Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
It's become a rule at this point. They claim to be the"party of science" while simultaneously dismissing or ignoring everything that doesn't fit their narrative
Governor blackface was trying to protect our shitty democrats in the house that were trying to pass extreme late term abortion bill. Our state senate and state house is full of people far worse than the governor.
One of our democrat state senators has been charged with felonies after pushing a riot in Portsmouth. Our state house leader has pushed the most radical bills that make us as liberal as Cali in 1 year. I hope we can flip within 2 years and reverse the leftist takeover.
Adding to this our federal senators Kaine and Warner are some of the worst in the senate. Hope we can replace Warner this year with Daniel Gade.
We replaced Jack Wilson (the old VA GOP chairman) with Rich Anderson this past month hope he does a better job at running candidates in every race. Wilson was terrible at the job.
Excuse the essay but I've done a good bit of reading into American Voter ID laws and there's a lot to say about what a huge mess it is. There's a lot that nobody seems to be bringing up.
To start, "it has a negative impact on minority voters" is not an argument. It's a problem with implementation (assuming it's real, which this as well as my own anecdotal evidence suggests it isn't).
All that it would imply is that you have to sort the issue out before you can implement voter ID, it's not an argument against voter ID in and of itself. It's a little like Eisenhower saying "some people might not like racial desegregation and be angry about it, so let's not bother, fuck it". You can make that argument for keeping the status quo in numerous cases, and they've done countless times.
Virginia up until recently would give you a free photo ID that's usable only for voting when you go register to vote. I'd advocate for more accessible and affordable Passport Cards ($65 for a first timer is expensive no matter who you are, you can't deny that) but you can't get much more accessible than free. And let's not forget the fact that in all states but one, there are more 18+ people with driver's licenses than there are individuals who actually go and vote, so this whole disenfranchisement argument would affect a fairly minimal number of people in the first place.
Now for the love of God, can people also please realize that Photo ID is not the end-all solution to voter fraud? I don't just mean Voting Machines or Mail-in, I mean that even a federally-implemented Photo ID implementation can be skirted around and will be implemented poorly without other security checks, which nobody is discussing. Most states with Voter/Photo ID have very poor implementations of it that I guarantee you are used for fraud.
My country in its current state (current constitution, etc) has existed since 1991, our first democratic election for this government was in 1993 and we have this all figured out. Voter rolls based on the census, you're assigned to a particular voting location based on address, additional security checks if you're voting in a location you're not assigned to and of course, Photo ID.
How the hell has a nuclear super power, biggest most powerful country in the planet not figured this out a hundred years ago? Anybody, on any political side here (even our progressives) think your election security is a fucking joke. It's kind of disgusting that this is even a discussion and it's kind of sad that just saying "hey, let's implement easily-subvertible Photo ID laws" is a controversial thing.
I get the feeling that some rich and influential people are very glad that the discussion is limited to just Photo ID instead of stricter security, because they know how to subvert your otherwise-poor Photo ID implementations and either have been doing it, or will do it when the need arises.
tl;dr You're selling yourself short by focusing on just Photo ID.
I basically agree with you. There's nothing wrong with photo ID, it's important, but it's just one piece of the puzzle.
Elections are rarely stolen by individuals voting more than once. That was the old method. Now they just manufacture hundreds or thousands of fake ballots.
Voter ID won't help you when it's the election workers doing the stealing.
That's precisely my point. They'll try to subvert things one way or another. Mail-in is now the easiest path as it's so widespread. Voting machines after that. If you were to sort those things out (as I hope you will), then this becomes more important. And just like that recent article on mail-in, it's probably inconsequential in a presidential election but is often used in local elections.
Though individuals voting more than once are definitely used to try to steal elections. Let's not forget bussing and how big a scandal that was as recently as the 2016 election. You can't even verify whether someone voted in their local county, how are you gonna verify whether they voted in several? Like other forms of fraud, people will say that "there's not a lot of evidence that it happens" but how the hell would you know? The only ones getting caught have to be idiots.
