Tyranny Of Another Democrat Appointed Judge!

[Reagan]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[LumRaiderFan]

Verifying citizenship before voting is a no-brainer for everyone but liberals.

Anyone disagree?

[Reagan]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Verifying citizenship before voting is a no-brainer for everyone but liberals.

Anyone disagree?

one has to show ID as benign as getting a library card.  Right, something this important should a no-brainer.  The reason the libs do not want voter ID is so they can cheat.  What else could it be?  Maybe some of our liberal friends here can enlighten us why libs are against voter ID.

[BS Wildcats]

On 3/2/2019 at 10:34 AM, Reagan said:

one has to show ID as benign as getting a library card.  Right, something this important should a no-brainer.  The reason the libs do not want voter ID is so they can cheat.  What else could it be?  Maybe some of our liberal friends here can enlighten us why libs are against voter ID.

 Can see that they are steering clear of your last question.  Says a lot!

[UT alum]

30 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

 Can see that they are steering clear of your last question.  Says a lot!

You have to have ID to get a voter registration card. Don’t confuse the voter registrar with the poll worker. The registrar (Tax Assessor/Collector) is responsible for verifying citizenship and identification. Requiring photo ID from someone who has a valid registration card is what this Democrat opposes. Virtually all voter fraud takes place not on Election Day, but in the absentee vote process. Polling place fraud is the straw dog Republicans use in attempts to make voting more difficult, not more honest.

[UT alum]

On 3/2/2019 at 9:28 PM, Reagan said:

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

That article is totally misleading. Fake news! Did you even read the four page ruling? It applies only to the people named on the list of 95,000 voters originally issued by the Secretary of State. That list was so flawed that the Secretary of State apologized to the state legislature for providing such bad information. No one appearing on that list may be asked about citizenship. The ruling specifically said that voter registrars could continue investigating the veracity of the list. Read the ruling, pay attention to the story, not some conservative review’s take on the story.

[LumRaiderFan]

2 hours ago, UT alum said:

You have to have ID to get a voter registration card. Don’t confuse the voter registrar with the poll worker. The registrar (Tax Assessor/Collector) is responsible for verifying citizenship and identification. Requiring photo ID from someone who has a valid registration card is what this Democrat opposes. Virtually all voter fraud takes place not on Election Day, but in the absentee vote process. Polling place fraud is the straw dog Republicans use in attempts to make voting more difficult, not more honest.

How are they making voting more difficult?

[Englebert]

9 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

How are they making voting more difficult?

Just simple regurgitation of Liberal talking points. (I know you know that, but just wanted to put it out there to exemplify UT Alum oft claims of the reverse.)

[UT alum]

6 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

How are they making voting more difficult?

8 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

How are they making voting more difficult?

By making people with a valid voter registration card show a photo id before the registration is considered legal. People who don’t drive, or don’t bank, or don’t otherwise need a photo id have an undue burden placed in the way of their right to vote. 

[LumRaiderFan]

5 minutes ago, UT alum said:

By making people with a valid voter registration card show a photo id before the registration is considered legal. People who don’t drive, or don’t bank, or don’t otherwise need a photo id have an undue burden placed in the way of their right to vote. 

Baloney, you need a photo ID to do just about any transaction, and you know it.

 

[Englebert]

19 minutes ago, UT alum said:

By making people with a valid voter registration card show a photo id before the registration is considered legal. People who don’t drive, or don’t bank, or don’t otherwise need a photo id have an undue burden placed in the way of their right to vote. 

An undue burden huh? So is it an undue burden for someone to show ID to receive welfare, money for which they depend on to live? Is it an undue burden to show ID to actually buy food, which is necessary to live on. How heartless is a government that will not give their needy citizens money to buy food without placing an undue burden on them?

And secondly, how sanctimonious does one have to be to think that people are incapable of obtaining an ID?

[UT alum]

37 minutes ago, Englebert said:

43 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Baloney, you need a photo ID to do just about any transaction, and you know it.

 

An undue burden huh? So is it an undue burden for someone to show ID to receive welfare, money for which they depend on to live? Is it an undue burden to show ID to actually buy food, which is necessary to live on. How heartless is a government that will not give their needy citizens money to buy food without placing an undue burden on them?

And secondly, how sanctimonious does one have to be to think that people are incapable of obtaining an ID?

Laws in 35 other states agree with my position.

[LumRaiderFan]

14 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Laws in 35 other states agree with my position.

lol...I wonder if you need an ID to cash a check in those states?

So majority rules makes your decisions?

 

[Englebert]

16 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Laws in 35 other states agree with my position.

Your sanctimonious position correct? Please describe these people that can somehow register to vote, find a way to a polling booth, but are incapable of obtaining an ID.

Should these same people that are incapable of obtaining ID be allowed to exercise their second amendment right of self protection and buy a firearm without said ID?

