Democrats and Media Already Trying to Spin 2022 Losses Over Voter ID
“Interviews with more than three dozen Democratic elected officials, party operatives and voting rights activists across the country reveal growing concern”
The 2022 midterms are still over a year away, Democrats and some media outlets are already making excuses for Dem losses. To them, it is impossible for Democrats to lose because voters are rejecting their policies.
It must be based on something nefarious. Something Republicans did.
Something like voter ID.
Politico reports:
‘We’re f—ed’: Dems fear turnout catastrophe from GOP voting laws
After Georgia Republicans passed a restrictive voting law in March, Democrats here began doing the math.
The state’s new voter I.D. requirement for mail-in ballots could affect the more than 270,000 Georgians lacking identification. The provision cutting the number of ballot drop boxes could affect hundreds of thousands of voters who cast absentee ballots that way in 2020 — and that’s just in the populous Atlanta suburbs alone.
It didn’t take long before the implications became clear to party officials and voting rights activists. In a state that Joe Biden carried by fewer than 12,000 votes last year, the new law stood to wipe out many of the party’s hard-fought gains — and put them at a decisive disadvantage.
Democrats in other states where similarly restrictive voting laws have passed are coming to the same conclusion. Interviews with more than three dozen Democratic elected officials, party operatives and voting rights activists across the country reveal growing concern — bordering on alarm — about the potential impact in 2022 of the raft of new laws passed by Republican legislatures, particularly in some of the nation’s most competitive battleground states.
Questioning the outcome of the 2020 election is forbidden and can even get you banned on social media. Prepare for that policy to be reversed the minute Democrats lose the House and possibly the Senate.
Democrats have a long track record of questioning election outcomes.
Fixed: Democrat Insurrectionists laying foundation to dispute legitimacy of their 2022 losses, just like they did in 2016, and 2004, and 2000. https://t.co/DDtwecW13n
— Legal Insurrection (@LegInsurrection) July 26, 2021
Sometimes the narrative shifts so fast it’s difficult to keep up.
NEW: Democratic operatives have only begun to calculate the coming ballot carnage from new Republican voting laws https://t.co/iBYnui8EyD
— Blake News (@blakehounshell) July 26, 2021
Wait Blake… I was told casting doubt and even just asking questions about our elections was a danger to the very fabric of our freedom and country… Funny how all that changed https://t.co/RkPvL14xKT
— Ahmed Al Asliken (@assliken) July 26, 2021
This article focuses on voter ID and bizarrely does not mention the fact that voter ID is overwhelmingly supported by voters of every race, creed and color:https://t.co/eHvMoDupIa
— Brian Doherty (@BDOH) July 26, 2021
Money quote pic.twitter.com/tdmHb1Fwlf
— Joe Gabriel Simonson (@SaysSimonson) July 26, 2021
If you’re confused by this new objection to voter ID, you should be. Just three weeks ago, Democrats were saying they have never been opposed to voter ID.
Democrats have been allowed to expand early voting, easing restrictions on absentee ballots and mail-in voting for years. It is high time to get back to basics.
Saying that it may take months to know the outcome of an election is unacceptable. If you want people to trust the outcomes of elections, they have to be made more secure and efficient.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Better headline: Democrats concerned that more secure elections will reduce their ability to win by cheating.
Better headline #2: Democrats fear honest elections.
Democrats don’t “fear” in the proper sense of the word as if anything would happen to them if they get caught. More like “hope” in the sense that they hope to continue getting their way.
See, we (will have) lost because our ability to cheat, as we always do, is being unfairly and unconstitutionally impeded!
“Cheater suppression!!”
It is doubtful their cheating will be suppressed. They will just cheat in other ways.
In other words, when they can’t cheat they can’t win. Yeah, and we’re supposed to believe the pedophile-in-chief was elected legitimately too … not likely.
Liberal Playbook: Keep your rent a mob ready for combat.
The original Politico article says there are more than 270,000 Georgians lacking acceptable voter IDs, but does not present any data to back up that claim. I cannot believe there are that many registered voters in Georgia who do not have an acceptable, government-issued, photo ID. Especially when every state that requires photo ID to vote makes them free to obtain.
I wondered that myself. Does this mean over a quarter of a million residents of Georgia are driving without a license? If all of these “voting rights” organizations can register people to vote, deliver and collect absentee ballots, why can’t they also help them get photo IDs?
Or are they just making stuff up?
Sure there are. And they’re all in K-10. Or younger.
They are residents of the cemeteries.
No, they are not. The count of those without ID is of actual living US citizens, not of “registered voters”. Or at least, of people who credibly claim to be US citizens and there’s no specific reason to think they aren’t. And some small number of them could not easily get ID, e.g. because they have no way of proving that they were in fact born in the USA. No birth certificates. There are a lot of older people in that situation.
Having been a voter registrar, it is not that difficult. If you are operating successfully in society, you probably already have an acceptable ID. What all voter registrants need is: Proof of identity, Residence, Citizenship, and Age. A Birth certificate or naturalization certificate satisfies Identity, Citizenship, and Age. Residence is proven using something official with your name and address on it – a lease, a deed, bank statement, utility bill, etc.
The problem isn’t with believing that some people have difficulty coming up with these – the problem is believing the 270,000 number. For example, if every Georgia resident over the age of 85 didn’t have an ID, that would only total 135,000. Assuming these are people born in GA, GA, like most states, began collecting vital statistics on births in 1919, meaning you’d have to be over 100 years old to not be able to get a birth certificate from the state by following their normal process. If they are receiving ANY form of government assistance, they would have had to produce the same documents.
Who are the un-ID’d? How did they come up with 270K?
The 270,000 number purports to be that of the number of Georgians who have no government-issued photo ID that is acceptable under the new law, not the number who can’t get one. The number who can’t get one, or would have significant difficulty getting one, is much smaller — but significantly higher than zero.
Georgia may have begun collecting birth stats in 1919, but it was not thoroughly enforced in cases of home birth, which was extremely common, and especially in rural areas. I suspect it was also not thoroughly enforced in the case of black births. So there are still a certain number of elderly people, especially black ones, who have no birth certificates and thus can’t prove they’re eligible to vote, even though they almost certainly are. Not even the Dems claim their number is 270,000, but their words are deliberately crafted to create such an impression on someone who doesn’t read carefully.
Yes, there are large numbers of people without a valid government-issued ID, and some number of them can’t easily get one. Both of these things the Dems tell us are true, but they don’t mention that the second number is much smaller than the first.
It’s like saying ” of Georgians are ill, some of them terminally; It’s certainly true, but without putting a number on the fatally ill subset, it’s dishonest.
They also ignore that, as you say, if the “voting rights” people helped them get ID instead of using them as a weapon to try to weaken election integrity, they could easily reduce that number even further.
No, it doesn’t mean that those people are driving without a license. It means they don’t drive. This is a blind spot many people arguing on our side have: they assume that everyone drives, which is just not the case.
Oops.
should have been “<some large number> of Georgians are ill”. I forgot to escape the <
Sure there are. The difference is that they call them undocumented voters, but we just call them illegal aliens.
I still think they will try to cancel the election over something or other.
Personally I think that is highly unlikely. Even the Soviet Union, Red China and revolutionary Iran went through the motions of having elections (no matter how crooked the process).
But it is possible – in fact, highly probable – that the Biden* regime will use the Wuflu as an excuse to ban in-person voting (by executive order, laws rammed through Congress, or a nationwide injunction by a Hawaiian Federal judge), mandate voting by mail only, legalizing nationwide ballot harvesting, and extending the 2022 elections over several weeks or even months.
Using the Wuhan to mandate mail-in voting nationwide is Plan A.
Cancelling the elections due to a ‘national emergency’ on the pretext of ‘white supremacist domestic terrorism’ is probably Plan C.
Plan B is 2020 vote fraud on steroids wherever they can’t mandate ‘no voter ID or signature check’ mail-in voting.
At the moment, they are in a panic over the return of Trump to the scene and he is more popular than ever. They are desperate to “take more direct action means” to stop the vote recounts which are not going well for them at the moment. That is also why they are rigging the Jan 6 “investigation” hearings since they can’t impeach Trump now.
