Obama: Maybe it's time for mandatory voting

What is the basis of this claim?

 

because poor people don't have identification!

https://www.aclu.org/voting-rights/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

 

Poor people have a social

 

I didn't realize a driver's license/simple ID was so expensive...

 

what are the chances that the same person who hasn't bothered to get a drivers license or some other form of ID has bothered to keep their social security card? I dont' even understand how you can function without some sort of ID. you can't get a job, you wouldn't think you could get on welfare. . .

 

I don't see why we couldn't give free IDs to those who want to get them to vote. but what about the nuns!

In 2008, it was widely reported that Indiana’s voter ID law disfranchised 12 nuns who were trying to vote in the primary election. The nuns were all over 80 years old, all had a history of voting in past elections, and none of them drove. Their limited mobility made it difficult for them to get an ID.

 

The ID issue is a solution in search of a problem. Republicans like it for the simple fact that higher voter turnout affects them negatively, not because of its "reasonableness". Alternatively, the fact that higher turnout helps Democrats certainly fosters the agreeability with a mandatory voting law from their point of view. I'll take the Democrat argument of moneyed groups being a lesser problem with the same level of skepticism as I do the Republican ID argument until I see some evidence to support either.

Until then, I'm against anything that unnecessarily limits the right to vote or changes the right to vote into something obligatory.

 

if it's a non issue then why not just let them do it? it won't have any effect and you can say I told you so.

 

This



or

 

[video=youtube;UthMHjoNyjA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UthMHjoNyjA[/video]

 

The ink has no down side. We should be doing it now already. The voter ID thing gets sticky.

 

Why? It's a cheap move by Republicans to say that this is a problem that we have to deal with that, oh by the way, negatively affects the group which typically doesn't vote for us. It's a faux outrage for a problem that doesn't exist simply to benefit them politically. The idea of mandatory voting is slightly different in that it's, supposedly, addressing an actual problem, but with no evidence that it's a solution and also happens to benefit Democrats politically.

Both seem like blatant partisan political maneuverings disguised as a solution to a phony outrage or a specious solution to a legit problem.

 

seems to me if it's not going to last on my finder for multiple days, it will be easy to wash off. voter ID isn't sticky at all. how many people who are currently voting don't have an id of any sort? I'm going to guess it's exceedingly rare.

 

So basically its just like the FCC taking on "net neutrality".

 

you are seriously telling me there has never been voter fraud ever? and you also seriously think there is a large group of democratic voters who don't have any form of ID?

 

Never? No. But, the studies have shown that the "problem" is so infinitesimal as to have, in all practicality, 0% influence on elections, i.e. the odds seem to be about the same as winning the lottery. It's an issue cultivated by Republicans that doesn't hold up.

And, yes, you would be surprised at how many people don't have IDs for day to day living.

 

Citizens?

 

and these same people are voting? and those same people who are voting without ID wouldn't get an ID if they needed one to vote? you are telling me the republicans are inventing non existent problems?

 

You seem shocked that a political party could possibly create an outrage in order to benefit themselves.

I'll tell you this, this number of people that vote who don't have IDs is significantly larger than the instances of voter fraud.