction and talking about DNA analyzers or Iris scans. Of course, that would require every citizen to put their dna or biological info into a database... and do we really want that?

[skinsmarydu]

I read a poll last week...some drastically low percentage of American citizens actually know how many SCOTUS justices there are. Some just don't think about the importance of the court, and the importance of who makes those appointments. Some of my friends are in awe because I can name them all. (I don't think it's awesome, it's a necessity.)

[Kilmer17]

I read a poll last week...some drastically low percentage of American citizens actually know how many SCOTUS justices there are. Some just don't think about the importance of the court, and the importance of who makes those appointments. Some of my friends are in awe because I can name them all. (I don't think it's awesome, it's a necessity.)

I take it one step further. I think it should be a REQUIREMENT.

[Bang]

We should just be safe and let the state legislature or the state's laergest corporation decide who everyone wants to vote for.
Make it easy.

No more jumping through hoops to pass these laws to attempt to subvert the system.
Let's just subvert it at the source and cut out the middleman.


..


Oh! I must go! if the local Lord catches me typing when i'm supposed to be diggng potatoes he'll put me in the stocks!

~Serf

[mistertim]

LOL. Making sure a system is totally secure and everyone is 100% verified?

Hmmmm. Sounds like a great idea. Maybe one party will start passing laws to require things like that.

I'm reasonably sure you understood the point of his post. Are you going to address it or just deflect?

[Kilmer17]

His point was that the only reason we cant have online voting is because it cant be secured. Which is the same argument the GOP is using to pass voter id laws.

I think he failed to see the irony in his post. I was helping him see it.

[mistertim]

His point was that the only reason we cant have online voting is because it cant be secured. Which is the same argument the GOP is using to pass voter id laws.

I think he failed to see the irony in his post. I was helping him see it.

I don't want to speak for him, but I think he was asking where your slippery slope of wanting to make it (more of) an effort to vote ends.

[Duckus]

It appears that the GOP is slowly moving to the next phase of their new "Southern Strategy" - restrict voting times and limiting voting locations.

Once "model" legislation like this gets rolling, it spreads fast through organizations like ALEC. You will start to see identical bills in states across the country over the next several years.

The good thing about these laws is they don't even try to hide behind any BS voter fraud claim - they straight up are created to limit voters and suppress turnout. Basically, Kilmers dream.

At least the courts seem to be protecting us a little bit.

Federal Court Rejects Florida Early Voting Changes

A federal court says a Florida law that restricts the number of early-voting days could result in a dramatic reduction in voting by blacks.

The Republican-controlled Florida legislature last year cut the number of early-voting days to eight from 12.

But the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled late Thursday that because of the law's potential impact on minority voters, it would not allow Florida to put the changes in place in five Florida counties covered by federal voting laws.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/F...166524676.html