GOP: Now sore losers

[John Galt]

[exploited]

[JockandBallTorture]

[exploited]

I think that is a valid concern.

So one of the things we can do for people who don't have proper identification is have them fill out a statutory declaration. Typically this is done in front of a police officer, lawyer, doctor, military officer, notary, etc., but we could also extend this to school teachers, church leaders, shelter executives, etc. You would have that statutory declaration address the specific requirements of the election and it would then be presented as proof of identification. "This is a man who has used my shelter from time to time for the past several years. I know he is older than 18 years old, and that he resides in the area."

Now it is conceivable that a person could lie, or misrepresent themselves, but it would be immediately obvious for investigators, because they just submitted a legal document outlining exactly how they lied. It is also enough of a hoop to dissuade those with bad intentions, while also not being significantly difficult for a homeless person who wants to vote.

One of the nice parts about this is that you could create a job position specifically dedicated to doing these declarations. Do some outreach. Have these documents available at shelters and needle clinics and libraries and hospitals. The number of homeless people who vote is very low, but I overall agree that people in exceptional circumstances should be given leeway when it comes to a right such as voting.

[Kane]

[exploited]

I genuinely don't understand your casual disregard for appearances.

You know, one of the main functions of the nation state and the literal main function of democracy is to assuage anxieties and address the concerns of the people.

For instance, the United States and most of the Western world has discarded the entire idea of personal privacy in order to prevent attacks that are far less frequent or deadly than your domestic gun problem, which you do nothing about.

Is this the right thing to do? I have my doubts, obviously. But what I don't doubt is that a core pillar of our society is that your vote matters, and will be treated with the dignity it deserves.

You keep on saying "Well voter fraud doesn't happen." I keep on confirming this for you: indeed, it doesn't really happen. What matters is that people think it has happened, and they can reach that conclusion simply by thinking about how they would go about committing voter fraud. It is absurdly easy for people to game our system - and that is a prevailing trend in everything from taxes to regulations to public sentiment, etc.

This is known by a number of titles, but I call it buy-in. Others call it suspension of disbelief. If you don't have it, the whole enterprise fails, no matter what you are talking about.

If a large number of people in your genuinely democratic society don't believe they live in a democracy that is fair with a voting system that is fair, that is a real problem. One that impacts every aspect of government performance.

You know what Kane? I think I've had enough teaching you about what democracy stands for. You always act like you care about these things but you don't. You imagine people to be more or less idiotic, and believe that technocrats should rule our society, rather than regular people.

[Kane]

[exploited]

[Spider]

Paradoxically, we have had automatic registration here in Oregon since the 2016 election...and it actually did increase turnout and voter diversity. Which isn't a huge thing when the voting electorate is 94% white. But still.

So far, it's something I can get behind. Basically, everyone is automatically added to the voter rolls, and informed of it. They can opt out if they like, but the default condition is automatically registered. If it pisses you off that they send you a ballot, you can trash it. It sounds like it would shaft homeless and low-income people who haven't had any of the sorts of interactions with the government that would lead to registering...but most people that bad off are already on the books because of DHS and HUD and such...and probably not voting anyways.

Downside is with a closed primary, people are registered independent unless they bother to actually check a box and choose a party. So they sit out the primaries. Which is the nature of a close primary anyways, I suppose.

But turnout did increase, particularly among the young, the disadvantaged, and minorities.

[John Galt]

What does one give up by mandating ID for votes?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Every functional democracy on Earth mandates this. There is no reason not to. The US has had a long history of vote manipulation, mainly in Democratic strongholds. Just do this simple thing, that will stop the most basic of frauds. I've heard no good reason to not do it in my entire life. It makes no sense to me why people are so hell bent on voting in disguise or whatever