A very simple (and yes, ultimately inconsequential form of fraud compared to some of the other stuff you hear, but still a possibility): what is stopping anybody from mailing in a ballot, then voting in person? Does anyone, in any state, double check this? How could they, if you don't keep track of who voted in person? I have not seen any evidence that they could double check this, or do.
A very simple (and yes, ultimately inconsequential form of fraud compared to some of the other stuff you hear, but still a possibility): what is stopping anybody from mailing in a ballot, then voting in person? Does anyone, in any state, double check this? How could they, if you don't keep track of who voted in person? I have not seen any evidence that they could double check this, or do.
I've wondered the same. I think it depends on the state.
We need to convince the left that Trump will steal the election with vote-by-mail. Then they might switch course.
I'm sure it's a bit more complex but logistically, I can't think of any way you'd ensure this in most cases.
What we do here is we set Mail-in aside. They're only counted after the in-person election. When you vote in person, you add your signature next to your name for every ballot you accept (or your name is crossed out if you vote in another location). Either way, they know that you voted in person. Then they check the Mail-in against that.
Most American states (maybe all?) don't have a system of that kind. We have lists of eligible voters (based on the census I believe) so no registration is necessary. Since you don't keep track of that, you don't know who voted in person and can't double check the Mail-in. You could compare it to voter registrations in most regular elections but many states threw a wrench in that plan by sending ballots to everyone. And even aside for that, do any states actually mark down that you already voted in person? I haven't seen any evidence of that so far (but would love to be proven wrong). Without that, there would be no way to know that you voted in person and it defeats the entire point of what I've said so far.
Alternatively, you could put together a list of all people who voted by mail (as a friend of mine suggested), though this would require all mail-in ballots to arrive before election day (which is not going to be the case in any US state).
That's sort of what it comes down to, there's many different ways to pull off election fraud, some easier and more blatant than others. The mail-in scams and voting machines are things that everyone talks about. The issues I like to bring up are ones that nearly-nobody seems to be discussing for some reason.
Even when it comes to Voter ID, it helps mitigate some stuff but someone hell-set on subverting those systems could do it with or without Voter ID. Let's not kid ourselves, if there was a Federal Voter ID mandate, California would probably hand out free photo ID to everyone, including illegals. You need something to compare the IDs against, which would probably have to be a census that excludes illegals (here's hoping Trump has luck with that).
I just worry that many people are trying to push for Voter ID as an end-all, be-all solution to in-person fraud without realizing that Voter ID doesn't fully prevent many of the issues they're worried about.
We made the Iraqis dip a finger in ink to show they’d already voted.
I have no problem with applying that rule to the US elections. Show ID, all vote on the same day unless valid reason for absentee, if absentee, have it notarized. And dip a finger in indelible ink.
While not a bad solution on paper (ha, get it), it does have a few flaws. Notably, you still have to ensure that the Voter ID implementation is checked against something substantial. As mentioned in another conversation, California hands IDs out to illegals already, you know democrats will do this in any blue/purple state if there was a Federal Photo ID requirement. You essentially need a Census that excludes illegals as Donald Trump is trying to do, and you need to check IDs against that Census because otherwise illegals could still vote one way or another.
This also requires heavy restrictions on absentee voting which you'd have a hard time passing. And even if you could get those, for this to simply work, you need all absentee voting to happen early, then assemble all absentee ballots and compile a full database of all citizens who voted by mail. Then doublecheck in-person voters against this database to ensure that nobody voted both by-mail and in person.
Alternatively, the aforementioned voter list which seems to be a solid (albeit certainly imperfect) way to solve multiple Voter ID shortcomings. At that point, the whole ink thing is a little bit needless however. Either way, either method's better than the nothing you have currently.
Newsflash: You can shower the left with evidence, it doesn’t matter because they were lying about their concerns in the first place and hiding their true motivations—in this case, enabling voter fraud.
