The Shrine

Hey, Americans, are you guys finding that the new voter ID laws are actually prohibiting poor people from voting? It's been suggested as such in the below article on CBC, but I'm wondering how big of an issue this actually is

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012 ... ssion.html

Yes, there have been like a negligible amount of voting fraud cases that ID laws will prevent, meanwhile it's purely a tactic to disenfranchise poor voters. There's literally footage of a Republican on the Pennsylvania general assembly floor saying that the law will prevent a Democrat turn out to the polls. The catches are in the fine print. Pennsylvania's law was too restrictive and was shot down for the time being, while GA has had the law passed for what I want to say over a year. I don't know the specifics, but the Republican tactic to win elections is to force voter apathy (prevalent in Democrat voters) and to downright block some of them from voting.

The law in GA just requires me to bring in even a formerly valid form of photo identification. Not the biggest deal, but IDs cost $35 when I got my last one, which was nearly a decade ago so they're probably more expensive now. The ability to spend money shouldn't be a hurdle in voting.

I'm just surprised there isn't more of an uproar, more of an issue made of something like this. I guess if you're poor you just don't have the same rights in America

A lot of people don't understand it and a ton of people don't see the problem with it. Mostly, it's hardly a national issue and the truly evil parts gets shot down. It's only really affecting like half a dozen states. If it actually ends up fucking with the election, people will start caring.

Shrinweck wrote:A lot of people don't understand it and a ton of people don't see the problem with it. Mostly, it's hardly a national issue and the truly evil parts gets shot down. It's only really affecting like half a dozen states. If it actually ends up fucking with the election, people will start caring.

How will anyone ever know?

I imagine people will keep track of it. Pissed off people being turned away aren't going to be quiet about it. Voter apathy is one thing, turning down potential voters is another. And like I said the stuff that most people are going to have a problem with has already gotten shot down.

Shrinweck wrote:A lot of people don't understand it and a ton of people don't see the problem with it. Mostly, it's hardly a national issue and the truly evil parts gets shot down. It's only really affecting like half a dozen states. If it actually ends up fucking with the election, people will start caring.

You mean like Flori-duh in 2000 and Ohio in 2004?

SineSwiper wrote:

Shrinweck wrote:A lot of people don't understand it and a ton of people don't see the problem with it. Mostly, it's hardly a national issue and the truly evil parts gets shot down. It's only really affecting like half a dozen states. If it actually ends up fucking with the election, people will start caring.

You mean like Flori-duh in 2000 and Ohio in 2004?

That's what I was gonna say. You have a lot more faith in the system than I do, Shrin

They didn't use Voter ID laws to steal the election in 2000 - they used a court stacked with right wing judges (which it still is, if Obama has to challenge the election results and it goes to the Supreme Court we are once again fucked). Kerry lost in 2004 for a lot more reasons than Ohio.

Shrinweck wrote:Kerry lost in 2004 for a lot more reasons than Ohio.

Nope, it was just Ohio, it was all down to that state.....and for very ugly reasons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Unite ... troversies

Here's a good breakdown of the current Voter ID cards:

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/S ... er_ID_Laws

Trusting the Internet for voter ID laws seems even more foolish to me than trusting a phone call. I'm aware of the laws in my state at least. Also a decent Democrat candidate should have destroyed Bush in 2004. That's what I was referring to. Kerry was just not a good candidate, even if he was smart and would have probably made a decent president.

Shrinweck wrote:Trusting the Internet for voter ID laws seems even more foolish to me than trusting a phone call. I'm aware of the laws in my state at least. Also a decent Democrat candidate should have destroyed Bush in 2004. That's what I was referring to. Kerry was just not a good candidate, even if he was smart and would have probably made a decent president.

Kerry was a cardboard cutout. No personality, a nothing. Love or hate Bush, you could at least agree he had a personality and charisma.

I guess the real question is whether we end up with an armed uprising if massive voting machine/manipulation fraud decides the election. Because that seems to be the only thing these rich assholes fear.

EDIT: Also...Will "experimental" software patches affect the Ohio vote?