None of their arguments parse nor correlate to the facts. They are just throwing shit against the wall and doing their best to make it stick to Trump. Even the new CDC mask and vaccine testing guidelines are explained as a reaction to the refusal of “Trump zombies” to get vaccinated. Biden called 74 million voters “domestic terrorists”. “The Fauche” specifically blamed Trump voters for the vaccine reluctance. Gov Hair Gel issued his latest word salad expressing similar sentiments but his mumblings don’t have the same comedic quality that Biden’s do and leave listeners with a headache.
This is all about Trump. Only another global economic shutdown would bring about the “big reset” before Trump and his army retake control. Marxist takeovers are never smooth. The big violence happens right after they take charge and begin purging their enemies to consolidate power. This time, it is starting early because of Trump.
If they think they might lose they will try anything. That includes cancelling the elections. Because ‘national emergency’ caused by ‘white supremacist domestic terrorists’
Even if they have to create a false flag ‘domestic terrorist’ incident themselves.
They already know how to do that. The Jan 6 ‘Insurrection’ was at least in part caused by government action and/or deliberate inaction.
They can’t cancel the election. Just as Trump couldn’t, and neither could 0bama before him, or Bush Jr before him. I’ve been hearing the claim that the president would cancel the election every four years since 2004, and it was probably doing the rounds earlier; and the people on each side who believe it are equally crazy. Elections can’t be canceled, and if they are not held then the office to be filled becomes vacant. If no congressional elections are held in 2022, then on Jan 3 2023 the House becomes empty, and the senate is down to 66 or 67 members. There is no possible way for the old congress to continue in office past Jan 3. It would take a constitutional amendment, and that takes 38 state legislatures.
You are assuming a continuance of the rule of law and the Constitution. Consider a more realistic view as expressed by Karl von Clausewitz in Vom Krieg:
“WAR IS A MERE CONTINUATION OF POLICY BY OTHER MEANS.”
We see, therefore, that War is not merely a political act, but also a real political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by other means. All beyond this which is strictly peculiar to War relates merely to the peculiar nature of the means which it uses. That the tendencies and views of policy shall not be incompatible with these means, the Art of War in general and the Commander in each particular case may demand, and this claim is truly not a trifling one. But however powerfully this may react on political views in particular cases, still it must always be regarded as only a modification of them; for the political view is the object, War is the means, and the means must always include the object in our conception.
The American Left has already demonstrated beyond doubt in the last couple of years that both violence and violation of the laws are considered legitimate tactics by them if it gives them what they want at any given moment. What they have stolen by violence and violation of the law they will fight to retain with even more violence and more blatant violations of the law. Elections are how we change governments only until someone in power with a big enough club decrees otherwise. Deciding if that club is in fact big enough will be most untidy, but there is no returning to the concept of assuming good faith on the part of the political opponent after that. TWANLOC.
Subotai Bahadur
I’ve noticed many people assume a continuance of the rule of law and Constitutional ‘guarantees’. They seem incapable of thinking outside of that box and considering possibilities that lie outside of that box.
Despite all of the evidence we’ve seen the last 5+ years that the rule of law no longer applies where and when and for whom certain PTB do not want it applied.
Starting with Hillary and her emails. Right on thru how violent Antifa/BLM offenders are treated. And everything in between.
An obvious current example… Laws regarding border integrity and illegal aliens crossing it are effectively no long enforced when The Regime does not want them enforced.
Not to mention election laws. Including what is in the Constitution WRT who decides how elections are conducted by the states.
We are in a semi-lawless period where laws are selectively enforced, or not, for political reasons.
Considering that you’re either required to or are very likely getting asked to provide photo ID at places such as the doctor’s office, the rental car place, the airport, hotels, restaurants and bars, retail establishments which sell alcohol and cigarettes, in your car if you just pulled over for speeding, and even to acquire a library card, I think it’s pretty well-established in people’s minds that photo ID is necessary simply to function in general.
