It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Liberals Against Photo IDs in Voting Booths

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
This interesting turn of events in American policy making makes me wonder about a few things.

Liberals are usually for big government

Conservatives usually want less government

The new laws being passed for Photo IDs at voting booths is an increase in legislation. Conservatives are for this push. Liberals are not.

Conservatives justify the push because you need a photo ID to pretty much do anything or get anywhere.

Liberals don't want Photo Ids because it costs money or is seen as an attack against the poor?

I am confused by the switched mentality but believe that liberals have it wrong here in the long run. Their argument is silly and stupid. I wonder if anybody else has caught this switch
edit on 11-1-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
im against this



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
The poor can be subsidized for just about everything. I'm sure there are programs that will pay for them to get a state ID. If you don't have the drive to get to the DMV,or pursue any of the other very easy ways to obtain an ID, then you shouldn't be voting anyway.

And it's not like they cost hundreds of dollars or anything ($10-$50 depending on the state). If you think voting is important, maybe you could save a couple of dollars a week until you have the funds.
This argument basically says that people should be enabled to be as pathetic and lazy as possible.

This also reeks of an attempt to ensure voter fraud to me.
Any nation/state/county/municipality that doesn't ensure someone is who they say they are before being allowed to vote is either very, very corrupt or very, very stupid.

Liberals want to make the US into the most pathetic hole of lazy, entitled scum on the planet.
(Conservatives are pretty sick, too, BTW. This thread is more specifically about the idiocy of the liberals, though)
Either that, or they want to save on fuel costs for those buses in the inner city by just having the same person vote 600 times in each district



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by shadowreborn89
im against this


Im against DEAD people voting.
Im against illegals voting.
Im against voting twice.
Im against stupidity.


+1 more 
posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


" Liberals don't want Photo Ids because it costs money or is seen as an attack against the poor? "


You want the REAL TRUTH ? The REAL TRUTH is ......... The Democrats are Against it Because it will Exspose their attempts to have Illegal Immigrants Vote for Democrats in Local , State , and Federal Elections even though they are Not LEGAL Citizens of this Country .



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I find that pejoratives like "liberal" or "conservative" to be not only counter-productive, but divisive as well.

I don't know any true conservatives or true liberals. Everybody I know is a mix of both.

Voting booth photo ID-ing? I don't have any feelings on it, since I refuse to participate in the lie that is voting in the US in the 21st century. What does it matter, since elections can be rigged via those Diebold election-stealing machines?

Yes, I'm bitter. I had been voting since I was 18 years old. I felt pride when I did it, and was thrilled to be part of the democratic process. Ever since 2000, that has been turned into a sick farce. Whether a Republican or a Democrat gets into office as POTUS makes little difference, as the real power brokers are not voted in and never leave.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Zanti Misfit
 


Yea thanx for that, I just posted their excuses. though.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   
I think this is more of a matter of constitutionality. Is there something within the constitution that say you are required to have a government-issued ID to vote, travel, or anything else of the sort?

We have to look there before we decide it's a left-right issue.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
The title 'Liberal' has been contorted over the years, the early 'Liberals', or 'Classic Liberal' were not for 'More Government'



www.thenagain.info...

Def: A political belief in which primary emphasis is placed on securing the freedom of the individual by limiting the power of the state. In its economic form, it advocates a respect for private property and free markets.

Classical Liberalism was the ideology of the moderate, constitutional monarch phase of the French Revolution, which promoted limited government and was based on principles of natural law.



According to this site, the 'Founding Fathers' were 'Classical Liberals'



www.ncpa.org...

Prior to the 20th century, classical liberalism was the dominant political philosophy in the United States. It was the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson and the signers of the Declaration of Independence and it permeates the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and many other documents produced by the people who created the American system of government. Many of the emancipationists who opposed slavery were essentially classical liberals, as were the suffragettes, who fought for equal rights for women.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


" Liberals don't want Photo Ids because it costs money or is seen as an attack against the poor? "


You want the REAL TRUTH ? The REAL TRUTH is ......... The Democrats are Against it Because it will Exspose their attempts to have Illegal Immigrants Vote for Democrats in Local , State , and Federal Elections even though they are Not LEGAL Citizens of this Country .


BINGO !

That is a very real issue here in Arizona as well as other places. It also helps against voters voting more than once
in different precincts.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
I think this is more of a matter of constitutionality. Is there something within the constitution that say you are required to have a government-issued ID to vote, travel, or anything else of the sort?

We have to look there before we decide it's a left-right issue.


