What a shock--Republican brags that voter ID law will help Romney carry Pennsylvania. http://leanforward.msnbc.msn.com/_news/ ... votes?lite

So it wasn't about voter fraud after all. It was about taking votes from Americans who have a legitimate right to vote. Shameful,

Yes, one Republican has a cynical motive, therefore all Republicans are bad and are equally cynical.

The Democratic presumption is that most Republicans are stupidly voting against their class interest because they are sitting on the couch and just watching Fox TV and advertising that they can't sort out. They are rubes. They vote against national health care because they want to protect their medicare. However, Republican rubes are smart enough to carry around identification.

Meanwhile Democrats are smart enough to truly understand the world including the pillaging of the 1% and global warming and a myrial of complex issues to vote correctly. However, they just can't manage to carry around i.d.

That's somewhat of an extrapolation in your second post, Ray.

He's not just a random Republican, by the way, he's one of the guys who has steered through the changes to the law that he's talking about. That's why he's taking 'credit' for what he hoped will deliver a Romney delegation from PA. I don't think it's unreasonable to take what the guy says as being his reasons.

Is it unfair to say 'all' Republicans are as bad! (yes, but freeman has not done that)

Is it unfair to question whether he's typical of 'some' Republicans, particularly those with influence over the laws and who have an interest in helping their party over the other? I'd say no to that.

The latest Quinnapac poll has Obama up by 6 in Pennsylvania. Thats a lot of voting to suppress if his claim of impending success is going to be true.

I suspect the admission by the majority house leader will cause more damage then the actual affects of voter suppression...

rickyp wrote:The latest Quinnapac poll has Obama up by 6 in Pennsylvania.

What may be a problem with this is that it is a registered voter poll and while Democrats out register Republicans in PA, they tend to vote in a lesser percentage. For example, in my little neck of the woods, which is one of the important Philly metro counties, the Democrats out register the Republicans by about 5 or 6%. Yet, there is almost always a 5-10% voter advantage in favor of the Republicans.

Looking at the Quinnipiac poll, we see that Democrats were over sampled by 8%. Also, Romney leads with the Independents by 6% and that 10% of the total asked are undecided. I will be the first to admit that I am not good at math so I could be wrong but given these facts, if the Democratic turn out is at it historical rates (especially compared to Republicans and Independents) and most of the undecideds break for Romney, which given the results of other questions in the poll isn't that far a possibility, that 7 point lead doesn't look all that steady.

freeman2 wrote:So it wasn't about voter fraud after all. It was about taking votes from Americans who have a legitimate right to vote. Shameful,

No. This has comment has to do more with the belief that there is massive voter fraud in certain counties. There is a belief in almost all senior party officials that certain counties in Pa have a large number of people registered to vote within municipalites they do not actually live in. Because it is based entirely on anectdotal evidence and there is no proof, I will not explain it any more unless asked. Further, I am not trying to support the validity of the belief. Rather, I am just explaing what it is Rep. Turzai meant. The guy is notorious for having a strong case of foot in mouth disease.

freeman2 wrote:What a shock--Republican brags that voter ID law will help Romney carry Pennsylvania. http://leanforward.msnbc.msn.com/_news/ ... votes?lite

So it wasn't about voter fraud after all. It was about taking votes from Americans who have a legitimate right to vote. Shameful,

Wait. Is there more to what he said? He said that Voter ID is going to allow Romney to win PA.

Where did he say he wanted to suppress votes? You characterize it as "bragging." Why isn't it just a "prediction?"

Again, if someone can't vote because they don't have an ID, how do they drive a car, get cold or allergy medicine, buy alcohol, pick up prescription drugs, etc.?

archduke

There is a belief in almost all senior party officials that certain counties in Pa have a large number of people registered to vote within municipalites they do not actually live in

.

How does that affect voting for senate or president?
Just wondering... Shouldn't proof of pennsylvania residence be enough?

rickyp wrote:How does that affect voting for senate or president?
Just wondering... Shouldn't proof of pennsylvania residence be enough?

