Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 kronk wrote:
I just early voted so I can't be molested on Super Tuesday!

Damn... in my state, I'd have to have a justified reason to vote early... like, being disabled or work for military... etc...

If I'm going to be molested... I call dibs on Kate Upton molesting me...

 whembly wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I just early voted so I can't be molested on Super Tuesday!

Damn... in my state, I'd have to have a justified reason to vote early... like, being disabled or work for military... etc...

If I'm going to be molested... I call dibs on Kate Upton molesting me...

My state just says "Come on by and vote! Here, have some cookies."

Also, there was a pretty young lady in a nice dress standing in front of me for 25 minutes...

 kronk wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 kronk wrote:
I just early voted so I can't be molested on Super Tuesday!

Damn... in my state, I'd have to have a justified reason to vote early... like, being disabled or work for military... etc...

If I'm going to be molested... I call dibs on Kate Upton molesting me...

My state just says "Come on by and vote! Here, have some cookies."

Also, there was a pretty young lady in a nice dress standing in front of me for 25 minutes...

Nice view...

Being an uncouth wargamer, naturally I asked her [perhaps not]

 kronk wrote:
There was a feth up when I voted today. They had my first and last name backwards on the registrar when I went to vote.

Solution? The looked at my driver's license #, then found the problem.

Having my ID fething fixed their issue and allowed me to vote today.

So, you know, there's that.

Wait, no strip search? No pat down? Where's the fun in that?

 gregor_xenos wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Preferably by making it obnoxiously difficult for anyone to vote Democrat, like Pennsylvania and North Carolina did!

First there's the pit of spikes you need to leap over, then there's the jungle full of man-eating tigers, and finally there's advanced calculus problems.

Or else it's just having to show your ID. I forget which, exactly.

No kidding. Glad someone said it.

And I'm glad you lot decided to pipe up.

In Pennsylvania and NC both, a state funded college issued ID with a photograph is not "proof" enough for a vote.
Nor is my Selective Service Card, Voter Registration Card, or my Learner's Permit (which has a photograph as well).

You tell me how much more identification I need to present to show I am who I am.

Oh wait. It's not applicable because I'm a registered Democrat and the two locations for early voting were churches littered with Romney crap.

Wow...some of you all never heard Obama being called the Chosen One?

 Kanluwen wrote:

 gregor_xenos wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Preferably by making it obnoxiously difficult for anyone to vote Democrat, like Pennsylvania and North Carolina did!

First there's the pit of spikes you need to leap over, then there's the jungle full of man-eating tigers, and finally there's advanced calculus problems.

Or else it's just having to show your ID. I forget which, exactly.

No kidding. Glad someone said it.

And I'm glad you lot decided to pipe up.

In Pennsylvania and NC both, a state funded college issued ID with a photograph is not "proof" enough for a vote.
Nor is my Selective Service Card, Voter Registration Card, or my Learner's Permit (which has a photograph as well).

You tell me how much more identification I need to present to show I am who I am.

Oh wait. It's not applicable because I'm a registered Democrat and the two locations for early voting were churches littered with Romney crap.

Gee whiz dude... didnt ya know that all ya have to do is push back your hippie mop and show them where youre wearing the number of the beast? That's all the identification you truly need.

 Jihadin wrote:
Wow...some of you all never heard Obama being called the Chosen One?

That doesn't mean its humorous and you need to keep repeating it.

Just for you DT I stop bringing up the..

NSF DT

Are we talking about lies being told to stop people from voting?

Pennsylvania, despite being ruled against on voter ID, is telling Latino voters they need to show ID.



http://act.presente.org/sign/pasigns

 Mannahnin wrote:
Are we talking about lies being told to stop people from voting?

Pennsylvania, despite being ruled against on voter ID, is telling Latino voters they need to show ID.



http://act.presente.org/sign/pasigns

How is that a lie?

Edit: Oh wait... The ID law was stuck down right?

It's been put on hold until after the election.

But the fethers are using billboards to tell minority voters to show ID anyway.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/10/judge_in_pa_voter_id_case_asks.html

 Mannahnin wrote:
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/10/judge_in_pa_voter_id_case_asks.html

Ah... gotcha. Thanks

Similar billboards have been up in Ohio and Wisconsin. Again specifically placed in minority-populated areas.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82698.html?hp=l8

 Mannahnin wrote:
Similar billboards have been up in Ohio and Wisconsin. Again specifically placed in minority-populated areas.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82698.html?hp=l8

Okay... I'll admit... that is subversive in a way.

"in a way"?

You don't think it's just another act in a long list (which I listed recently) of attempts to reduce the number of minority voters participating in big elections?

 Mannahnin wrote:
"in a way"?

You don't think it's just another act in a long list (which I listed recently) of attempts to reduce the number of minority voters participating in big elections?

There are better ways to do this.

But, I do believe each state has a right devise rules/regulation to ensure the integrity of the election process. Here's the kicker... each state can do it differently.

I don't disagree with that at all.

I just disagree that voter ID laws are being introduced across the country in order to ensure the integrity of the election process. I think the preponderence of the evidence makes pretty obvious that their actual purpose is to make it a bit more difficult for poor people to vote, especially poor minorities. To discourage them from participating, and reduce their impact on elections.