[Hagar]

Bull hockey on getting an ID is an undue burden.  If you want to vote bad enough, getting an ID is not an undue burden, it’s a requirement.  Do it.  ID’s are required to get in either political party convention.  Why, if it’s an undue burden.  I can’t comprehend someone going through life without an ID.  How anyone, who’s looking out for the welfare of America, could defend allowing voters to vote without an ID, is beyond me.  There’s an estimated 30 Million non-citizens in the US.  That’s enough to sway many elections.  Voter ID laws are a no brainer.

[UT alum]

10 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

lol...I wonder if you need an ID to cash a check in those states?

So majority rules makes your decisions?

 

States rights. You’re telling me you want the federal government to mandate voter ID for all Americans? Would you please show me where that is in your interpretation of the Constitution?

[UT alum]

5 hours ago, Hagar said:

Bull hockey on getting an ID is an undue burden.  If you want to vote bad enough, getting an ID is not an undue burden, it’s a requirement.  Do it.  ID’s are required to get in either political party convention.  Why, if it’s an undue burden.  I can’t comprehend someone going through life without an ID.  How anyone, who’s looking out for the welfare of America, could defend allowing voters to vote without an ID, is beyond me.  There’s an estimated 30 Million non-citizens in the US.  That’s enough to sway many elections.  Voter ID laws are a no brainer.

You have to prove who you are when you register. You keep confusing registration and voting. Laws exist for ID to be presented when registering. 

I notice no one has commented about the story that launched this thread. The Republican Secretary of State had to apologize to the Republican legislature for providing faulty data. I’ll bet not one of you read the judge’s order.

[UT alum]

10 hours ago, Englebert said:

Your sanctimonious position correct? Please describe these people that can somehow register to vote, find a way to a polling booth, but are incapable of obtaining an ID.

Should these same people that are incapable of obtaining ID be allowed to exercise their second amendment right of self protection and buy a firearm without said ID?

I’ve worked the polls for over 40 years. I have assisted many voters who were brought to the polls by someone else because they couldn’t drive, or even enter the polling place. I didn’t say incapable. I said undue hardship. I’ve seen these voters personally. Anyone here read the Secretary of State’s election handbook covering proper election procedures? I have. Several times.

[baddog]

6 hours ago, Hagar said:

Bull hockey on getting an ID is an undue burden.  If you want to vote bad enough, getting an ID is not an undue burden, it’s a requirement.  Do it.  ID’s are required to get in either political party convention.  Why, if it’s an undue burden.  I can’t comprehend someone going through life without an ID.  How anyone, who’s looking out for the welfare of America, could defend allowing voters to vote without an ID, is beyond me.  There’s an estimated 30 Million non-citizens in the US.  That’s enough to sway many elections.  Voter ID laws are a no brainer.

What kills me is the dims are butt hurt because they believe Trump colluded with Russia to cheat the voting process, yet they openly invite cheating the voting process with illegal alien votes to possibly win an election.

[UT alum]

14 minutes ago, baddog said:

What kills me is the dims are butt hurt because they believe Trump colluded with Russia to cheat the voting process, yet they openly invite cheating the voting process with illegal alien votes to possibly win an election.

That is a gross misrepresentation. I don’t know if he collided or not. I do believe the Russians interfered, not so much to elect Trump as to destabilize our democracy. 

[LumRaiderFan]

2 hours ago, UT alum said:

States rights. You’re telling me you want the federal government to mandate voter ID for all Americans? Would you please show me where that is in your interpretation of the Constitution?

So if a state decides it wants to allow illegals to vote, they have that right?

[UT alum]

14 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

So if a state decides it wants to allow illegals to vote, they have that right?

I don’t think that would pass Constitutional muster, though states are given broad rights in establishing voter eligibility.

[LumRaiderFan]

6 minutes ago, UT alum said:

I don’t think that would pass Constitutional muster, though states are given broad rights in establishing voter eligibility.

Libs don't concern themselves with Constitutional muster...after all, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, right.

[Englebert]

2 hours ago, UT alum said:

I’ve worked the polls for over 40 years. I have assisted many voters who were brought to the polls by someone else because they couldn’t drive, or even enter the polling place. I didn’t say incapable. I said undue hardship. I’ve seen these voters personally. Anyone here read the Secretary of State’s election handbook covering proper election procedures? I have. Several times.

So it is an undue hardship to have a person obtain an ID but not an undue hardship to actually make a person come down to a polling station to cast a vote? Is it an undue hardship to require an ID to obtain government benefits?

I'm curious, should the government force a person to show ID to vote? Should a person be subjected to a background check in order to qualify to vote? Should a person be required to attend a mandatory education class on how to vote (and pay for privilege of taking the class)? Should a person be required to carry around documentation of this government sanctioned education course to exercise their right to vote? Should a person be stripped of their right to vote if found guilty of particular crimes? Should a person with mental disabilities be allowed to vote? If all/any of these things were to come to fruition, would you complain that the people's right to vote would be infringed?

[stevenash]

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

That is a gross misrepresentation. I don’t know if he collided or not. I do believe the Russians interfered, not so much to elect Trump as to destabilize our democracy. 

If the Russians tried to destabilize our democracy, did they only do it in this past presidential election?  How about the two elections before the last one?