Courts Strike Down Voter ID Laws in Wisconsin and Texas

[Pooky 3,347]

You were looking for proof that voter ID laws are aimed at disenfranchisement. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. What other purpose could these laws have? The stated purpose is nonsense and everyone knows that. Republicans have even been caught admitting it more than once. Do some reading on the issue and you'll learn something.

I claimed JohnR's assertion as spurious. Everything else you wrote is just a symptom of your self-delusion.

For someone who claims to like facts and reality, you certainly like making sh#t up, when it suits you.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Right. Guns were designed for sporting - they're really no different from a golf club, right?

Finally. I never thought I'd see this day. Mark it on your calendars, boys and girls! MBD has finally seen the light.

Even Jon Lajoie said it, several years ago...

Edited October 11, 2014 by DavenRoxy

[Curmudgeon 227]

Good. The people should be very careful about who it allows to regulate who casts a ballot.

[Sousuke 1,214]

I'm rolling my eyes at mr. Big Dogs red herring comment. What a cop out.

[UncleBeer 244]

More so, when states like Texas do so with the purpose of discriminating against certain minorities.

Fact check: the Supreme Court cleared Texas of the spurious accusations last year. Don't you read the papers? Or maybe just the parts you agree with...

[JohnR! 5,495]

In the least any such moves should be challenged so the law can have it say, as was the case here...

Good. The people should be very careful about who it allows to regulate who casts a ballot.

[UncleBeer 244]

In the least any such moves should be challenged so the law can have it say, as was the case here...

Haha. That's good ol' Goggle Translate for you.

[Sousuke 1,214]

I'm confident, that all people, no matter what the race, economic background, or infirmary can be fully accommodated to ensure no one is discouraged from voting while at the same time requiring ID to minimize fraud.

Also this isn't even a partisan issue as the majority of the US supports it.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Sousuke

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Minimize what fraud? The problem of In-person voter fraud that requires a solution is a fairy tale.

[JohnR! 5,495]

:thumbs:

Minimizing fraud is just another red herring... the intent is to help the GOP gain seats by stuffing ballots and preventing some from casting theirs.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/texas-voter-id-law-blocked-federal-judge-26090269

A federal judge on Thursday likened Texas' tough voter ID rules to a poll tax meant to suppress minority voters and blocked Texas from enforcing it just weeks ahead of next month's election, knocking down a law that the U.S. Justice Department condemned in court as deliberately discriminatory.

Minimize what fraud? The problem of In-person voter fraud that requires a solution is a fairy tale.

[Sousuke 1,214]

It is rare. It would only be an issue in a swing state during a close election.

(PS. I'm not pro GOP here.)

Edited October 13, 2014 by Sousuke

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It is rare. It would only be an issue in a swing state during a close election.

(PS. I'm not pro GOP here.)

It's so rare and minimal that there hasn't been a swing state - not even a swing district - election where it made any difference. The same cannot be said about other forms of voter fraud which the GOP strangely has absolutely no interest in addressing.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Here's an interesting copy... I couldn't find a blog... LOL

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/upshot/vote-fraud-is-rare-but-myth-is-widespread.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0

Voter Fraud Is Rare, but Myth Is Widespread

Is vote fraud common in American politics? Not according to United States District Judge Lynn Adelman, who examined the evidence from Wisconsin and ruled in late April that “virtually no voter impersonation occurs” in the state and that “no evidence suggests that voter-impersonation fraud will become a problem at any time in the foreseeable future.”

Strikingly, however, a Marquette Law School poll conducted in Wisconsin just a few weeks later showed that many voters there believed voter impersonation and other kinds of vote fraud were widespread — the likely result of a yearslong campaign by conservative groups to raise concerns about the practice. Thirty-nine percent of Wisconsin voters believe that vote fraud affects a few thousand votes or more each election. One in five believe that this level of fraud exists for each of the three types of fraud that individuals could commit: in-person voter impersonation, submitting absentee ballots in someone else’s name, and voting by people who are not citizens or Wisconsin residents.

Belief in voter impersonation is strongest among Republicans, echoing claims made by elites in their party. Thirty-six percent of Republicans think voter impersonation affects a few thousand or more votes, compared with 20 percent of independents and just 7 percent of Democrats.

By contrast, beliefs about the prevalence of fraud by election officials show far less of a partisan skew, with 16 percent of Republicans, 21 percent of independents and 14 percent of Democrats (and 17 percent of Wisconsin voters over all) thinking that this affects a few thousand votes or more each election.

It’s important to be clear that there is no evidence of vote fraud at these levels. Judge Adelman’s conclusion in the Wisconsin case echoes previous findings that voter fraud is exceptionally rare across the country. The New York Times reported in 2007, for instance, that a five-year investigation by the Bush administration “turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections.” Even after this intensive search, the Rutgers political scientist Lorraine Minnite showed in her book “The Myth of Voter Fraud” that prosecutions for migratory bird law violations were still far more common than election fraud during the 2005 fiscal year.

As my Dartmouth colleague Kyle Dropp pointed out, these findings are noteworthy because previous polls have typically asked about whether voter fraud is a major problem, minor problem or not a problem — wording that blurs the distinction between people’s objections to the practice and their beliefs about its prevalence. (Fox asked how likely “widespread voter fraud” would be before the 2008 election, but even that question left the exact prevalence of the practice undefined.)

At this point, though, we can safely classify widespread voter fraud as a misperception — and one that is far more prevalent than the practice itself.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Here's an interesting copy... I couldn't find a blog... LOL

If it's not from a blog, it is not valid.

[Sousuke 1,214]

Here is a question. If no one shows ID, how do you even know if fraud is occurring....