Republicans trying to disenfranchise Dem. voters

[TonyV]

www.frequency.com/video/republicans-already-trying-to/3276204

[bo862]

How can you allow the people that run for public office to pass laws that affect voting and expect them to keep it honest?

[jobs1stb4polarbear]

What's PMSNBC bitching about now?

Show ID, one vote....Show ID, one vote....

While I generally am offended when asked to show an ID, the one exception is when I'm being asked to prove who I say I am. Not only do I think it's OK for states to require people to prove who they are when they're voting, I think every state should. Not because I'm worried about widespread voter fraud but because it's just commonsense. To those who worry that people without ID won't be able to vote I say, "so"....... It's not that hard to get an ID,(hell my 4th grader has one, it even has finger prints on it) and if you don't have one you're probably not that involved in your community anyway.

........In instances where you're saying you're a specific person - someone registered to vote, someone who has an electronic ticket for a flight, someone who is claiming they're the person listed on a credit card - it makes sense to require people to prove who they are.

[keithf]

when i vote for my committeeperson at work, i have to provide ID. why should we settle for less when voting for our leaders?

[bo862]

“when i vote for my committeeperson at work, i have to provide ID. why should we settle for less when voting for our leaders?”

The issue brought up is not whether you should have to show ID, but what types of ID are acceptable. The republicans are trying to make it easier for their hardcore voters and harder for the democratic voters.

It’s a simple matter of trying to manipulate the election to your own advantage. This should be illegal regardless of party affiliation. In fact, politicians should not have any ability to influence the voter turnout.

[keithf]

Mar 19, 2011 22:03:16 GMT -5 bo862 said:

“when i vote for my committeeperson at work, i have to provide ID. why should we settle for less when voting for our leaders?”

The issue brought up is not whether you should have to show ID, but what types of ID are acceptable. The republicans are trying to make it easier for their hardcore voters and harder for the democratic voters.

It’s a simple matter of trying to manipulate the election to your own advantage. This should be illegal regardless of party affiliation. In fact, politicians should not have any ability to influence the voter turnout.

i didnt watch the video, so maybe i am against the republicans here. but in order to vote, a person should have to provide an ID.

[ktpelec]

I have to provide an ID when I sign the book at my local polling place.

[oldsbdcjim]

Rachel Madcow and her video is a bunch of blah blah blah. What's wrong with showing an ID to vote. If Chicago had been checking ID's, maybe we wouldn't have all all the dead people voting. If we had ID's maybe we can eliminate illegal aliens from voting. Voting ID's, Gee what a novel idea.

[bo862]

I believe everyone agrees that showing an id is a good thing, including “Rachel Madcow.”

The problem is that republicans are trying to make it as inconvenient as possible for democratic voters in order to affect future elections

[jobs1stb4polarbear]

....and the denial begins

[bo862]

Good grief, that is hilarious. If you do not have a credible position in your argument just change the subject.

“If you cant dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bull.” Well done

[jobs1stb4polarbear]

Good grief, do all democrats email that quote to each other....its really gets old......ooohhh....I have a new one, "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with Quotes"

[bo862]

Instead of hijacking this thread any further, do you have anything reasonable to add to the discussion about republicans disenfranchising democratic voters.

Or better yet, does anyone else have a different view of why this should be allowed.

[jobs1stb4polarbear]

I apologize bo862, I meant to say.. denial borderline paranoia!

These "disenfranchise voter" BS....its just gets old....and sad to say you just dont want to take a couple steps back and look at the big picture here.....

.....Election policy debates like photo ID and same-day registration have become so fierce around the country because they are founded more on passionate belief than proven fact.......(...and frankly I tend to avoid close minded(narrow)....like your self not to see the big picture!.... One side(Republicans) is convinced fraud is rampant..... the other(Democrats) believes that disenfranchisement is widespread. Neither can point to much in the way of evidence to support their position, so they simply turn up the volume......)hint....PMSnbc video above)

.....before you come back at me with another QUOTE...yes...Although elections officials say there are occasional cases of fraud, experts say the battle lines are drawn largely along deeply partisan - and largely theoretical - lines.

