In general, if we have universal ID’s, then it makes sense… There are a segment of the poor that just don’t have ID, and it currently adversely affects one party more than the other.
Once you require ID, then republicans start adding roadblocks and requirements that make it tougher for classes of people.
On top of all that, it is an attempt to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. Non-citizens are not attempting to vote.
This right here. It’s not a problem with voter ID. It’s a problem with getting the ID. Cost, accessibility, and prerequisites are all roadblocks. Those prerequisites all tend to be issues for the poorer people that tend to vote democrat. Right up there with refusal to make election day a holiday, making mail-in ballots a fight, reducing voting locations, making offers of water to people in long voting lines illegal…. Poorer people work maybe multiple jobs and can’t take the time off or spend time in long lines, so that’s all designed to reduce the democratic vote count.
IDs can be full of stupid bureaucracy to get. Eg if you are homeless, how will you get 2 pieces of mail with a home address? And in some places, IDs cost $50 or more. IDs are not the only way to identify someone - if you forget your ID before flying, there are alternative ways to identify you. The DMV has long wait times and IDs are often mailed to people, the delay could impact voting if done shortly before election day. And disabled people may not be able to wait in line at the DMV. The DMV has limited hours as well.
It’s more important to protect someone’s right to vote than to enforce an arbitrary ID rule.
So how would this system prevent people from voting multiple times or voting as someone they’re not? Could you elaborate on what you meant when you said “alternative ways”? I’m imagining something like fingerprints or retina scans, both of which take more time and money than a simple ID.
Also I’m not too familiar with the DMV, but isn’t that for driver’s licenses only? Surely that’s not the only way to get an ID in the US?
I guess my point is rather than allowing voting without ID, there should be better systems in place to provide everyone with an ID.
It’s the DMV or a passport in the US. Since nearly everyone drives in the US, the main form of ID is a drivers license. They tacked the non-driver ID onto the DMV as well because they were already doing most IDs.
There should be a better way to provide everyone with IDs. But that should be done first before tying such an important right to it.
The US as a country is carefully designed to not function properly. The federal government doesn’t issue IDs, so it’s up to the states (why even have a government if states have so much power? Nonsense.). State IDs aren’t always free, so instead of campaigning for that, Democrats instead claim that voter ID laws are racist.
do you have any evidence that andrew wakedield’s 1998 paper, in the lancet, was backed and funded by the kremlin? That doesn’t seem to be in any of the contemporary reporting on the paper?
blaming russia without evidence for all things is the one thing that did start during trump’s campaign.
None of these mention andrew wakefield, and they’re all from two decades after his study, that started the modern antivax movement, was published.
The modern anti vaccine movement was not started by russians. The fact that russians chose to join in two decades later does not make them responsible for its origins.
The problems with vaccines started with andrew wakefield. Republicans have been pushing for voter ID laws for decades.
none of this started with trump.
Yeah
2012:
2024:
95% of Republicans for voter ID hasn’t changed before/after Trump
Why are democrats not as supportive of ID laws? I would assume it’s obvious you need an ID to vote, or am I missing something here?
In general, if we have universal ID’s, then it makes sense… There are a segment of the poor that just don’t have ID, and it currently adversely affects one party more than the other.
Once you require ID, then republicans start adding roadblocks and requirements that make it tougher for classes of people.
On top of all that, it is an attempt to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. Non-citizens are not attempting to vote.
This right here. It’s not a problem with voter ID. It’s a problem with getting the ID. Cost, accessibility, and prerequisites are all roadblocks. Those prerequisites all tend to be issues for the poorer people that tend to vote democrat. Right up there with refusal to make election day a holiday, making mail-in ballots a fight, reducing voting locations, making offers of water to people in long voting lines illegal…. Poorer people work maybe multiple jobs and can’t take the time off or spend time in long lines, so that’s all designed to reduce the democratic vote count.
IDs can be full of stupid bureaucracy to get. Eg if you are homeless, how will you get 2 pieces of mail with a home address? And in some places, IDs cost $50 or more. IDs are not the only way to identify someone - if you forget your ID before flying, there are alternative ways to identify you. The DMV has long wait times and IDs are often mailed to people, the delay could impact voting if done shortly before election day. And disabled people may not be able to wait in line at the DMV. The DMV has limited hours as well.
It’s more important to protect someone’s right to vote than to enforce an arbitrary ID rule.
So how would this system prevent people from voting multiple times or voting as someone they’re not? Could you elaborate on what you meant when you said “alternative ways”? I’m imagining something like fingerprints or retina scans, both of which take more time and money than a simple ID.
Also I’m not too familiar with the DMV, but isn’t that for driver’s licenses only? Surely that’s not the only way to get an ID in the US?
I guess my point is rather than allowing voting without ID, there should be better systems in place to provide everyone with an ID.
It’s the DMV or a passport in the US. Since nearly everyone drives in the US, the main form of ID is a drivers license. They tacked the non-driver ID onto the DMV as well because they were already doing most IDs.
There should be a better way to provide everyone with IDs. But that should be done first before tying such an important right to it.
The US as a country is carefully designed to not function properly. The federal government doesn’t issue IDs, so it’s up to the states (why even have a government if states have so much power? Nonsense.). State IDs aren’t always free, so instead of campaigning for that, Democrats instead claim that voter ID laws are racist.
deleted by creator
Wakefield was way late to the game.
This is from the 1890s.
Those were backed and funded by the Kremlin.
As was Trump.
Edit:
https://www.state.gov/russias-pillars-of-disinformation-and-propaganda-report/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anti-vax-movement-russian-trolls-fueled-anti-vaccination-debate-in-us-by-spreading-misinformation-twitter-study/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/russian-misinformation-seeks-to-confound-not-convince/
…
do you have any evidence that andrew wakedield’s 1998 paper, in the lancet, was backed and funded by the kremlin? That doesn’t seem to be in any of the contemporary reporting on the paper?
blaming russia without evidence for all things is the one thing that did start during trump’s campaign.
Oh for Pete’s sake:
https://www.state.gov/russias-pillars-of-disinformation-and-propaganda-report/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anti-vax-movement-russian-trolls-fueled-anti-vaccination-debate-in-us-by-spreading-misinformation-twitter-study/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/russian-misinformation-seeks-to-confound-not-convince/
None of these mention andrew wakefield, and they’re all from two decades after his study, that started the modern antivax movement, was published.
The modern anti vaccine movement was not started by russians. The fact that russians chose to join in two decades later does not make them responsible for its origins.