Democrat opposition to Voter ID isn't really that rational. Because opposition puts them on the wrong-end of public opinion. It'd probably be better on an electoral position to just politically accept the laws, allow the courts to strike down the stricter laws, and create party infrastructure/organs (and/or work with outside groups) to assist voters without voter ID (and convince them to vote Democrat).
But as this thread proved, I think it's just all about leftists being unable to resist the opportunity to slam people who disagree with them as racist.
Public opinion supported the Iraq war at one point.Is that a bad thing?
In the long run going against public opinion at that time was a boon to president Obama.
Is that a good thing?
EVERYONE that posts on this forum that can shave has an approved state issued ID. Until this whole voter ID thing started I had no idea so many people didn't have that type of ID. We on this forum are a privileged lot. A lot of people in America fall into that category and as a result they don't understand the plight of people on the margins of society.
Because having and not having an ID (which every state that has passed such a law has, to my knowledge, guaranteed you can get one for free) is such a clear sign of what class you belong to, as opposed to, say, income or net worth?
I don't think it is right or noble to ignore those people.
OK. Nobody's saying anybody should ignore them.
I think the Democratic party has to educate people like you and me.
That sounds very ominous, but thankfully it's doubtful the Democratic Party will begin such an initiative, considering it would almost certainly backfire anyway.
If the NRA can whip people into a frenzy about gun rights I think the Democratic party can at least whip up some empathy for voting rights.
Considering voting rights aren't being challenged at all, whereas gun rights (not that seriously, but c'mon; wanting to ban assault rifles is an accepted position in certain circles, wanting to ban voting isn't.)
It'd probably be better on an electoral position to just politically accept the laws, allow the courts to strike down the stricter laws, and create party infrastructure/organs (and/or work with outside groups) to assist voters without voter ID (and convince them to vote Democrat).
That should not be the job of political parties.That's right, it should be the job of the voters themselves.
The state has a responsibility here.
To make sure voting fraud doesn't occur?
Even if Obama himself drove some of these people to get the ID and paid for it himself out of pocket there would still be problems. This lady was driven by a Republican law maker to get her id...
Link. Er, OK. Computer issues.
This monkey business should not be going on two months before a presidential election.
Computers, being machines, have a tendency to behave in a certain way irregardless of election cycles.
Voter ID if necessary should be tax payer funded and only enforced once a certain percentage of registered voters have the ID.
Why? That's like saying we should allow everybody to drive until a certain percentage of the populace has a driver's license...
then we can start requiring it.
The state in a nonpartisan way should educate and assist people to get the id... again, if it is shown to be necessary.
I agree the state has a responsibility to tell people about the things it does ('educate') but it's already doing that...and I don't see a reason the state should assist people in getting an ID.
