My position isn't, potentially, infringing upon anyone's right to vote, so whether or not people care about my position isn't important.
Our government has already established that ID verification to enjoy a right does not qualify as infringement. So you can cross that one off your argument list.
Wut? That's just a terrible comparison. A better analogy would be if we had a record number of rich people could we claim that it's harder to get rich today than the prior year. Once again. No I don't particularly care if .0000001% of people are inconvenienced or can't vote if 99.99999% seem to be voting just fine.
You keep arguing volume. Why? It's either occurring or it's not. 1 million or 5 million votes, the number is irrelevant. If people are being denied, it shouldn't be dismissed simply because the numbers overall are good.
But with voter fraud, there has to be a specific volume, right? Totally different concept there, for whatever reason. What's the minimum needed before the problem is serious enough to address?
No, the volume argument is stupid, really. My analogy is better because you are saying it doesn't matter if some people are screwed because, in the end, it works out ok (i.e. there's still a bunch of votes or there's a bunch of money, so who cares if it's right or unfair). But, one, it's more than the percentage in which you state. Although, it is interesting that the percentage that you "don't care" about not voting is about accurate for the number of suspected voter fraud cases, which you do care about.
I don't know about a real number, but the study which was done put the number of suspected, not confirmed, suspected cases of fraud at 31 out of over a billion votes over a period of about ten years. Since the number of voters in Wisconsin that were denied, possibly, unfairly is around 3,000, just in a primary,then I'm pretty sure of which side the math favors.
Wisconsin's problem was execution. It wouldn't be rocket science to make this practical. And 31 out of a billion is pretty funny. 31 were found. That doesn't mean more don't exist.
Yeah I don't particularly care if some lazy ass person isn't willing to sit in line for an hour to get an ID, but I do care if someone is defrauding the system. Please don't tell me it's impossible for anyone legally in this country to get an ID
Six months. The dude in the article took six months trying to get his ID situation taken care of and it's not as if he's the only one by any stretch of the imagination. All for remedying a problem that doesn't ****ing exist. People aren't defrauding the government, at least not in this manner. It's easy for you, so you don't give a shit about anyone else, I get it. What's easy for you shouldn't be the basis for a law.
It's actually a very good one, an excellent one, in fact One that has merit because somebody actually bothered to look at them, unlike you. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/http:/www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/a-comprehensive-investigation-of-voter-impersonation-finds-31-credible-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/
So it's your opinion that 31 or fewer out of a billion is a very precise account of all the fraudulent votes.
You think it's common for it to take six months to get an id? I guarantee you the voter fraud number is higher than the people who can't get an ID in 6 months
You are going to have to explain how they are going to find fraud if no one is looking for it? This is like telling me no one smokes pot in Santa Cruz because the city doesn't arrest anyone for smoking pot anymore.
