9% of Pennsylvanian voters not allowed to vote.

[Ralin]

Some standard of proof, sure. Limiting it to just one specific piece of ID? No. Alternate forms of ID should be allowed

Really what should be required is a national ID card.

If there's found to be a problem their vote can be stricken in the review process.

How is that even possible with a secret ballot?

[Losonti Tokash]

Ralin, do you feel like addressing the fact that it doesn't solve anything? That voting does not rely on an honor system? That the Justice Department, over a period spanning years, couldn't find a single instance of someone impersonating an eligible voter? That it impairs the voting rights of people who are already the target of voter suppression efforts every year? Maybe you could even tell us how buying alcohol is directly comparable to voting. I've certainly never heard of a teenager tricking his way into a ballot box and then crashing into a minvan with his blood patriotism content of 0.16.

[Ralin]

Ralin, do you feel like addressing the fact that it doesn't solve anything? That voting does not rely on an honor system? That the Justice Department, over a period spanning years, couldn't find a single instance of someone impersonating an eligible voter? That it impairs the voting rights of people who are already the target of voter suppression efforts every year? Maybe you could even tell us how buying alcohol is directly comparable to voting. I've certainly never heard of a teenager tricking his way into a ballot box and then crashing into a minvan with his blood patriotism content of 0.16.

No, I don't, because it doesn't fucking matter. The idea that you don't have to provide ID to prove that you are who you say you are before you can vote is so blatantly absurd that it can't be justified, regardless of whether anyone has actually exploited it yet. If I can't drive, buy alcohol, board a plane, buy a gun or any number of things without providing photo ID I damned well shouldn't be able to vote without it.

[Sea Skimmer]

You can in fact buy a gun without providing a photo ID unless were talking about a class III weapon in which case no legal means would exist to do so, but then the Class III system is also on questionable constitutional grounds, you can also board a plane if you own it, and you can buy alcohol without one if you look old enough, legally ID checks are normally only 'required' for under 25. You also can in fact drive without photo ID on private property. never mind the fact that of these, only buying guns is remotely like the kind of hard constitutional right voting is.

[Losonti Tokash]

So you fully admit it doesn't solve a problem that actually exists, makes existing problems worse, and is totally ineffectual at preventing electoral fraud, but you want it anyway because you have to prove your age when you buy booze. That sum up your position well enough?

PS. As has been stated multiple times in this very thread, you do need some proof of identity, generally a piece of mail addressed to yourself. Strangely enough, this system has managed to reduce voter fraud to near zero.

[Ralin]

So you fully admit it doesn't solve a problem that actually exists, makes existing problems worse, and is totally ineffectual at preventing electoral fraud, but you want it anyway because you have to prove your age when you buy booze. That sum up your position well enough?

If you seriously can't see why you should have to provide ID to vote there's really no helping you.

[Losonti Tokash]

You have yet to give a solid reason why photo id is necessary and outweighs the negative impact it would have, so you should probably do that at some point.

[Ralin]

On reflection, I'm maybe not not making as much sense as I thought I was, so I'm going to step back and do some thinking. Argument conceded.

[seanrobertson]

I understand why Republicans push this sort of thing but I gotta be honest, I have a really hard time justifying the idea that I need photo ID to buy a six pack of beer but not to vote.

Where is the evidence that this sort of voter fraud is a problem anyway? The only sort of voter fraud I ever hear about on any kind of wide scale actually being convicted involves Republicans removing qualified voters from the polls.

I only have anecdotal evidence.

Shortly after my maternal grandmother and aunt voted in '08, they were approached by a man talking on a cellphone in the parking lot. They'd seen him in the line to vote just ahead of them.

He asked them, "Missus', what's the name of this town?" Taken aback, my aunt said, "Gastonia." He motioned thanks and went back to his phone conversation. He said something to the effect, "OK, we went to Belmont and are leaving Gastonia now. Next stop is Shelby."

Neat trick, having to ask other voters what town he just voted in.

Immediately thereafter, my grandmother ran into an acquaintance and got stuck in a stop and chat. Meanwhile, Mr. Geography Champ piled onto a church bus with a bunch of other people, presumably to pull the same stunt in Shelby. Whether he was successful or not, I certainly don't know. How common people like him are -- unknown. But it has happened. On principle alone, that's enough to put me firmly in the "no identification, no vote" camp.

[Losonti Tokash]

That is such a mind bogglingly stupid conclusion to draw from what are clearly exit pollers or get out the vote drives I'm surprised you remember how to breathe.

[seanrobertson]

That is such a mind bogglingly stupid conclusion to draw from what are clearly exit pollers or get out the vote drives I'm surprised you remember how to breathe.