The left is filled with manipulative psychopaths and sociopaths. Reasoning with them is futile, resort to lead.
i tell my in laws that if they vote for Biden, i'm voting twice. they get really upset when they try to argue and every leftist talking point is flung right back at them
This is a link to the study that the ACLU cites to support their claim that voter ID laws reduce voter turnout. Does anyone with experience analyzing research articles want to evaluate this study and see how this compares to the study referenced in this post?
A lawyer in my town wrote a blog post about "voter supression" because the poll worker asked him to lower his mask to verify against his ID. He refused, wasnt going to take the "risk".
So even though we have photo ID in Texas, they already have excuses for making it of questionable value with the mask.
Don't most European countries, aka their utopian progressive role models for the world, have pretty stringent voter ID laws? Seems like their favorite "eVeRy OtHeR ciViLiZed CouNtRy" chestnut applies to this one.
Liberals: "Black people, who are totally not inferior, will be disenfranchized by this because they are too dumb to vote the same way we expect white people to vote. Only a racist would apply the same rules and standards to all races. As a good liberal, I recognize blacks who are NOT inferior need white folks' help to vote. Now stop being racist you white devil's!"
You know what the DNC’s official reasoning was to avoid Voter ID? It discriminates against minorities. They claim a study on the past two elections examined states with strict ID laws to vote. They found a greater percentage of whites compared to minorities turned out to vote.
So you gotta ask: what kind of person wouldn’t be allowed to vote when asked for a state ID? The ones without state ID, which you need for literally everything. Who wouldn’t have a state ID? Illegals.
If the RNC wasn't a bunch of worthless, bought and paid for shills, this would be their number one platform, with this study printed on weekly flyers for every citizen as a reminder.
If voter ID was going to happen, it would have happened prior to 2018 when we had the house and senate and potus.
It didn't happen, which just proves there is only one party...and they all support this country's destruction.
Trump not pushing for it at all means it will never happen. He's the only politician who would have had the will or ability, and he clearly didn't find it important enough - and now they may very well steal the election.
This will be one of his greatest mistakes. Voter ID would give us confidence in the electoral process, and it would probably turn every fucking state red because the dems cheat that much. And it didn't happen...
Just tie it into the Real ID needed to fly. Problem solved. Set aside a fund for people who cannot afford the $20 fee so there isn't a constitutional issue.
They are racist
The study was obviously done by homophobic white racists.
Otherwise it would show the same BS the Dems are propagandizing.
Spread this tweet everywhere!!!!!!!!!!
https://youtu.be/rrBxZGWCdgs
Whenever they say "without evidence" it means there's a video out there conflicting with their narrative.
It's become a rule at this point. They claim to be the"party of science" while simultaneously dismissing or ignoring everything that doesn't fit their narrative
In Virginia we had more black people vote after we passed voter ID!
Democrats challenged the law and we won in the Supreme Court that it was constitutional.
Last year the got rid of voter ID in Virginia. The democrats want to cheat!
That’s because you’ve got Governor Blackface wrecking the place.
Governor blackface was trying to protect our shitty democrats in the house that were trying to pass extreme late term abortion bill. Our state senate and state house is full of people far worse than the governor.
One of our democrat state senators has been charged with felonies after pushing a riot in Portsmouth. Our state house leader has pushed the most radical bills that make us as liberal as Cali in 1 year. I hope we can flip within 2 years and reverse the leftist takeover.
Adding to this our federal senators Kaine and Warner are some of the worst in the senate. Hope we can replace Warner this year with Daniel Gade.
The GOP would have to actually RUN CANDIDATES first. A good chunk of those seats were unopposed.
We replaced Jack Wilson (the old VA GOP chairman) with Rich Anderson this past month hope he does a better job at running candidates in every race. Wilson was terrible at the job.
Excuse the essay but I've done a good bit of reading into American Voter ID laws and there's a lot to say about what a huge mess it is. There's a lot that nobody seems to be bringing up.
To start, "it has a negative impact on minority voters" is not an argument. It's a problem with implementation (assuming it's real, which this as well as my own anecdotal evidence suggests it isn't).
