Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is true - it's also true that a student can use their home address/ID to vote in one place and their student ID to vote in another place. Helps to explain why college campuses are so popular with Leftists for their Campaign Rallies and registration drives. Double Dipping
I read Eric Holders lawsuit against the Texas Voter ID - 1st item on his list of complaints was the Student ID.
I've read about the outrage over the student ID thing for years, and no matter how many times people explain the reasoning, it never sinks in. It makes a great rage point for people who don't want to dig too deep.
I'm sure the Texas AG was able to argue that first point of Eric Holder's easily.
So prove it or keep searching for the obvious voter fraud that now one has been able to find.
Prove that it's not happening. The only way to prove it is to require voter ID. It's not onerous. If Grandma was born in her mother's bedroom 80 years ago, but has voted in every election since 1957, then give her a waiver of that requirement. I would be fine with that. It's not the elderly people who may not even know what year they were born that are the problem. It's the people who vote in multiple districts, or who aren't eligible to vote that are the problem. And we know that happens. Even if it's not massive (what is definition of massive anyway), if 300 people voted illegally, they canceled out 300 legal votes. That's not acceptable.
Prove that it's not happening. The only way to prove it is to require voter ID. It's not onerous. If Grandma was born in her mother's bedroom 80 years ago, but has voted in every election since 1957, then give her a waiver of that requirement. I would be fine with that. It's not the elderly people who may not even know what year they were born that are the problem. It's the people who vote in multiple districts, or who aren't eligible to vote that are the problem. And we know that happens. Even if it's not massive (what is definition of massive anyway), if 300 people voted illegally, they canceled out 300 legal votes. That's not acceptable.
That would be backwards, normally laws are created to address a specific problem based on facts not conjecture. Did you ever wonder why all this avalanche of new voter restrictions came into being since 2008, coincidence?
In Texas, they will give you an ID for free Additionally, you don't need to have an ID, transportation or even money for a stamp to vote by mail.
If Texas didn't require an ID, I could illegally vote dozens of times without ever being caught. Nobody would ever know.
Read it. You'll see your assumption is not based on fact in Texas, so where is it a fact?
Here, read THIS Texas just got spanked by the Appellate Court
"The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed previous rulings that the 2011 voter ID law — which stipulates the types of photo identification election officials can and cannot accept at the polls — does not comply with the Voting Rights Act. The full court's ruling delivered the strongest blow yet to what is widely viewed as the nation’s strictest voter ID law. Under the law, most citizens (some, like people with disabilities, can be exempt) must show one of a handful of types of identification before their ballots can be counted: a state driver's license or ID card, a concealed handgun license, a U.S. passport, a military ID card, or a U.S citizenship certificate with a photo. Texas is among nine states categorized as requiring "strict photo ID," and its list of acceptable forms is the shortest."
Here, read THIS Texas just got spanked by the Appellate Court
"The U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed previous rulings that the 2011 voter ID law — which stipulates the types of photo identification election officials can and cannot accept at the polls — does not comply with the Voting Rights Act. The full court's ruling delivered the strongest blow yet to what is widely viewed as the nation’s strictest voter ID law. Under the law, most citizens (some, like people with disabilities, can be exempt) must show one of a handful of types of identification before their ballots can be counted: a state driver's license or ID card, a concealed handgun license, a U.S. passport, a military ID card, or a U.S citizenship certificate with a photo. Texas is among nine states categorized as requiring "strict photo ID," and its list of acceptable forms is the shortest."
Ok, so the court decided against common sense and the citizens. It's happened before and it will happen again.
Some judges are retarded.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