That being said, a lot can happen between now and next election day 2022, including various statewide general elections this November. If Democrats suffer serious losses or perform below expectations, particularly in places like Virginia, then the operatives can hit the panic button.
I have never been asked for ID — let alone government-issued ID, which is the issue here — at a doctor’s office or a restaurant. Library cards only require proof of address. The people we’re discussing don’t drive, and they certainly don’t fly. Or frequent restaurants, for that matter, not that those require ID. And regardless of what the law may say, it’s extremely rare for anyone who is visibly of age (and most of these people are very visibly of age) to get carded for alcohol or cigarettes.
I do wonder about welfare payments, though. Either these people simply do without those, or a social worker has managed to get them on the rolls without government-issued ID. I don’t really know how that works in practice.
I have been asked for my id buying wine, and I am visibly far past 21. I have also been asked for my id having some delicious gin delivered to my home–I was horrified when the delivery person scanned it with their iPhone before I could grab it back. I have also been asked for my id when picking up prescriptions for pain medication following a painful tooth abscess that required a root canal (I didn’t mind this since I understand some pain meds are closely guarded/monitored). I was constantly asked for my id when dealing with my mother’s passing; even though they had a photocopy of it from before.
Off hand, I can’t think of other instances when I have been asked to show my id, besides when I vote, but I think it’s important to understand that different states, even different counties/towns within states, have different id requirements. Your experience is not universal.
I was addressing p’s claim that government-issued photo ID is needed at a doctor’s office or a restaurant. My experience is that it is not. You did not address those locations.
As for alcohol and cigarettes, the point is that it is common not to get carded, especially if one is about 4 times the legal age, I’m sure it’s even more common that if such a person says they have no ID the store will sell it to them anyway. Especially if the person asking for the ID knows them.
In any case, I did not claim, and need not claim, that my experience is universal. On the contrary, it is p and those who take his position who must claim that their experience is universal. Even one exception to that experience demolishes their argument. They say that it’s impossible to exist without government-issued photo ID, and therefore these people we’re discussing can’t exist. To prove they can exist it’s enough to show one example.
“I have never been asked for ID — let alone government-issued ID, which is the issue here — at a doctor’s office or a restaurant.”
You will, son, you will.
Just last week, I had a medical office demand to scan my DL “so they would have a photo of me.” I told them to take their own picture, it lasts longer.
So I guess requiring photo IDs is back to being Jim Crow. And Oceana has always been at war with Eurasia.
They worry that their now institutionalized system of election fraud cannot stand the strain of honest vote counts. They will, of course, cheat harder and be praised in the media for it. If they steal another election, that will probably be the last one. But that can only go so far before they cannot even pretend it is a real election, OR they will simply have to stage a coup [unresisted by the GOPe].
Subotai Bahadur
One key to keeping vote counts closer to honest is to keep track of the number of registered voters vs. the number of votes cast vs. the number of votes counted. If those numbers don’t line up, the election should be considered invalid.
Should be, but never is in Democrat strongholds like Philly and Detroit. When the number of votes exceeds 100% of eligible voters in a precinct, yet nothing is done, you know the precinct is Democrat.
That never happens. Ever. Not in Detroit, not in Wisconsin, nowhere at all. When you see a claim that it has happened, you know the person making the claim is either an idiot or a fraud.
Which is Judicial Watch?
Number of registered voters isn’t relevant, because the number of votes cast or counted never exceeds that. Also because in some places you can register on the day, so the number is meaningless.
And number of votes cast v counted are kept track of and reported, and they’re almost always identical, or close enough to make no difference at all. I mean, how do you even measure “votes cast”? For in-person voting you can count ballots issued; all that means is that if you mean to cheat at in-person voting you need to have someone actually show up, somehow convince the clerks to issue a ballot, and then cast it. Or, if you’re at a polling place where the other party has no observers (certain areas of Philadelphia are notorious for this), just before closing you “issue” 200 ballots to people who never showed up, and cast them all. The numbers will balance, of course, but will be no indication that there was no fraud.