All that it would imply is that you have to sort the issue out before you can implement voter ID, it's not an argument against voter ID in and of itself. It's a little like Eisenhower saying "some people might not like racial desegregation and be angry about it, so let's not bother, fuck it". You can make that argument for keeping the status quo in numerous cases, and they've done countless times.
Virginia up until recently would give you a free photo ID that's usable only for voting when you go register to vote. I'd advocate for more accessible and affordable Passport Cards ($65 for a first timer is expensive no matter who you are, you can't deny that) but you can't get much more accessible than free. And let's not forget the fact that in all states but one, there are more 18+ people with driver's licenses than there are individuals who actually go and vote, so this whole disenfranchisement argument would affect a fairly minimal number of people in the first place.
Now for the love of God, can people also please realize that Photo ID is not the end-all solution to voter fraud? I don't just mean Voting Machines or Mail-in, I mean that even a federally-implemented Photo ID implementation can be skirted around and will be implemented poorly without other security checks, which nobody is discussing. Most states with Voter/Photo ID have very poor implementations of it that I guarantee you are used for fraud.
My country in its current state (current constitution, etc) has existed since 1991, our first democratic election for this government was in 1993 and we have this all figured out. Voter rolls based on the census, you're assigned to a particular voting location based on address, additional security checks if you're voting in a location you're not assigned to and of course, Photo ID.
How the hell has a nuclear super power, biggest most powerful country in the planet not figured this out a hundred years ago? Anybody, on any political side here (even our progressives) think your election security is a fucking joke. It's kind of disgusting that this is even a discussion and it's kind of sad that just saying "hey, let's implement easily-subvertible Photo ID laws" is a controversial thing.
I get the feeling that some rich and influential people are very glad that the discussion is limited to just Photo ID instead of stricter security, because they know how to subvert your otherwise-poor Photo ID implementations and either have been doing it, or will do it when the need arises.
tl;dr You're selling yourself short by focusing on just Photo ID.
I basically agree with you. There's nothing wrong with photo ID, it's important, but it's just one piece of the puzzle.
Elections are rarely stolen by individuals voting more than once. That was the old method. Now they just manufacture hundreds or thousands of fake ballots.
Voter ID won't help you when it's the election workers doing the stealing.
That's precisely my point. They'll try to subvert things one way or another. Mail-in is now the easiest path as it's so widespread. Voting machines after that. If you were to sort those things out (as I hope you will), then this becomes more important. And just like that recent article on mail-in, it's probably inconsequential in a presidential election but is often used in local elections.
Though individuals voting more than once are definitely used to try to steal elections. Let's not forget bussing and how big a scandal that was as recently as the 2016 election. You can't even verify whether someone voted in their local county, how are you gonna verify whether they voted in several? Like other forms of fraud, people will say that "there's not a lot of evidence that it happens" but how the hell would you know? The only ones getting caught have to be idiots.
A very simple (and yes, ultimately inconsequential form of fraud compared to some of the other stuff you hear, but still a possibility): what is stopping anybody from mailing in a ballot, then voting in person? Does anyone, in any state, double check this? How could they, if you don't keep track of who voted in person? I have not seen any evidence that they could double check this, or do.
I've wondered the same. I think it depends on the state.
We need to convince the left that Trump will steal the election with vote-by-mail. Then they might switch course.
I'm sure it's a bit more complex but logistically, I can't think of any way you'd ensure this in most cases.
What we do here is we set Mail-in aside. They're only counted after the in-person election. When you vote in person, you add your signature next to your name for every ballot you accept (or your name is crossed out if you vote in another location). Either way, they know that you voted in person. Then they check the Mail-in against that.
Most American states (maybe all?) don't have a system of that kind. We have lists of eligible voters (based on the census I believe) so no registration is necessary. Since you don't keep track of that, you don't know who voted in person and can't double check the Mail-in. You could compare it to voter registrations in most regular elections but many states threw a wrench in that plan by sending ballots to everyone. And even aside for that, do any states actually mark down that you already voted in person? I haven't seen any evidence of that so far (but would love to be proven wrong). Without that, there would be no way to know that you voted in person and it defeats the entire point of what I've said so far.
