Obama: Maybe it's time for mandatory voting

There have been plenty of studies in various states, Pennsylvania, Florida, Texas, etc. etc. Take your pick. They all verify the same conclusion.

 

I agree. but it's also the only actual survey.

 

then why didn't you post those?

 

I have no idea whether it is 2.5 or less than 1 %. I don't even care. I'm on board with making voter fraud far more effort than it is worth, so long as we make sure not a single person's voting ability is hampered. Which is definitely possible. Get me on the democratic ticket, droski. I'm your boy.

 

Shocking that you ignore their analysis and sit on the one possibly glimmer of hope in all the data that you feel suits you. I feel like we are getting to the point where we were in the Iraq WMD discussion where you ignore all obvious information and analysis to stick to your position.

So, again, there's nothing, nothing, out there that has suggested that this is a problem and plenty to demonstrate that it's not.

 

Thats true if the proper steps and procedures are being taken to currently prevent it. From personal experience in my little portion of the country, I dont believe it is.
If not, the reported numbers are gonna be skewed. How much, who knows. I wouldnt try and attached a number to that given my opinion on the above for the same reason I wouldnt with the current fraud numbers.

As political as it is for the Rs pushing for IDs and more strict enforcement, its just as political for the Ds to fight enforcement of a better system.

 

sounds good

 

where do you think the evidence is going to come from? the best way possible would be to do a survey and hope people admit it which is somewhat questionable. and again. I've never suggested it's a huge problem. only that it's so friggen easy to do that it's absurd to think people don't do it.

 

To be fair, no one has talked about a better system at the congressional level. We've talked more about one in this thread than they have on the Hill. Just saying "voter ID cards" or "no!" isn't leading and that is what we are getting from leadership. I like the idea of national IDs, and think they could be made more palatable for those concerned about disenfranchising legal voters without IDs with some assurances or concessions in terms of how we get them to people.

This also means we need to look at early voting via mail, which is typically conservative. I am sure something could be figured out.

And ink, damn it. Give us ink.

 

Any study relying on someone to admit that should be taken with pause.

 

If I can wire money online and submit my taxes online, I don't see why I can't vote online.

 

True. I think some dont really want to know the level of fraud involved. Not just in voting but many other things. You flip the topic over to Wall St. among other things and tunes change.

"V" on the forehead or Im not sold yet.

 

Some of the voting machines now are essentially online voting kiosks dressed up so that they can be sold at huge markups via contractors. Big money in voting machines, apparently. Yet what is it about them that couldn't be duplicated via standard computers and software?

 

But, they obviously aren't, not at any sort of rate beyond very rare and the studies that have compared the ID required voting with the non-ID required show no difference, then why bother, especially if there are an appreciable number of people without IDs? Voting is a right, not a privilege and you're telling people to get IDs to exercise their right because of a problem that doesn't really exist?

Again, I would be fine with requiring IDs if the problem existed and people's right to vote was being compromised by rampant fraud, but, until it actually happens beyond "it could" or "I think people do", then there's no reason for it, just as, from the OP, there's no reason to implement mandatory voting.

 

Right. There's no interest in finding common ground to improve things, because they all like the battle lines right as they are.

 

I ascribe to your conspiracy theory. awful lot of money that would go out the window if everyone could do it on their web browser. I'm sure the argument is web security, but surely we can figure something out.

 

I just don't think it's a big deal at all to ask for identification for something so important. agree to disagree.

 

No one has to agree to see that the ink dipping would be a harmless way to eat least complicate one of the easiest methods of voter fraud. It isn't bullet-proof, but it is so damn easy. Wonder how this could be brought up as a national conversation?

 

I think, essentially, my position can be boiled down to the idea that voting is a right and should not be required or restricted in any manner that is not of a necessity to preserve that right. If there is an idea floating that we need IDs to combat potential voter fraud that isn't actually a problem, then I am against it. If there is an idea floating around to require voting by penalty of a fine to combat vote buying, but that the two concepts aren't proven to be connected, then I am against it.

 

I'm going to guess a lot of people will refuse to get their finger dipped. and as I said if it's going to wear off in a day or two, surely you can remove it without much effort just by washing your hands.