Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Is your vote suppressed?

Posted 1 year ago on Aug. 10, 2012, 7:39 a.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Or is your vote wasted?
Because you WANT voter suppression to succeed?
Because you are ignorant?
Because you are angry?
Because you don't know how to stand up for the truth?
Because you want to vote FOR the voter suppression party?
Because you are afraid to vote for the party that does support the 99% - because they are not perfect?

__There is only one question- do you have the courage to do what YOU may not FEEL good about - but what YOU KNOW is best for America. ?_



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

Great post.


[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

I would think that concerted efforts to take away peoples right to vote would ring all kinds of alarm bells sirens whistles and launch distress flares.

If they were coming after my vote(?) - I would think that that would be all I needed to know to make sure to get out and vote.

BTW - unless it was not obvious - vote against them - I know I know but I have found it best never to assume.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

Arguably 'Voter Suppression' is perhaps The Major Issue between now and November & I'd argue that 'Occupy' should focus on this issue still along side but somewhat above, all else - for the time being.

caveat ...

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

It is an issue of immediate and far reaching importance. Same as NDAA or any other right or freedom attack on the individual ( human being - breathing biological person ) in the population.

[-] 7 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

Artificial, synthetic, pseudo-legal 'rights' of quasi-human 'CorpoRATions' have usurped the full and innate rights of natural born human beings !!!

This Shit Has Got To Stop !!

veritas vos liberabit !

[-] 4 points by DKAtoday (33128) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Artificial entities should have very few rights - one should be a level playing field domestic and import.

Artificial entities should have many regulations - such as - employees - ALL Employees - receive at the very minimum a living wage.


[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

The saddest part of this debacle is the naming of the corpocrims' actions as Citizens United, and yet there's no Citizens standing up and saying anything about it.

Has apathy and lethargy become the new standard?

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

"Apathy and Lethargy" are the enemies of 'Democracy' and are actually assiduously cultivated by the wholly (& unholy) "Corporate Owned MSM" in The U$A !

'Citizens United' is oxymoronic and like a sick joke, as it has nothing to do with 'Natural Born Humans' ; has even less to do with any concept of 'Citizen' that you or I may be familiar with ; and quite clearly has 'nada/zilch/zip' to do 'uniting' anyone - as the whole enterprise is really about 'dividing real citizens' and insinuating, imposing & consolidating "Corporate Rule" !!

American Democracy (demoCRAZY, deMOCKERYcy) - such as it is, is being debased & eroded daily & a R-money/Ryan ticket is A Corporate Dream Ticket !!!

caveat emptor ...

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

"Voter ID laws : the Republican ruse to disenfranchise 5 million Americans" :

"Under the guise of fighting nonexistent voter fraud, the GOP is attempting the greatest election-stealing conspiracy in US history"

e tenebris, lux ...


[-] 1 points by freewriterguy (882) 1 year ago

i know my vote is ALWAYS SUPPRESSED, as i havent voted the 2 party system since ross perot. although in this ballot i did vote for ron paul in the primary.

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

if you are serious about ron paul.
you are serious about ayn rand
if you are serious about ayn rand
find out the truth
google "ayn rand hickman"

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

I can understand where just dumping people off the voter roles could cause legitimate voters to be removed. What's wrong with voter ID requirements though?

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

ask 750,000 voters in PA who do not have "proper" ID and have voted in PA for decades. Some have voted in PA for 50+ years. Of course, if you are serious, you could read:

Pennsylvania state Rep. Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, is putting the national election spotlight back on his home state. He said a new voter ID law in Pennsylvania could help Mitt Romney win the state.
This will effect over 700,000 voters in Pennsylvania – mostly seniors, minorities, and students.
Turzai listed the Castle Doctrine law, pro-life regulations and a new voter ID law as items Republicans have passed in Pennsylvania. The House Majority Leader then said

the voter ID law "is gonna allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania."

The law goes into effect in the general election. All voters must show a photo ID at the polls before they are allowed to vote.
The New York Times reports some colleges and universities in Pennsylvania will have to make changes to student IDs to allow some students to vote. The changes would make it harder for younger voters and minorities to cast ballots.
Mark Nicastre told PoliticsPA.com claims the state's Republican agenda "simply helps their donors and political allies. ... Democrats are focused on protecting all Pennsylvanians' right to vote."
Turzai alleges substantial voter fraud has occurred in Pennsylvania in the past. Turzai spokesman Stephen Miskin also told PoliticsPA.com "the Republican presidential candidate will be on a more even keel thanks to voter ID." President Bush launched a voter fraud investigation throughout all 50 states for ten years..

The Bush investigation –
after a full ten years investigating all 50 states -- found 87 voter fraud cases.

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

You linked back to this page? Doesn't offer much of a reason why we shouldn't be required to prove who we are when we vote.