Alternatively, you could put together a list of all people who voted by mail (as a friend of mine suggested), though this would require all mail-in ballots to arrive before election day (which is not going to be the case in any US state).
In FL I believe mail-in votes are being counted as they are received.
No way around fraud as I see it, if unsolicited ballots are being mailed out.
I don't know the answers to all these questions. I hope someone does.
That's sort of what it comes down to, there's many different ways to pull off election fraud, some easier and more blatant than others. The mail-in scams and voting machines are things that everyone talks about. The issues I like to bring up are ones that nearly-nobody seems to be discussing for some reason.
Even when it comes to Voter ID, it helps mitigate some stuff but someone hell-set on subverting those systems could do it with or without Voter ID. Let's not kid ourselves, if there was a Federal Voter ID mandate, California would probably hand out free photo ID to everyone, including illegals. You need something to compare the IDs against, which would probably have to be a census that excludes illegals (here's hoping Trump has luck with that).
I just worry that many people are trying to push for Voter ID as an end-all, be-all solution to in-person fraud without realizing that Voter ID doesn't fully prevent many of the issues they're worried about.
We made the Iraqis dip a finger in ink to show they’d already voted. I have no problem with applying that rule to the US elections. Show ID, all vote on the same day unless valid reason for absentee, if absentee, have it notarized. And dip a finger in indelible ink.
While not a bad solution on paper (ha, get it), it does have a few flaws. Notably, you still have to ensure that the Voter ID implementation is checked against something substantial. As mentioned in another conversation, California hands IDs out to illegals already, you know democrats will do this in any blue/purple state if there was a Federal Photo ID requirement. You essentially need a Census that excludes illegals as Donald Trump is trying to do, and you need to check IDs against that Census because otherwise illegals could still vote one way or another.
This also requires heavy restrictions on absentee voting which you'd have a hard time passing. And even if you could get those, for this to simply work, you need all absentee voting to happen early, then assemble all absentee ballots and compile a full database of all citizens who voted by mail. Then doublecheck in-person voters against this database to ensure that nobody voted both by-mail and in person.
Alternatively, the aforementioned voter list which seems to be a solid (albeit certainly imperfect) way to solve multiple Voter ID shortcomings. At that point, the whole ink thing is a little bit needless however. Either way, either method's better than the nothing you have currently.
It has negative effects for their illegal aliens - they won't be able to vote for them. And it may make election fraud more difficult.
Actually that is NOT TRUE....it does effect the illegals that vote, the dead people that vote, the pets that vote and the imaginary people that vote.
Newsflash: You can shower the left with evidence, it doesn’t matter because they were lying about their concerns in the first place and hiding their true motivations—in this case, enabling voter fraud.
The left is filled with manipulative psychopaths and sociopaths. Reasoning with them is futile, resort to lead.
Friendly reminder they want mail-in voting because it completely skips any chance of voter id laws
Link to study?
Daily Signal article. Actual Study.
https://www.nber.org/papers/w25522
Thank you! I’m driving rn. Updated post context.
Be safe!!
Was about to ask the same thing. You need an upvote.
Shit like this is just a fake news meme if it doesn't have a link.
So much for being racist, huh? Most liberals have no idea that Mexico has voter ID FFS.
Doesn't the vast majority of countries have voter ID? I think we should also dye your hand purple after you vote
Bologna>malarkey
Fucking everyone has ID in their wallet every day all day. Canada, you need voter ID. It’s not ducking 1890 anymore.
B-b-but black people don’t have internet and dunno how to find the DMV! Voter ID is racisss!!
If India with over a billion people can do it, so can we.
Found the study for those curious: https://www.nber.org/papers/w25522
Thank you -- a red pill is only as good as its sauce! Otherwise, consider it a placebo!!