But the constitution doesn't say anything about driver's licences, passports, college ids. That's a silly thought to look at the constitution to declare if it's a left-right issue. It already is.
edit on 11-1-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:38 PM
link   
Places to obtain your card are different from state to state:
Wash State: (used to be at the fire station) but now DMV.
Idaho: County Clerk
Florida: Division of Elections ( Was different, prior to the Broward electron issues with Bush...had obtained my first voter card through HighSchool didn't have to go anywhere else)

ETC, but I am sure similar in other states.

I believe, by now, they all require a PICTURE ID to confirm you are the voter.
edit on 11-1-2012 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-1-2012 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


I thought the same thing dude. How is it that an entire segment of the population can be automatically grouped in on a certain side of an issue? I'm sure there are people on all sides of the political spectrum that oppose and support this.

We absolutely need people to be able to identify themselves when they vote. That's outrageous to think otherwise. Could people just walk in and be like...."Yo, my name is Scooby Doo. I'd like to vote please", then come in later with a fake moustache and a new shirt and say "Hello, I'm Tom Hanks. I'd like to vote"? Or maybe there are some other factors I don't understand here...



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 


That is their Main Fear though . Imagine the Scandal that would cause if that Truth be Told with Evidence. Here in my Home State of N.J., I have seen it happen during our last Local Elections .



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 





But the constitution doesn't say anything about driver's licences, passports, college ids


Exactly! So why are we as conservatives/republicans trying to demonize so-called liberals for following the constitution and not requiring an ID to vote?

Unfortunately, it looks like those that claim to uphold the constitution are the same people looking past it to pass legislation in their favor.




That's a silly thought to look at the constitution to declare if it's a left-right issue.


It's a silly thought to criticize a position that seems to follow the constitution. Left or right does not matter.

Is it constitutional? Doesn't appear to be. Who cares about left or right?
edit on 11-1-2012 by sheepslayer247 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by mwood
 


" That is a very real issue here in Arizona as well as other places. It also helps against voters voting more than once
in different precincts. "


True , and lets not Forget the " Dead " Votes . Can they Still be Registered whether they be in Heaven or Hell Right Now ? .........




posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
I have thought about this issue a lot over the last week or so. Finally I have decided that I would be for using ID at the poll if the state were to issue everyone over 18 a free picture voting ID. I'm sure this would also be a hassle due to certain individuals not having enough existing ID to prove who they are, but I am just adamantly against anyone having to pay to vote; in any way whatsoever?

I understand both sides of the argument. I also do see the fact that mandating voter ID puts a dent into the minority and young voters. Everyone NEEDS to have the same ability to vote. However, it is of course important to ensure that there is as little fraud as possible. The system is only as worthy as the accuracy of the outcome, right?

What would be the cheapest, most efficient way to issue voter ID? Should it be a Federal card, a state card? Should each state mandate differently what is acceptable forms of proof prior to issuing voter card, like the DMV does now? There are many things to consider here.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
While photo IDs would be good to legitimize each vote; there's a serious downside when people are forced to PAY for these IDs. This all goes back to the poll taxes in the 60's. Poll taxes were taxes paid AT the polling booth, for the right to vote. These taxes were designed intentionally, to discriminate and disallow certain racial and socio-economic groups their constitutional rights.

So, if they require photo IDs to vote; they should PROVIDE FREE access to these IDs instead of a $45 charge (or whatever your state charges for DLs and IDs).


edit on 11/1/2012 by Trexter Ziam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 





I am confused by the switched mentality but believe that liberals have it wrong here in the long run.


On the face of it, verifying your identity at the polling booth seems to be obvious and straight forward - who could be against it? There are many problems with it however.

The first of those problems being that the purpose of the proposal is not to clear up some huge voter fraud problem, such a problem just does not exist. Illegal voting is almost non-existent in this country, and there are already countless laws and procedures to ensure it does not turn into one.

The second problem is that it will inconvenience only those persons who already turn out in embarrassing low numbers. America is the laughing stock of the world because of the low turn out of eligible voters. Anything that works to place barriers to people voting is anti-democratic and just plain stupid.

Of course the reason the conservative parties want to further disenfranchise certain segments of society is because that segment of society tend to not vote for conservative candidates. Simple as that.

It is, for the conservatives, enlightened self-interest, not concern for the integrity of the electoral role.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by spinalremain
 




What would be the cheapest, most efficient way to issue voter ID?


When I registered to vote in the State of Arizona in 1970 I think, I was given a Voter's Registration Card. To register I had to show sufficient ID to demonstrate that I was of age and a citizen (i.e. my Birth Certificate). Then when I attended the polling booth, I had to show that card and my name was crossed off the list.

Why on earth isn't that enough?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join