Hack Holder Tries to Stop TX Voter ID law

[BDKJMU]

Um...If you live in a dorm/apartment while in school you can still vote absentee to your home district as you aren't registered in that location.

I did change my registration when I went to UNI so I could vote in Cedar Falls.

If people are too **** lazy to change their ****/get what they need to get ID that's their issue.

Thank You. Late to get back to the thread that I started early this morning & have been responding to posts as I've read them, only to later see others have already made the same point.

[BDKJMU]

Somebody here is suffering from some sort of donkophobia from the looks of the most recent threads here..

Restricting the right to vote for legitimate citizens is anti-American, and regardless of the existence or level of "voter fraud" can not be infringed.

Another red herring tossed out there by the party that hates women, brown people, and black people, and any Democrats. Off to a grand old party election year for sure. Keep it up, can't wait to see all the teabaggers on the courthouse lawns with their bibles and hate messages after the Obama landslide this fall.

Its only restricting their right in your distorted donkworld..

[kalm]

I did have one question - how could anyone ever point out voter fraud anyway? Especially widespread fraud? How would one prove it? You can't legally videotape who goes to the polls, so you could never know who is voting. In this era of low voting percentages, there are tons of people who never vote so the rolls are filled with eligible names that are in essence unused. Didn't the Pew Center report (pretty certain the Pew Center is fairly non-partisan, correct me if I'm wrong) say that 1 out of every 8 active registrations are invalid or incorrect? That's 12% of the national rolls right there. The same report had record of at least 1.8 million active, although dead, voters, and 2.8 million people were on the rolls in more than one state. And 12 million registrations were so wrong that mailings wouldn't ever get to those actual people.

I certainly understand the concern, and it's valid, that the GOP rhetoric is partisan based on this, but it seems pretty easy to counter that and ensure that photo ID's are easy to get in terms of both cost (i.e. free) and time. Why is that a bad thing then? And taking the tact that there is no proven evidence of widespread fraud, when there is plenty of evidence of widespread loopholes all throughout the voting rolls in America (meaning that it wouldn't be very hard to take advantage of some of those and also that there is no way anyone could prove it anyway) seems like partisan rhetoric from the Dem side.

This should be one of those issues that are really easy to solve - come up with a simple way (i.e. no $$ or inconvenience) to prove who you are and that you only vote once anywhere. Of course, with the two parties invovled trying to game the system to their own advantages, we're stuck with the current flawed system. Pity.

Exactly. The donks like to beat the drum of haven't PROVEN WIDESPREAD voter fraud, which again, would be very difficult to prove.

With 12% or whatever it is of the voter rolls invalid/incorrect, the onus should be on the donks to prove that there isn't.

See Cappy's Paul Weyerich post. This is about low voter turnout. Truth be told, college kids and old folks probably shouldn't be allowed to vote anyways. But this is such a non-issue.

[Bronco]

-
But But But Jim Crow

Via Rasmussen:

The Obama administration has blocked Texas’ new law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls, saying it would suppress Hispanic voter turnout, and the United Nations is now investigating the fairness of such laws in Texas and other states. But voters in this country still overwhelmingly support voter ID laws and don’t think they discriminate.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 72% of Likely U.S. Voters believe voters should be required to show photo identification such as a driver’s license before being allowed to vote. Only 22% are opposed to the photo ID requirement.

[BDKJMU]

2. they'd support common sense compromises - like allowing someone to either show a photo ID OR allow an election worker to take a photo of them on site on election day - they would then sign in - with that photo pegged to them on the rolls (a reminder - signing the voter roles fraudulently is a federal perjury charge)... which would virtually eliminate the problem they claim exists.

That wouldn't be a common sense compromise because even when discovered because it would rarely be prosecuted. Few DA's offices would ever expend the resources to prosecute individual cases.