False. Dead voters casting all Democrat ballots would stop turning out.
Hey you bigot. Don't you know blacks are too dumb and poor to get ID's!
-Dems
I have this criticism as well. Hopefully the administration is playing their cards close to the chest.
Massive flaw for America. If it does not happen in the next term, it never will. The Dems will have the roost to rule.
i tell my in laws that if they vote for Biden, i'm voting twice. they get really upset when they try to argue and every leftist talking point is flung right back at them
The fact that the democrats can actually say to blacks, you can't afford a drivers license and then they vote for that person is crazy to me
Source?
https://www.nber.org/papers/w25522
"It discriminates against the lower class and people too poor to get ID!"
Too poor to get ID? They had to identify themselves to apply for welfare dumbass.
A study for that? Should have asked me for free.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665966.pdf
This is a link to the study that the ACLU cites to support their claim that voter ID laws reduce voter turnout. Does anyone with experience analyzing research articles want to evaluate this study and see how this compares to the study referenced in this post?
The study also found that it disenfranchised people committing voter fraud
This is not true. It has a negative effect on turnout of illegal aliens and dead people.
"That study is bologna!"
-sleepy Joe (probably)
A lawyer in my town wrote a blog post about "voter supression" because the poll worker asked him to lower his mask to verify against his ID. He refused, wasnt going to take the "risk".
So even though we have photo ID in Texas, they already have excuses for making it of questionable value with the mask.
Executive Order.
of course we all know this
Has an effect on illegals.
#IBelieveScientists!
Correct. The only demographic voter ID has a negative impact on is illegal votes.
Fact check: false
Dead voter turnout was adversely impacted.
Don't most European countries, aka their utopian progressive role models for the world, have pretty stringent voter ID laws? Seems like their favorite "eVeRy OtHeR ciViLiZed CouNtRy" chestnut applies to this one.
Liberals: "Black people, who are totally not inferior, will be disenfranchized by this because they are too dumb to vote the same way we expect white people to vote. Only a racist would apply the same rules and standards to all races. As a good liberal, I recognize blacks who are NOT inferior need white folks' help to vote. Now stop being racist you white devil's!"
You know what the DNC’s official reasoning was to avoid Voter ID? It discriminates against minorities. They claim a study on the past two elections examined states with strict ID laws to vote. They found a greater percentage of whites compared to minorities turned out to vote.
So you gotta ask: what kind of person wouldn’t be allowed to vote when asked for a state ID? The ones without state ID, which you need for literally everything. Who wouldn’t have a state ID? Illegals.
TBF, Italy doesn't have a permanent underclass that's been coddled into total incompetence.
No shit. IDs don't wear klan hoods and bite their black owners.
You need ID to vote in every democratic country in the world. It's as basic as it gets.
If the RNC wasn't a bunch of worthless, bought and paid for shills, this would be their number one platform, with this study printed on weekly flyers for every citizen as a reminder.
This study is FALSE - It restricts the dead from voting, so turn out is effected. I'd like a refund.
If voter ID was going to happen, it would have happened prior to 2018 when we had the house and senate and potus.
It didn't happen, which just proves there is only one party...and they all support this country's destruction.
Trump not pushing for it at all means it will never happen. He's the only politician who would have had the will or ability, and he clearly didn't find it important enough - and now they may very well steal the election.
This will be one of his greatest mistakes. Voter ID would give us confidence in the electoral process, and it would probably turn every fucking state red because the dems cheat that much. And it didn't happen...
Well, Voter ID heavily discriminates against non-citizens, dead voters, multi-voters,......
Sorry I would never believe anything coming from the University of Bologna.
Sauce
See my comment and others in the thread have also posted. Share far and wide
It's too late for this election cycle
University of bologna lul
It has a negative effect on voter fraud though, which is the real problem.
Being against voter ID is pretty transparently just being against fairness in elections.
Just tie it into the Real ID needed to fly. Problem solved. Set aside a fund for people who cannot afford the $20 fee so there isn't a constitutional issue.