It sounds as far fetched as the foolish Republican claims of voter fraud. We need a photo ID for just about anything important, why not voting too? Around 60% of the states already have some kind of voter ID requirement.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

"Voter ID requirement" is a canard & it's real intention is voter suppression. Please click some of the links on this thread, especially the alarming documentary - "Murder, Spies & Voting Lies". Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 - both were stolen elections and where Gore & Kerry subsequently lacked both the gumption and 'cajones' to adequately challenge the result & Dubya Bush got in on both occasions !

caveat ...

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

I don't understand how the possibility of using computers to rig elections has anything to do with voter ID. Stolen elections are an entirely different subject. Unless you're saying IDs are irrelevant because all elections are going to be stolen anyhow.

Most states require some form of ID in order to vote now, what's wrong with just that? I can't get a library card without showing ID. Simply having and showing ID shouldn't be a hardship on anyone. It's also my understanding that the States adding the photo ID requirement are giving IDs for free to those that don't have them.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

ID is not the important question - any form should do ; The Real Issues are 'Voter Suppression' ; "Stolen Elections" ; Disenfranchisement & The Further Erosion of demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy in The U$A !!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

They may be the real issues, The 2000 and 2004 election are dead and gone, this isn't the NCAA where you can vacate past victories. Yes fight to prevent future election tampering if that is what the real issue is. Why fight the non-issue of having an ID?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

"Why fight" ?! Have you seen who is pushing it & why ?!! Cui Bono ?!!!

caveat ...

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

Doesn't matter who is pushing it. If voters providing ID to vote is a reasonable idea it should be supported by all reasonable people. Is there a legitimate reason to oppose voter ID?

To oppose it because you don't like the source makes you look unreasonable at best or paranoid at worst. Some form of ID is already required in about 30 states. Should those laws be repealed?

[-] 5 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

To spell it out again : I'm not expressing complete opposition to some ID, perhaps voter registration acknowledgements & docs., utility bills - basically "any form should do". The reality is that stringent, inflexible and mandatory stipulations - will and are meant to : disenfranchise ; 'suppress voting' ; aid 'stealing of elections' ; and Erode Democracy !!!

Voter ID fraud convictions are utterly miniscule when compared to the resources and monies being put to 'rectify this Non-Problem' ! The Real Intentions are disingenuous, partisan, mendacious, manipulative and Machievellian and very much meant to even further disable and prevent, the chances for any new '3rd Party' entrants to 'the market' !!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (20415) 1 year ago

The problem with requiring ID is that some people, oftentimes the elderly, and the poor do not have the paperwork necessary to get the ID. They may not have a birth certificate, for instance. Also, requiring ID is a bigger burden on the poor as they often do not have transportation to get to motor vehicles. In one great state that I once lived in you can wait on a line (standing - very difficult for the elderly) at motor vehicles for over 5 hours. Therefore, you need to take a day off of work. This is a huge burden for the poor.

So, ID laws affect certain groups more than others. The elderly and the poor are the largest affected groups. Think of a $35 fee, say, for an ID. That is a much larger percent of income for a poor person. For someone making minimum wage they need to work an entire day to pay for that.

So, ID requirements are a big deal to a lot of people. Sorry for rambling.

[-] 4 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

Electronic voting systems present a FAR greater threat to election integrity than the relative very few (compared to the entire voting public) who misrepresent themselves at the polls. Americans need to put the focus where it truly belongs.

There should certainly be an effective and all-inclusive way to verify that a voter is legit and that they only get to vote once but 'voter fraud' is a tiny issue compared to the actuality of voter suppression, 'stolen elections', disenfranchisement and gerrymandering.

The fact that not everyone has a car also seems to be strangely overlooked and there is no denying the onerous nature & intent of some inflexible ID requirements especially on the poor. Already nearly half of the US Electorate does not vote for whatever reason and one must seriously question the motives of those who would make it more likely that the turnout would be even less.

You didn't ramble ; your points were sound. Thanx and ...

pax, amor et lux ...

[-] 0 points by ivian (-60) 1 year ago

if they're on welfare they had to have ID in order to qualify for it. same with medicaid and food stamps. PA. and other states pay for your photo ID.


[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

I don't think there is significant fraud, that claim is as foolish as the paranoia I seem to see over photo IDs to vote.

As far as the real intentions of anyone is concerned, I don't care as long as the regulation they are talking about are reasonable. Photo ID to cash a check, fly, enter a courthouse, vote all seem reasonable.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

Consider : that we are in agreement when you "don't think that there is significant fraud" and you regard "that claim as foolish". The "paranoia", I suggest is evident on the part of those who would pursue 'Voter ID' issues, where empirically - there are non !

