I have my birth certificate, marriage license & my social security card. It's called record keeping. So people might have to get on a bus/train. If they don't have a car that's what they normally do on a day to day basis.
Taking time off to get the id - big deal, that's what people with DLs do.
Again not seeing a problem.
Originally posted by: tom
I have my birth certificate, marriage license & my social security card. It's called record keeping. So people might have to get on a bus/train. If they don't have a car that's what they normally do on a day to day basis.
Taking time off to get the id - big deal, that's what people with DLs do.
Again not seeing a problem.
Do people with driver's licenses have to jump through hoops to vote? No.
Do people without driver's licenses have to jump through hoops to vote? Yes.
Do voter id's favor one demographic over another?
(Let's see if tom's or Candy's lazy brain cells can answer that last question.)
My brain cells have been declared lazy by MisterPicture.
End of discussion.
Candy
Originally posted by: O2bnVegas
My brain cells have been declared lazy by MisterPicture.
End of discussion.
Candy
Well, you couldn't answer the question: "Do voter id's favor one demographic over another?"
I think that cinches it.
Originally posted by: tom
I have my birth certificate, marriage license & my social security card. It's called record keeping. So people might have to get on a bus/train. If they don't have a car that's what they normally do on a day to day basis.
Taking time off to get the id - big deal, that's what people with DLs do.
Again not seeing a problem.
There's a LOT you don't see, Tommie-poo, on myriad subjects in addition to this one.
Originally posted by: MisterPicture
Well, you couldn't answer the question: "Do voter id's favor one demographic over another?"
I think that cinches it.
The answer is an obvious "yes," but that answer would invalidate the standard conservative argument, articulated by Candy and Tommie-poo, that voter ID requirements are no big deal.
If one wants to drive I have to get a DL
If one wants to fly on a plane one has to get an ID
If one wants to vote they have to get an ID
Of the 3 getting a DL requires the most effort. The moral to the story, if you want something, it requires an effort.
Do voter IDs favor a demographic? No
Candy - when the liberals can't win an argument, they resort to insults. See the above 2 comments.
Originally posted by: tom
If one wants to drive I have to get a DL
If one wants to fly on a plane one has to get an ID
If one wants to vote they have to get an ID
Of the 3 getting a DL requires the most effort. The moral to the story, if you want something, it requires an effort.
Do voter IDs favor a demographic? No
Candy - when the liberals can't win an argument, they resort to insults. See the above 2 comments.
Tommie-poo tells the truth: TWICE!!! Then, with his third statement...he lies. Most places, what you need to do to vote is register. IDs are not required except in the few places that have passed such laws.
He doesn't understand that the right to vote shouldn't require an "effort"--it should come automatically with being a US citizen. DUHHHHHHH.
Voter ID requirements DO favor some demographics over others--so Tommie-poo is lying again.
When the conservatives can't win an argument, they simply lie.
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Yes, of course. That's what all those people were doing, sitting at desks, working late into the night, sometimes while maskless RepubliQ "election monitors" stood two feet away, scowling at them.
In ALL states, as you say, if a signature on a mail-in ballot didn't match the one on file, that ballot was either discarded or, if the match was close or questionable, set aside for review. The Fox News types bleating about trillions of FAKE NOOZE ballots being counted conveniently ignored how many were invalidated and discarded due to signatures not matching--in every state!
Facts matter and here is the key statement:
...under state law, a voter’s signature goes on the envelope containing the secret ballot, not the ballot itself. As a result, even if a number of voters are found to have cast votes that were ineligible, there will not be an easy way to remedy the damage that was caused.
Making matters worse, the state of Georgia arbitrarily changed state law on signature verification of absentee ballots via a March 2020 judicial consent decree with Georgia Democrats — without ever going to the state legislature. It changed the statutory requirement that the signature must match the signature on the voter registration card to simply matching the signature on the absentee ballot application.
State law says the signature must match either the voter registration card or the most recent updated registration card and the absentee ballot application, “The registrar or clerk shall then compare the identifying information on the oath with the information on file in his or her office, shall compare the signature or mark on the oath with the signature or mark on the absentee elector’s voter registration card or the most recent update to such absentee elector’s voter registration card and application for absentee ballot or a facsimile of said signature or mark taken from said card or application…”
https://tennesseestar.com/2020/11/16/analysis-a-lack-of-signature-verification-in-georgia-damages-recount-validity/
Originally posted by: jphelan
Facts matter and here is the key statement:
...under state law, a voter’s signature goes on the envelope containing the secret ballot, not the ballot itself. As a result, even if a number of voters are found to have cast votes that were ineligible, there will not be an easy way to remedy the damage that was caused.
Making matters worse, the state of Georgia arbitrarily changed state law on signature verification of absentee ballots via a March 2020 judicial consent decree with Georgia Democrats — without ever going to the state legislature. It changed the statutory requirement that the signature must match the signature on the voter registration card to simply matching the signature on the absentee ballot application.
State law says the signature must match either the voter registration card or the most recent updated registration card and the absentee ballot application, “The registrar or clerk shall then compare the identifying information on the oath with the information on file in his or her office, shall compare the signature or mark on the oath with the signature or mark on the absentee elector’s voter registration card or the most recent update to such absentee elector’s voter registration card and application for absentee ballot or a facsimile of said signature or mark taken from said card or application…”
https://tennesseestar.com/2020/11/16/analysis-a-lack-of-signature-verification-in-georgia-damages-recount-validity/
Yes. Signatures are recorded at the time of voter registration and then matched with signatures on ballots to validate those ballots. Thank you for confirming this.
What whoever wrote this screed fails to mention is that when the signature on the absentee ballot is on the envelope and not the ballot, then the envelope is attached to the ballot for the purposes of signature validation. The only thing that could go wrong is if the envelope was inadvertently discarded before signature validation took place. In that case, the ballot would be invalid and not counted.
Here's how you were fooled. "...even if a number of voters were found to have cast votes that were ineligible, there will not be an easy way to remedy the damage that was caused." Really? Wouldn't an "ineligible" vote (a dumb term to use in this context, the writer means "invalid") simply not be counted?
In most democratic states (as opposed to undemocratic, aka RepubliQ states), absentee ballots are opened and subjected to validation when received (rather than being held unopened until Election Day) precisely to be able to remedy any irregularities and allow a voter to correct his ballot. Thus, the "damage" that the bozo you quote talks about only happens when there are undemocratic restrictions placed on absentee voting.