Ah, so the exit pollers vote, then ask other voters what town they're in?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

For you to accuse me of stupidity is fucking beyond the pale. FUCK YOU and your "oh, the negative impact" whiny bullshit. If you can't prove who you say you are at the polls, you don't deserve to vote. Simple as that, you chickenshit blowhard.

[General Zod]

That is such a mind bogglingly stupid conclusion to draw from what are clearly exit pollers or get out the vote drives I'm surprised you remember how to breathe.

Ah, so the exit pollers vote, then ask other voters what town they're in?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

For you to accuse me of stupidity is fucking beyond the pale. FUCK YOU and your "oh, the negative impact" whiny bullshit. If you can't prove who you say you are at the polls, you don't deserve to vote. Simple as that, you chickenshit blowhard.

Oh hey, another fuckwit who can't read.

Nobody's saying showing who you are is a bad thing. We're saying a photo ID should not be the single and only acceptable document.

[Questor]

There are a number of ID's one can get that don't require one to have passed the driving test ( which BTW in PA pretty much only requires that one has a face and can work the pedals). If Mailing a photo of yourself from the post office to get a passport is too expensive for you or too much of a hassle, you go the the DMV give them 14 dollars and they make your ID. Seriously, that's it.

Depends on your state. Some states make it unreasonably difficult.

http://www.iowadot.gov/mvd/ods/identity.htm

If your parents were natural citizens but you were born out of the US, or one of your parents was a citizen and the other was a foreign national, you might be shit out of luck.

Passport Card. I'd probably use my federally issued GE/SENTRI card just to be difficult.

[seanrobertson]

Oh hey, another fuckwit who can't read.

Nobody's saying showing who you are is a bad thing. We're saying a photo ID should not be the single and only acceptable document.

And when did I say that, "fuckwit"?

I'm waiting. SHOW ME. I said if you can't prove who you say you are at the polls, you shouldn't vote. Where's the bit about photo ID, genius?

.... I'm waiting.

You've also got serious balls telling me I "can't read." If you were a lick objective you'd be busting your pal's balls for even half-heartedly suggesting that a man who STOOD IN LINE IN FRONT OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS, VOTED, THEN ASKED THEM WHAT FUCKING TOWN THEY WERE IN WAS AN "EXIT-POLLER."

That smacks of the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty and apologism I can imagine.

God damn, fellas. Are you so keen to "win" this argument that you'll outright ignore 50% of what I say?

[seanrobertson]

That is such a mind bogglingly stupid conclusion to draw from what are clearly exit pollers or get out the vote drives I'm surprised you remember how to breathe.

Exit pollers often vote right ahead of folks and then can't remember what town they're in, don't they?

Epic fail, retard.

[Losonti Tokash]

Right, I apologize for daring to impugn your flawless memory from an event 4 years ago that was clearly so important you didn't call the police to report a federal crime. I'd hate to imply you were fine with depriving hundreds of thousands of people tehir right to vote in order to prevent something that doesn't happen (and evne if it does, has a smaller impact on elections than simple voter error). I'm also sure you're aware that you still do need to provide some proof of who you are in order to vote and that requiiring photo ID has thus far not prevented electoral fraud in the states where it currently is enforced.

[Simon_Jester]

Ah, so the exit pollers vote, then ask other voters what town they're in?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

So, I assume someone will be able to find non-anecdotal evidence of this? And hopefully press charges?

These states pressing for ID laws, do they have actual investigators looking into this? If not, then I'm having a hard time believing that they care about these presumed hordes of fake-voters hopping from town to town.

I mean, you can say "eat shit and die you chickenshit" to me all you want, but I have to ask. Where's the investigation?

Imagine if someone passed a law mandating that we all make our doors slam shut automatically to stop invisible thieves from sneaking in through open doors. If there are invisible thieves, maybe that makes sense. But wouldn't you first have to prove that the thieves exist?

So why don't you have to first prove that invisible fake-voters exist?

[General Zod]

You've also got serious balls telling me I "can't read." If you were a lick objective you'd be busting your pal's balls for even half-heartedly suggesting that a man who STOOD IN LINE IN FRONT OF MY FAMILY MEMBERS, VOTED, THEN ASKED THEM WHAT FUCKING TOWN THEY WERE IN WAS AN "EXIT-POLLER."

That smacks of the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty and apologism I can imagine.

God damn, fellas. Are you so keen to "win" this argument that you'll outright ignore 50% of what I say?

I'm not the one posting anecdotes as evidence and expecting to be taken seriously. But keep up the hilarity.

[seanrobertson]

Right, I apologize for daring to impugn your flawless memory from an event 4 years ago that was clearly so important you didn't call the police to report a federal crime.

Don't be obtuse.