Not sure what you are asking here so I will answer by explaining the belief more.

It is my understanding, under the old law all you had to do was fill out and mail in a voter's registration form. It asked for your name and address but there was no requirement to provide proof you actually resided there. Further there was no requirement to show id when you voted. So, theoretically, a person from New Jersry could mail in a voter's registration form with a PA address, then drive over on election day to vote.

There is a strong belief within the higher ups of the state Republican Party that the Democratic Party in Pennsylvania has people from out of state fill out the form and register to vote in certain PA counties that have large Democratic registration. It will then bus those out of state voters in during Presidential races so they vote for the Democratic candidate.

There are two items of "proof" usually giving in defense of this belief. First is the huge disparity in registered Democratic voters in these Counties and the actual turn out of Democratic voters in non-presidential races. There is a large number of registered Democrats who only vote in the General election of Presidential year. Basically this means, of 8 elections (4 years of primary and general elections) they only vote once.

The second item being people who have claimed to have seen buses with out of state license plates (the biggest being NY) bring people into vote.

Like I said, it was purely anectdotal evidence. I am not endorsing the belief or saying that I agree with it. I am only relating what Rep. Turzai was most likely referencing when he made his comment.

What I really want to see is evidence that showing ID suppresses the legitimate electorate.

The opposite side wants evidence of fraud. Well, you can only prove fraud if there is some mechanism for catching the culprits. With voting, you have the perfect storm: motive without any real chance of getting caught. As I've said, NO ONE checks ID in MA. So, what prevents me from voting 15-20 times?

Answer: personal integrity.

Now, if a party were willing to put winning above ethics, it seems obvious they could swing a close election. Why should that even be a possibility?

I don't know the PA law. What I do know is that similar laws generally have provisions for free ID and/or provisional ballots (if, for example, you forget your ID at home). So, what about PA? How would people actually be disenfranchised (in practice, not via the theoretical "fear factor")?

So, with free-ID, ID Check at the polling station for EVERYONE, and the ability for provisional ballots if need be, there is still an issue? Whatever could be the issue?

Perhaps it is that the ID's are not personally delivered, and tattooed on the foreheads of those requesting them to ensure they are not left at home. Surely some effort and responsibility needs to be applied to exercise the right to vote?

Freeman: what is the outrage?

See this:

ALL voters will be required to show a photo ID before voting at a polling place in the November 2012 Election

See a complete list of acceptable photo IDs. If you do not have one of these IDs and require one for voting purposes, you may be entitled to get one FREE OF CHARGE at a PennDOT Driver License Center. NO ONE legally entitled to vote will be denied the right to do so.

Did you actually watch your own video? As soon as you saw Sharpton, that should have been a warning to you. Not only does the PA rep not say anything close to "suppressing the vote," but the law doesn't appear to do anything of the sort (see above).

So, again, what's the problem?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/thu-august-16-2012-rob-corddry

Great Daily Show opening monologue.

Jon Stewart asks why ID is being asked for in Pennsylvania, and hours were being selectively reduced in Ohio counties. The Ohio situation I agree with. It should definitely be equal treatment across the entire state. To select a few counties to get special treatment is wrong. As for Pennsylvania though, as long as EVERYONE has to produce a photo ID to vote there is no inequality.

All in all, the Stewart bit is funny.

bbauska wrote:As for Pennsylvania though, as long as EVERYONE has to produce a photo ID to vote there is no inequality.

Huh? That assumes that 'EVERYONE' can obtain a photo ID in an equal manner.

Here are the people from Pennsylvania who are taking their cases to challenge the ID law and it's implementation:

http://www.aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket ... lients.htm

I believe the first on the list has now obtained her voter ID. Some others have done but had to pay for documentation in order to do so. One, who didn't get her ID first time because her marriage certificate was in Hebrew apparently used political connections to get a temporary ID.

Many of the situations involve people born out of PA, but in the USA, who don't have a copy of a birth certificate.