"Reasonable" is a purely subjective notion & in this case, is being used by Particular Interests to enable the creation of a 'Straw Man Argument' riding in on a Trojan Horse Issue', so as to facilitate "voter suppression" and its corollaries !!

Re. your : "As far as the real intentions of anyone is concerned, I don't care ..." ; well, that speaks volumes me thinks !!!

temet nosce ...

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

Your argument is getting lost in intricate plots and conspiracies. I don't see how it's unreasonable to require an ID to vote. I'm not a believer that there is significant fraud on either side but that both are playing up to the worst paranoid fears of their base.

Considering the emotion attached to the whole thing maybe the minority of states without voter ID laws should make it effective for 2016. No matter what is done it seems to have worked well enough for half the states to require some form of ID, it's pending in a few states and about 20 require nothing. I seriously doubt New York or California would go Republican if they ever require ID to vote.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

Naah, IF my "argument is getting lost", then that is only to yourself. I have laid out my thinking on the matter extensively on this thread and provided numerous links which I hope are useful. We are not really going to change each other's mind here but are only talking over, past and through each other. Thus :

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

It certainly matters WHO is trying to add new voting requirements. It is only republican controlled states that are adding new voting requirements. (rightwingers were the ones who created all sorta new creative voter requirements against African Americans decades ago, thats why we passed voting rights in the '60's & thats a good reason to watch these right wingers closely).

And although we can agree that providing ID's seems reasonable. We haven't had to use this new requirement! System works fine without the new ID requirement. No "in person" fraud exists to speak of! & the republican efforts are clearly aimed at dem leaning groups who are more likely to not have ID's, (Poor, Elderly, Young people).

Perhaps if they haven't done it right before this election we would be less suspicious. Let's do it for the next election.

And no it ain't free to get ID's everywhere the repubs have added this new unnecessary requirement. So that creates a cost & seems a lot like a pol tax. Ever hear of that?

Why do you think gun licenses are ok but not student ids? hmmmm! Why do you think PA state repub pol Turzai said the voter ID law would allow Romney to win PA.? hmmmm!

You don't think that is suspicious?

Elect progressives! Vote out vote suppressing republicans

[-] 1 points by JenLynn (692) 1 year ago

I don't know how much of the lack of push in Democratic controlled states is simply due to the idiotic partisan they want it so we don't attitude. In Republican states it obviously appeals to conservative paranoia. Neither side comes to this with pure motives. The point is if it's a reasonable requirement then I don't care who's for pushing it.

Thirty states require some form of ID when you vote. As new laws are proposed the ID required is what I would consider appropriate for today's world, a photo ID. Some states are writing into the new law that state voter IDs will be provided for free. Times change, I don't consider "that's the way we've always done things" all that good a reason for the minority of states that don't have voter ID to oppose it.

I don't find the gun permit thing surprising at all. I got a student ID just showing up with my registration for classes, I could have been anyone holding Jennifer's class schedule, getting a gun permit requires a lot more proof of who you are, and a background check they don't even do for a passport so that ID is obviously better controlled and more reliable then my student ID.

I don't know the context of Turzai's remark, Republicans are pushing a paranoid notion that there is massive fraud. Maybe he was speaking to his base of crazies, a pep talk saying we'll win because this eliminates fraud, I don't know or care.

All I'm getting for an answer comes down to fear or hatred for anything Republican. I can understand it but it doesn't strike me as a reason to be against what seems like a reasonable idea. Making it effective for 2016 seems equally reasonable, we've survived this long four more years won't hurt us. Maybe the states without voter ID should do it that way.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 1 year ago

They should definitely do it that way, and would if they were not trying to affect the election in 85 days!

You have offered an effective defense of this dishonest republican effort of suppresing democratic votes. Well done.

I wouldn't say I "hate all things republican" but I certainly do not support the republican/conservative policies that benefit the 1% plutocrats and are at the center of all our current problems.

Peace. Elect progressives, Republicans ARE the problem.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

Manually Counted Paper Ballots are an absolutely essential and minimum safeguard in demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy U$A - where the toss between two sides of the the same crooked coin is somehow deemed to be a "democracy" !!!

ad iudicium ...

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

A precise paper audit trail that can verify the "computer" is manditory. Computers can easily be programmed to cheat- and do it in an untestable way

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

'American Democracy - "Murder, Spies And Voting Lies"' - Doc. (alt. links)

"Rachel Maddow on Republican Voter Suppression", The Rachel Maddow Show (May 30th, 2012) :

GOP Voter Suppression Updates : OH, MI, IA Sec's of State Create New Obstacles For Voters :

Important Blog re. 'Voter Suppression' :

fiat lux ...

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (17667) 1 year ago

On the matter of 'Voter Suppression' and for some insights into who is doing the 'fraud' and how and why - I append a link to a very illuminating & rather disturbing documentary film + three other relevant links :

fiat justitia ruat caelum ...