The real mine for fraud, though, is in postal votes. That’s why Dems claim that requiring ID for in-person voting is unnecessary, because “Fraudsters don’t work that way”. They know, because they’re the fraudsters, and mostly they don’t work that way. And they’re right that most of the fraud is not there, but that’s no reason not to try to stop the small amount of fraud that is there. “Most” is not zero, after all. And there is very likely a lot of unorganized fraud at the in-person level, which nobody knows about because there are no records of it. The Dems don’t even know about it, but they suspect it’s there and that it helps them, which is why they try so hard to leave the door open for it. But as I said, the real fraud happens in postal voting, and that’s just getting bigger and bigger, which is why the Dems are fighting to expand it even further.
They already went too far last time to pretend that it’s legitimate, half of the country isn’t buying it.
If Republicans win, will Democrats then return to “resistance” mode, which is simply another term for insurrection?
Why are you even asking? It’s a given.
A Democrat’s “firm principles” are whatever they have to be to get them what it is that they want most right this moment.
They were against voter ID, before they were never against it, before they were against it again.
If electronic outing isn’t fixed they don’t have much to worry about, the hacking will take care of lack of real votes.
It’s very sad for me to type that.
In the “forensic audit” being held in Arizona, it has been shown that the voting machines (Dominion) were never hooked up to the internet. I believe this is a standard practice.
The Dems/socialists/Marxists are trying to find a way to use the conveniently never ending Covid ‘pandemic’ to mandate mail-in voting everywhere for the midterms.
If they manage this then all bets are off.
They know if they lose House in 2022 their radical Leftwing coup and ‘fundamental transformation’ of America is probably over.
They will do ANYTHING to prevent that from happening.
Maybe the Pastors of local churches could work with State government to collaborate for mobile sites to take ID photos and fill out paperwork?
Maybe the well heeled d/progressive donors could finance a non partisan ID drive assisting with transport? Others concerned could volunteer their time as well.
Maybe the d/progressive would rather complain about ID than actually work towards solving the problem of lack of ID they claim exists?
That’s what the d/progressive do with every other issue; demand $ and an extensive bureaucracy to ‘work’ on but never actually resolve the issue.
Yes, this exactly. There is a problem, though it’s much smaller than the Dems complain, but it could be solved if they wanted to. Maybe not all of it, but enough of it to be acceptable. But they don’t want it solved.
Last night I heard a story about a case my late father was involved in, where he helped someone who was a genuine victim of injustice, by solving her problem directly rather than agitating for justice, and all the activists who had been salivating about using this poor woman’s predicament as fodder for their campaigns attacked him for depriving them of that opportunity. He simply told them that he cared about the victim more than he did about their abstract agitation for “justice”, and if he’d done it their way “justice” might eventually be achieved, but in the meantime this poor woman would still be suffering.
Milhouse,
Holy crap we agreed on something for the first time in awhile! Seriously though, I can’t imagine large numbers. The sad sack stories portray these folks without ID as all being ‘old Mother Hubbard’ living in a small apartment on social security because their employer was bought by vultures who looted the pension fund.
No ID means; no lease, no bank account and no social security or other benefits. Can’t get them without ID.
There are a very tiny number from rural areas who may not have access to a birth certificate due to laxity in enforcement way back when for home birth a via a midwife. Practically zero since 1935. Even those folks would be 86+ at minimum. Most have social security so they already dealt with the issue long ago.
This whole can’t get an ID is farce. Where are the plaintiffs? Several recent trial CT asked that and the folks claiming group harm via statistics couldn’t produce even one actual person who would be unable to get an ID. Not one.
A lease doesn’t require government-issued photo ID. Bank accounts do, but these people may not have one, or may have one from before that became a requirement. I remember when you could go into a bank and open an account without showing any ID. When the ID requirements were first coming in and hadn’t yet taken effect, I opened several accounts in a false name, just in case I ever found a use for them.
Lease with ID depends on the lessor and what is customary in that State/City. Everyone I ever leased to when I owned rentals had their ID photocopied and kept on file. Every lease I signed in my younger days the same.
That doesn’t mean you need it, or can’t get one without it. Remember, the claim is that these ID-less people can’t exist because they would be unable to get a lease. That’s just not true.
In any case, some of them may own their homes (which may be valueless shacks).
Milhouse,
I don’t dispute that people without an ID exist far from it. They choose not to get one which is way way different from can’t get one.
I absolutely dispute that people are unable to obtain an ID if they choose to do so in any significant number.
These theoretical people claiming theoretical harm via voter ID are, IMO a statistical illusion. The public interest groups pushing this illusion never seem to produce any actual people impacted who are ‘unable’ to get an ID.
I have owned and operated rental properties in Florida, Texas and New Mexico. Everyone signing a lease was asked for ID because that was local custom. Hell it was on the standard State real estate forms I plagiarized.
Next year and several months will see a number of disgusting Dem tricks
–Trump demonization to inflate their sagging base and attempt to drive Republicans away from his populist positions
–Inflation of the 1/6 riot until it seems to be a giant conflict much like the Battle of the Bulge with heroic Dems and demonic Republicans
–Muzzling of BLM and other Leftists so their flaming pictures fade from the TV and the phrase ‘mostly peaceful protests’ goes away
–Coordinating between social media and government to suppress any viewpoint they don’t want heard (like the Arizona audit which just got smoked off Twitter)
Twitter also suspended the Nevada, Georgia, and Pennsylvania audit accounts, and former Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett is being frozen out of the audit.
Medicare, Medicaid/Obamacares/shared responsibility, you have an id.
Virginia votes for Governor this year. No major changes to laws here but many will vote in person again. I expect the voter rolls are full of extra voters. We Can’t tell without a real audit in blue areas like Fairfax county. Could be ballot stuffing or vote switching. We’ll never know.
The article seems to claim there is a narrative shift. That’s bullshit. The claim.has always been that these supposed voter ingritty laws suppress votes and in particular those who vote democrat. The politico article is an acknowledgement that it could have a serious impact on voting in 2022.
Oh and btw questioning the outcome of an election based on lies is the issue.
I’ve been asked for ID at my doctor’s office and at the local Costco when I bought a bottle of wine. And I’m 71.
Buying alcohol at Costco, or any large chain, yes. Doctor’s office, why would they need ID? Even if they asked for it, what do you think they’d do if you didn’t produce any? Or if you produced something that is not government-issued, or has no photo, or is expired? Do you seriously think they’d refuse to treat you?! In any case, your experience is not universal, since I’ve never had to show ID at a doctor’s office.
It’s hard for me to reconcile the gibberish spouted by Biden about the “sacred right to vote” with the unwillingness of an (apparently) non-trivial percentage of his constituency to get a government-issued ID.
Here’s a point that’s crucial to this debate, but that goes unstated by either side: Given that there exist a certain number (not a huge amount, but enough to warrant concern) of eligible voters who can’t prove that because they can’t get acceptable ID, what should be done about that?
Now if we were talking about a fundamental constitutional right, such as buying a gun, then there’d be a lot of room for the argument that the government can’t deprive them of that right, or impose a burden on their exercise of that right, merely by insisting on a specific method of proving their eligibility, that doesn’t work for them. They are entitled to a presumption of eligibility, and the burden must be on the government to prove that they’re not eligible. I’m not sure I agree with this argument, but I think it’s a respectable and formidable one.
And that’s the Democrats’ argument for letting them vote. That the government should simply take their word that they’re eligible, because not doing so deprives them of a fundamental constitutional right through no fault of their own. (Assuming, of course, that they are actually eligible; I have yet to hear a Democrat concede that it might actually not be so.)
But here’s the thing; voting is not a constitutional right, let alone a fundamental one. It sounds hard to believe, because we’ve had the opposite idea drilled into us for decades, but it’s true. Read the constitution and you’ll find that the right to vote is something that is granted to people by the states, and the states can restrict it in any way except those specifically forbidden by an assortment of amendments.
And since that is so, it seems to me that those who, even through no fault of their own, can’t prove they’re eligible, can be legitimately told, “We’re very sorry, but we can’t grant you the privilege of voting, because there’s a chance you’re not eligible. We agree that may not be very likely, but it’s possible, and the burden is on you to prove you are eligible.”