Tittle: Republican trying to disenfranchise Democrat voters" is just too simplistic for me..... Why? because I hear it every time an election is close or from pissed off Democrats for losing(or worried they might lose)......Remember all the articles and news organizations like PMSnbc bitched about this shit already in 2008....and the worked out well for republicans didnt it!.....

....Remember, Denial borderline Paranoia....let it go my friend!

[bo862]

It must be true; such a free, democratic and Christian society would never try to affect an election by preventing certain people from voting. The whole Voting Rights Act of 1965 was due to denial and paranoia. This shows you the extent of the "paranoia."

www.core-online.org/History/voting_rights.htm


* * * * *

In the century following Reconstruction, African Americans in the South faced overwhelming obstacles to voting. Despite the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which had enfranchised black men and women, southern voter registration boards used poll taxes, literacy tests, and other bureaucratic impediments to deny African Americans their legal rights. Southern blacks also risked harassment, intimidation, economic reprisals, and physical violence when they tried to register or vote. As a result, African Americans had little if any political power, either locally or nationally. In Mississippi, for instance, only five percent of eligible blacks were registered to vote in 1960.





President Johnson signs the Voting Rights Act of 1965

while Dr. King and others look on
The Voting Rights Act of 1965, grew out of both public protest and private political negotiation. Starting in 1961, CORE joined SCLC in staging nonviolent demonstrations in Georgia, and Birmingham. They hoped to attract national media attention and pressure the U.S. government to protect Black's constitutional rights. Newspaper photos and TV broadcasts of Birmingham's racist police commissioner, Eugene "Bull" Connor, and his men violently attacking the protesters with water hoses, police dogs, and nightsticks awakened the consciences of whites.



Selma, Alabama was the site of the next campaign. In the first three months of 1965, Local residents and visiting volunteers held a series of marches demanding an equal right to vote. As in Birmingham, they met with violence and imprisonment. In the worst attack yet, on Sunday, March 7, a group of Alabama state troopers, local sheriff's officers, and unofficial possemen used tear gas and clubs against 600 peaceful marchers. By now, the nation was watching.




President Lyndon B. Johnson made civil rights one of his administration's top priorities, using his formidable political skills to pass the Twenty-Fourth Amendment, which outlawed poll taxes, in 1964. Now, a week after "Bloody Sunday" in Selma, Johnson gave a televised speech before Congress in which he denounced the assault. Two days later, the President sent the Voting Rights bill to Congress.







The resolution, signed into law on August 6, 1965, empowered the federal government to oversee voter registration and elections in counties that had used tests to determine voter eligibility or where registration or turnout had been less than 50 percent in the 1964 presidential election. It also banned discriminatory literacy tests and expanded voting rights for non-English speaking Americans.



President Johnson and Dr. King congratulate each other on the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965

The law's effects were wide and powerful. By 1968, nearly 60 percent of eligible African Americans were registered to vote in Mississippi, and other southern states showed similar improvement. Between 1965 and 1990, the number of black state legislators and members of Congress rose from two to 160.



The Voting Rights Act was extended in 1970, 1975, and 1982. Some key provisions are scheduled to expire in 2007. Despite some setbacks and debates, the Voting Rights Act had an enormous impact. It re-enfranchised black southerners, helping elect African Americans at the local, state, and national levels.



* * * * *

[marcus]

ok I watched it but what ID are they wanting you to have in order to vote?

[bo862]

Knowing the republicans probably a Republican National Committee Membership card... seriously, I don’t know, but it would not be unreasonable to require standardized state id or something. (for college students as well as nra members and seniors)

Making it harder for groups that tend to vote one way and then easier for the opposite voting groups is cheating the whole voting process.