Should All Votes Count, Equally?

Who cares if the vast majority do, either?

 

Begs the question as to why you are objecting doesn't it?

 

What are you talking about? It already is making a difference.

http://www.thenation.com/article/wisconsins-voter-id-law-caused-major-problems-at-the-polls-last-night/

 

Because I care about the "integrity of the process". I care, in reality, that it disenfranchises people, in essence, from voting, unnecessarily making a simple process more cumbersome and is clearly designed as a political move.

I start advocating the removal of people who, generally, vote conservative or Republican for specious reasoning or based upon a non-existent problem, then you would have a case against me.

 

What? The argument is about the difficulty of obtaining an ID. You're making it sound impossible. Who's it impossible for?

Clearly rights have obligations on the recipient, no? Like, you know, don't be a criminal. Don't be too sorry to get an ID or prove that you're who registered.

 

More cumbersome? Good grief.

 

Exactly. I don't care who votes. I don't think the presidency that important any more. The bully pulpit isn't strong enough because the personalities willing to take the job are pretty lame. I just can't imagine anyone having a problem with a voter taking steps to prove he / she is allowed to vote.

 

No, no. We keep hearing this silliness about no statistical proof ...

 

Silliness about something that is true? Interesting.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2014/0807/Voter-ID-laws-a-solution-in-search-of-a-nonexistent-problem

 

You read anything about what happened in Wisconsin? Yes, more cumbersome process and totally unnecessary.

 

The place that had record turnout?

 

So, if the number is high it doesn't matter if there are problems with the use of the ID requirement? They reached the threshold for enough votes to ignore any problems entailed?

 

I'd argue it's a sign there isn't a problem

 

The number of people voting isn't the indicator. The indicator is the number of people wrongly denied access to voting or unduly inconvenienced in their attempts to vote versus the number of fraudulent votes caught. A lot of people voting is immaterial.

 

What is worse, a person getting disenfranchised because they couldn't vote or because someone cast a fraudulent vote countering theirs?

 

Who cares how small you perceive the problem of voter fraud to be?

 

Is a shit ton of people voting, in historical numbers, a strong indication that there weren't a lot of people wrongfully denied or unduly I convinced?

 

So you are saying that if we verified 1 million fraudulent votes in this year's election, it still wouldn't be worth adding an ID validation if an estimated 1.1 million voters viewed an ID as an "inconvenience"?

 

So, if you are still rich, what does it matter the tax rate which you have to pay? You're still rich, right? I assume it matters, to you, right? Having higher numbers of people voting doesn't preclude the fact that there were unnecessary denials of voters. Or, are you just trying to prove my accusation that you don't care about certain people voting? I mean, hell, the numbers are high, who cares if some don't get to vote, huh?

 

I'd say that sounds like a problem in search of a solution, which is the opposite of the situation right now.