Put yourself in my shoes. How would I report the crime? Did one take place? I'm almost sure of that, yes. But what am I to say, Losonti? I do not doubt my family members' recollection of the event. We spoke of it the other day. But a second-hand account on my part would do precious little good: "He was maybe 6'2", thin, black, 35-50. My grandmother and aunt saw him vote. Later, he asked them where he was. Etc."

Not much to go on, especially when I only learned of it days after the fact.

I'd hate to imply you were fine with depriving hundreds of thousands of people tehir right to vote in order to prevent something that doesn't happen (and evne if it does, has a smaller impact on elections than simple voter error). I'm also sure you're aware that you still do need to provide some proof of who you are in order to vote and that requiiring photo ID has thus far not prevented electoral fraud in the states where it currently is enforced.

Photo ID or otherwise, some form of identification would seem indicated, yes?

I appreciate that you hold off on painting me with too broad a brush I was always known as a nice fellow at the BBS, going back almost 10 years now. I wouldn't want to deprive any eligible voter their Constitutional right. But among these hundreds of thousands, well ... I wasn't talking about them, was I? I was talking about people close to me observing what was an obvious attempt at voter fraud. Y'all can try to make that into more than it is, stupidly question my intelligence in spite of my long standing in the community, accuse me of being right of Attila the Hunn -- whatever. Frankly, I don't give a shit. I'm just reporting what a couple of sweet old ladies saw with their own eyes. And it wasn't any fucking "exit poller."

[seanrobertson]

I'm not the one posting anecdotes as evidence and expecting to be taken seriously. But keep up the hilarity.

Last I checked, anecdotal evidence was considered superior to none.

You've offered none, which is kind of funny.

Unless, of course, you're accusing me of lying, which I've no reason to do.

[Losonti Tokash]

Zod, you don't understand. The greatest threat to our democracy isn't the documented voter suppression efforts funded by anonymous organizations every year, unlimited campaign contributions from corps, or politically minded gerry mandering. It's roving bands of fake voters that are clever enough to literally never be caught but still can't remember what town they're in.

Edit: holy shit, not only is your story a totally useless anecdote which is contradicted by statistics from multiple sources, it's not even your first hand experience. Amazing.

[seanrobertson]

So why don't you have to first prove that invisible fake-voters exist?

Are you joking?

I told you what my grandma and aunt saw. If you want to spin that into "oh, he's just a nice exit poller!" and that helps you sleep at night, so be it.

Otherwise, how many of you do I have to address at once? I do recall a "dogpiling" clause in effect in at least some forums, and not the one of you have said a single fucking thing to

A. address what I initially said without strawmandering the shit out of it (case in point: twisting my words to "photo ID")
B. offer the least bit of counter-evidence. Anecdotes are low on the evidentiary chain -- I know that better than probably all of you trying to go full-prick mode on me.

Still, it's more than any of you have -- and as I said, unless you're accusing me of just making shit up, I've given you a fairly clear if NOT quite iron-clad example of voter fraud. Call it attempted voter fraud if you want to.

But do NOT bullshit me with stupid excuses about exit polling, do NOT put words in my mouth about picture identification and, please, save the snarky bullshit comments for someone else.

-Sean

[evilsoup]

What is the procedure for elections in the US currently, anyway? Do you just turn up to your designated polling station and vote or what?

[Stark]

From what I've heard on SDN it varies widely by state from utterly retarded to amazingly good.

[General Zod]

So why don't you have to first prove that invisible fake-voters exist?

Are you joking?

I told you what my grandma and aunt saw. If you want to spin that into "oh, he's just a nice exit poller!" and that helps you sleep at night, so be it.

Otherwise, how many of you do I have to address at once? I do recall a "dogpiling" clause in effect in at least some forums, and not the one of you have said a single fucking thing to

A. address what I initially said without strawmandering the shit out of it (case in point: twisting my words to "photo ID")
B. offer the least bit of counter-evidence. Anecdotes are low on the evidentiary chain -- I know that better than probably all of you trying to go full-prick mode on me.

Still, it's more than any of you have -- and as I said, unless you're accusing me of just making shit up, I've given you a fairly clear if NOT quite iron-clad example of voter fraud. Call it attempted voter fraud if you want to.

But do NOT bullshit me with stupid excuses about exit polling, do NOT put words in my mouth about picture identification and, please, save the snarky bullshit comments for someone else.

-Sean

If you weren't arguing for photo IDs, then what was the point in posting that bullshit anecdote at all? You didn't even see it yourself so it's complete hearsay.

Since none of us have been saying that "identifying yourself" at the polls is bad, then it's not exactly a huge leap in logic to assume you were arguing to the contrary. Unless of course you didn't actually read the entire thread before dropping that anecdote.