If they are actual citizens and can manage to drag themselves to a DMV/RMV (depending on where they are), they will be issued a free state id (heck, in far too many states, they don’t even need to be citizens to get a free state-issued id). If they cannot manage to get there, how can they be expected to find their polling place and cast a vote?
This is ridiculous, you get that, right? Stop buying into the “black people are stupid” crap, it’s nonsense, it’s super racist, and over all, it’s not a good look.
Fuzzy, it’s not a matter of dragging themselves to the DMV. It’s a matter of not being able to prove that they’re citizens, and therefore not being able to get the specific IDs that the voting laws require. And they can’t prove it, not because they weren’t born here but because they have no birth certificate.
This is also part of the debate that many on our side ignore: When Dems say “We’re not against voter ID”, what they mean is that they’re not against requiring some kind of ID, but it should be any kind at all, whereas the voter ID laws that states are passing require specific forms of semi-secure ID, and do not accept the forms that many people are getting by with, which are insecure, because they’re based entirely on what the person says, and they can say anything they like.
The new more-secure forms of ID require one to already have documents such as birth certificates, passports, etc. And a lot of people have never had those, so they’re in a catch. They need ID to get ID. It’s a problem, and in some cases it has no good solution. But it’s not nearly as big a problem as the Dems would like us to think it is. And to the extent that it is a problem, it bothers me more that they can’t buy guns from licensed FFLs than that they can’t vote. Because the former is a fundamental constitutional right, and the latter is not.
Milhouse,
Deciding that it isn’t worth the hassle to obtain an ID is a horse of an entirely different color from being unable to comply with the requirements to obtain an ID.
Are there a few people who have no birth certificate issued way back when? Sure. However they are eligible for Social security so they had to fix that a long time ago.
Show me someone who personally attests that they can’t obtain an ID who has never been booked or incarcerated or committed or prescribed controlled drugs and doesn’t draw any govt benefits or have a SS number in 2021. Then show me the evidence.
If they reside in Alabama I will help to ensure passage of legislation that works to accommodate their proven inability to obtain an ID.
CommoChief, there is indeed a difference between those who flat-out can’t get the forms of ID that are required for voting, and those who can get them but only at a great hassle. But the difference isn’t as big as you think.
Burdening a constitutional right also violates it. Imagine if the government were to impose an onerous process before one is allowed to publish something; it can be done, but it involves more time, effort, and resources than most people are willing to put in. That would violate the first amendment.
Deliberately siting polling places where it’s difficult to get without a car, in order to discourage those without cars from voting, is voter suppression. I don’t believe that happens nearly as often as Dems claim it does, but if it happens once, then that’s one instance that shouldn’t have happened. The answer is to fix that one instance, not to undermine the whole system and issue a gilt-edged invitation to fraudsters, which is what the Dems want.
Milhouse,
The burdens of obtaining an ID are minimal. Basically it boils down to birth certificates. If you don’t have a BC it’s a pain in the ass that’s a fact. There are other source documents that can in combination substitute for a BC.
Say someone was born at home via midwife and birth unrecorded in 1920. That person is now 101 years old. They turned 65 in 1985. It’s hard to believe that they haven’t been collecting Social security.
Let’s say they didn’t. They could use military service records to establish who they are. Maybe they didn’t serve in WWII or Korea.
Remember though that you are saying this person never obtained a DL or State issued ID. Never got a passport. Never obtained a social security number..
I suppose there might be a 100+ year old hermit living off the grid of modern life where ID is ubiquitous. Though that wouldn’t just be now it would span their lifetime. I need someone to produce the individual instead of speculating and theorizing about their existence.
“Now if we were talking about a fundamental constitutional right, such as buying a gun, then there’d be a lot of room for the argument that the government can’t deprive them of that right, or impose a burden on their exercise of that right, merely by insisting on a specific method of proving their eligibility, that doesn’t work for them.”
You do know that’s literally what you have to do when you buy a gun, right?
(Unless you have a CCW, for which the state already has your photo even if it doesn’t appear on the card.)