Voter ID opponents try, try again

  • Article by: JEFF DAVIS
  • Updated: February 23, 2012 - 7:00 PM

At almost every turn their objections have been disproved, yet they persist.

  • 337
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
czelgertFeb. 22, 12 8:09 PM

A very well-reasoned argument here by the writer. The government requires that you show ID for a lot of things we consider rights such as buying a firearm or getting welfare benefits. I am totally lost as to who the opponents of Voter ID really think is going to be disenfranchised here. Moreover, it appears that the courts agree since the Voter ID opponents haven't been able to actually produce a living, breathing, eligible voter who has been disenfranchised for their court challenges.

logician88Feb. 22, 12 8:11 PM

Lies and nonsense. The Voter ID bill has one objective: To disqualify democrats from voting. The Conservatives can't win the battle of ideas, so they are simply trying to keep Democrats from participating in the process by things like this proposal. This adds to their efforts to disqualify Obama from serving by claiming he wasn't born here, the atrocious supreme court travesty that lets the Koch brother buy elections with unlimited ad spending, and the efforts of people like Scott Walker to get rid of unions so that there is no organization that can compete with the spending of the Kochs and their ilk. It is all extremely un-American and disgusting.

MrFlamFeb. 22, 12 8:13 PM

I still can't understand why we have to have photo ID for doing something as simple as buying cold medicine, but when it is time for us to undertake our most serious duty as a citizen, getting that same ID is too much work. This past November when I voted, all I was asked was my name. I signed on the line and voted. I knew of someone that was out of the country at the time and didn't absentee vote. I could have easily come back at after a shift change, given that other name to a new poll worker and voted under that name too. And once the ballot is handed over, it is anonymous so I could not have been caught. It is far too easy to commit voter fraud in this state.

mrhandsFeb. 22, 12 8:15 PM

Conservatives who don't have proper ID wont be able to vote either. There's some logic for you.

johneramone4Feb. 22, 12 8:18 PM

"The Voter ID bill has one objective: To disqualify democrats from voting"... Nonsense, the Voter ID bill only objective is to disqualify ineligible voters and multiple voters from voting. It's just a sad fact that ineligible voters and multiple voters tend to vote for Democrats.

johneramone4Feb. 22, 12 8:20 PM

This is an argument the Far left simply cannot win. The harder they push this "disenfranchisement" nonsense, the more foolish, desperate and dishonest they appear.

yathinksoFeb. 22, 12 8:29 PM

Still waiting for one case of voter fraud to be documented. An expensive solution for a problem that does not exist. And let's clear the air, this is to try and reduce the number of democratic votes...PERIOD. We were not born yesterday, although the RIGHT counts on idiots that are middle class to vote for their hidden agenda to stick it to the middle class while benefiting the wealthy.

johneramone4Feb. 22, 12 8:33 PM

One question I have asked a couple of dozen times on a couple of dozens over the past few weeks and not a single fraud supporter has even come close to providing any answer: Exactly what is it that is preventing these alleged voters who supposedly do not possess a valid form of ID from obtaining one? I have the feeling I will be waiting forever.

bugmenot99Feb. 22, 12 8:34 PM

Funny...Dems are big on "equality" (or so they claim) but it seems to escape them that equality DEMANDS this law...Why? Because my legal vote shouldn’t be canceled out by someone not entitled to vote, or by someone that doesn't even exist, yet is brought to the polls by ACORN. Very unequal indeed, but Dems love it went it benefits them.

justsayinFeb. 22, 12 8:49 PM

Wow. 200 convictions. Over how many decades? OMG. We better spend 10s of thousands to stop that! Build a whole new Big Govt bureaucracy around it even. Don't you see? It is far better to disenfranchise many thousand than risk a few hundred bad votes. How patriotic. Really though, don't stop there. Voting for landowners only should be our battle cry!! And so what, I say, if you don't look a lick like your old (and awful) photo ID - no voting for you! What a terrible burden to put on election judges, trying to figure out if that's really you with that new nose job, weight loss, glasses, or hair style.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters