Arpaio

[keenobserver]

The ID advocates make it harder for young people to have an approved ID. College and High school photo ID does not count as acceptable and all efforts to allow that have pretty much been resisted. Hunting license does count - no ID needed to get a hunting license but it is good enough to vote. I wonder why?

 

[BULLDOG00]

If you use public transport for everything, and you could never afford a car anyway, going through life without a drivers license might be the norm. And jumping through hoops and paying money to get a state ID for the sole purpose of voting isn't very practical.

Why? If the simple act of getting a state ID is too much of as hassle, maybe voting is not very important to that person.

 

[braalian]

Those results were predicted rates of turn-out. And they make some pretty wild assumptions. I've not heard from anyone who actually does not have a photo identification despite specific queries in this thread.

Using calculations based on turnout figures for the past two presidential elections, researchers at the University of Chicago and Washington University in St. Louis concluded that overall turnout this year by young people of color ages 18-29 could fall by somewhere between 538,000 to 696,000 in states with photo ID laws.

"Our estimates are conservative. We are looking at demobilization from 9 to 25 percent," said Cathy Cohen, a University of Chicago expert on young and minority voters, who worked on the study with Jon Rogowski of Washington University. "If young people really have valid IDs at a rate of only 25 or even 50 percent, the number of young people of color disenfranchised will be even greater than what we estimate."​

Are you really trying to make the case that voter ID laws don't have a disparate impact on blacks? It is well known that they do.

If you're so in favor of photo ID laws, why not ensure all eligible voters are automatically given IDs. It's not that hard. Most countries do it.

 

[Klingsor]

Why? If the simple act of getting a state ID is too much of as hassle, maybe voting is not very important to that person.

The right to vote is not predicated on how important it is to you.

 

[Max_Polo]

Were I a black man with an impoverished background in an inner city setting, not having a photo ID might not seem so odd.

You deliberately act like you're stupid.

So your theoretical black man in the inner city receives no support from social programs such as unemployment, food stamps, or Medicaid?

When someone says that straight bananas are common enough to worry about and not only have I never seen one, don't know anyone who has, and can't find reliable data to suggest they exist in significant numbers, my lazy, uneducated, stupid brain says, "something ain't right here."

 

[Max_Polo]

If you're so in favor of photo ID laws, why not ensure all eligible voters are automatically given IDs. It's not that hard. Most countries do it.

Did you not see my post above? I said precisely that.

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/arpaio.480516/page-13#post-6676541

 

[BULLDOG00]

The right to vote is not predicated on how important it is to you.

Voting is predicated on showing that you are registered and eligible to vote. If you can't do that, too bad, get your shit together.

 

[Max_Polo]

The right to vote is not predicated on how important it is to you.

Apples and oranges. The right to vote is not, but doing so obviously is. I have to leave my office, go stand in line, etc and if I'm not willing to expend that de minimis effort, should I whine about the outcome of an election?

 

[BULLDOG00]

It comes down to this, the racist alt-left thinks blacks are too stupid and too uneducated to be able to figure how to get to the DMV and get a photo ID.

 

[Klingsor]

Voting is predicated on showing that you are registered and eligible to vote. If you can't do that, too bad, get your shit together.

It's a question of exactly what shit you need to get together, and the motivation behind the requirements.

 

[BULLDOG00]

It's a question of exactly what shit you need to get together, and the motivation behind the requirements.

You must be against voter registration also, it is too much of a burden. Why should we have to register to vote?

 

[braalian]

Why? If the simple act of getting a state ID is too much of as hassle, maybe voting is not very important to that person.

If a state is going to *require* a specific form of ID to vote, then said state should *provide* that ID for everyone. If it's such a big fucking deal that everyone have photo ID to vote, then issue photo ID to everyone.

 

[BULLDOG00]

If a state is going to *require* a specific form of ID to vote, then said state should *provide* that ID for everyone. If it's such a big fucking deal that everyone have photo ID to vote, then issue photo ID to everyone.

Sounds good to me. Tell the alt-left. They are the ones against it.

 

[braalian]

Did you not see my post above? I said precisely that.

https://www.lpsg.com/threads/arpaio.480516/page-13#post-6676541

Then why do you support these laws if you admit there's no effort being made to ensure all eligible voters are issued a photo ID?

 

[Klingsor]

Apples and oranges. The right to vote is not, but doing so obviously is. I have to leave my office, go stand in line, etc and if I'm not willing to expend that de minimis effort, should I whine about the outcome of an election?

Apples and oranges. Since the decision whether or not to exercise one's right to vote is distinct from the right itself, how is it pertinent to this discussion?

 

[Klingsor]

You must be against voter registration also, it is too much of a burden. Why should we have to register to vote?

I'm trying to find my earlier post about what happens when you "assume." I seem to remember it being pretty clever.

 

[Max_Polo]

Then why do you support these laws if you admit there's no effort being made to ensure all eligible voters are issued a photo ID?

I said that I agreed with a national ID system, possibly modeled around the passport card.

 

[braalian]

Sounds good to me. Tell the alt-left. They are the ones against it.

Oh, I must have missed all the GOP efforts to establish national and/or voter photo ID cards.

Elements of both the right and the left are against national ID schemes on the grounds of privacy invasion.

If these GOP lead state legislatures are really innocent of racist motives, then why are they trying to push these laws through *before* ensuring all voters have photo ID? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

 

[Max_Polo]

Apples and oranges. Since the decision whether or not to exercise one's right to vote is distinct from the right itself, how is it pertinent to this discussion?

Because the right is guaranteed, not limousine transportation to do so. The requirements are that you register to vote, then go and do it. If the hurdle for me is that it costs me a few thousand dollars in lost revenue to close my office so that my colleagues and I can go vote, so be it. If I have to show my driver's license when I get there to vote (and I'm pretty sure I already do), so be it. If voting is not sufficiently important to me to take those steps and incur those costs, then what?

 

[BULLDOG00]

Oh, I must have missed all the GOP efforts to establish national and/or voter photo ID cards.

Elements of both the right and the left are against national ID schemes on the grounds of privacy invasion.

If these GOP lead state legislatures are really innocent of racist motives, then why are they trying to push these laws through *before* ensuring all voters have photo ID? Shouldn't it be the other way around?

IDs are issued at the state level. No national ID is necessary.