Thats low...pretty damn low...That be three days of BS I have to read after the election when they troubleshoot on why the other guy lost

whembly wrote:But, I do believe each state has a right devise rules/regulation to ensure the integrity of the election process. Here's the kicker... each state can do it differently.

And so do you also believe each state has the right to intentionally target specific demographics with regulations designed to hinder their ability to vote, or persuade/intimidate them into staying home?

BONUS: Do you also believe your civil war was about states' rights? Because that is honestly the first thing that jumped into my head when I read your rhetoric on this matter.

 Frazzled wrote:
Me too. The downtown tax office is only three blocks away from work and I was done in 5 minutes. Ok add two minutes to help the elderly Spansih speaking lady and three minutes for an affadavit that I'm still at my address then its Green Party uber alles time.

All joking aside. Did you actually vote for Jill Stein?

 Mannahnin wrote:
I don't disagree with that at all.

I just disagree that voter ID laws are being introduced across the country in order to ensure the integrity of the election process. I think the preponderence of the evidence makes pretty obvious that their actual purpose is to make it a bit more difficult for poor people to vote, especially poor minorities. To discourage them from participating, and reduce their impact on elections.

Without ID how do you tell if someone is an actual voting citizen?

 azazel the cat wrote:

whembly wrote:But, I do believe each state has a right devise rules/regulation to ensure the integrity of the election process. Here's the kicker... each state can do it differently.

And so do you also believe each state has the right to intentionally target specific demographics with regulations designed to hinder their ability to vote, or persuade/intimidate them into staying home?

Eh? You mean having a valid ID is such a burden to some folks that it's deemed as persuading/intimidating/suppressing their votes?

In my state, I must show one of the following:

Identification issued by the state of Missouri, an agency of the state, or a local election authority of the state
Identification issued by the United States government or agency thereof
Identification issued by an institution of higher education, including a university, college, vocational and technical school, located within the state of Missouri
A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or other government document that contains the name and address of the voter
Driver's license or state identification card issued by another state

I'd have to double-check, but I believe that's the same as Florida/Texas/PA...

BONUS: Do you also believe your civil war was about states' rights? Because that is honestly the first thing that jumped into my head when I read your rhetoric on this matter.

lolwat?

You do understand what federalism is...right?

EDIT 1: Nope... they're not same as MO. The new PEN law actually issues a "voter ID" card.

Cheesecat: You just ask them. We have rolls of registered voters. In-person voting fraud is practically nonexistent. Most of the examples we have of people attempting in-person fraud have been pro-voter ID guys trying to make a point.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Cheesecat: You just ask them. We have rolls of registered voters. In-person voting fraud is practically nonexistent. Most of the examples we have of people attempting in-person fraud have been pro-voter ID guys trying to make a point.

Oh OK makes sense, I think when I voted for the first time we needed some ID like a passport, driver's license, etc and then I got to put an X on some paper of who I thought was the best guy.

 juraigamer wrote:
You can assume it's the opposite, after all the time, effort, and amount of money required to drive around and place the letters does suggest someone with some cash and free time is behind this.

I mean, we can assume that this wasn't just done for gaks and giggles, but to depress the vote of one side or the other. At which point, we have to ask if these were sent predominantly to one side or the other. The article doesn't say, but heavily implies Republicans are more concerned about this than Democrats.

Now, this is FOX news we're talking about. They're sloppy as anything, so it could just be that they forgot to mention these mailouts went to Republican registered voters. But, given its FOX news, it could be that neither political party was targeted, and FOX is trying to beat up a story to pretend conservatives are the victims.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Cheesecat: You just ask them. We have rolls of registered voters. In-person voting fraud is practically nonexistent. Most of the examples we have of people attempting in-person fraud have been pro-voter ID guys trying to make a point.

The problem there Rangar is that some states (the south) are forbidden to review the registration lists to knock off obvious fraud records.

If I remember right, Florida recently went thru this, and the DoJ tried to stop them. But the Judge overruled them.

 Jihadin wrote:
Wow...some of you all never heard Obama being called the Chosen One?

Yeah, we've heard it. A lot.

It's tired dribble standing in the place of actual thought. Don't have any actual political insight? Call Obama the chosen one and pretend like you do!

 whembly wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Cheesecat: You just ask them. We have rolls of registered voters. In-person voting fraud is practically nonexistent. Most of the examples we have of people attempting in-person fraud have been pro-voter ID guys trying to make a point.

The problem there Rangar is that some states (the south) are forbidden to review the registration lists to knock off obvious fraud records.

If I remember right, Florida recently went thru this, and the DoJ tried to stop them. But the Judge overruled them.

Florida, like every other state, can review and update the voter rolls. They've had a bad track record of how they've gone about it, at times.

http://www.salon.com/2000/12/04/voter_file/
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/10/us/florida-list-for-purge-of-voters-proves-flawed.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/30/eveningnews/main4490682.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_4490682

Certain states, or smaller areas (countes or townships) within states, with a history of suppressing minority voting are held to a more stringent standard, requiring preclearance of changes to voting rights or accessability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act#States