Do you think that one should be required to present a valid photo ID in order to vote? I say yes. You need a photo ID to do many things such as driving, getting on an airplane, writing a check, adopting a child or pet, etc., and it is required in many places such as jail, pawn shops, hospitals, pharmacies, banks, court, etc. Most of these places are just regular everyday things. Voting is much more important, and for some reason a photo ID is not required.

Now I'm sure many of you are saying "What's the big deal? Voting fraud doesn't exist anyway." If you are thinking that, then you are WRONG. Voting fraud is a very real thing. And more times than not, it is the republicans getting the short end of the stick. That is why republicans usually think that a photo ID should be required, while democrats usually say that it shouldn't. Here are some statistics for you:

- In 59 voting districts in the Philadelphia region, Obama received 100% of the votes - with not even a single vote recorded for Romney. (A mathematical and statistical impossibility)

- In 21 districts in Wood County Ohio, Obama received 100% of the votes where GOP inspectors were illegally removed from their polling locations - and not one single vote was recorded for Romney. (A statistical impossibility)

- In Wood County Ohio, 106,258 people voted in a county with only 98,213 eligible voters.

- In St. Lucie County Florida, there were 175,574 registered voters, but 247,713 votes were cast.

- Palm Beach County Florida had a 141% voter turnout.

- In one Ohio County, Obama won by 108% of the total number of eligible voters.

- Obama won in every state that did not require a photo ID to vote and lost in every state that did require a photo ID in order to vote.

That last one may just be a coincidence, but the statistics do not lie. Voting fraud is real, and making a photo ID required to vote may not solve the problem, but it will help fix it. Many people believe that Romney would have won the 2012 election if there was no voting fraud. I do not know if this is true or not, and there is no way to tell for certain. All I know is that if you want to vote, you should be required to present a valid photo ID. What do you think?

No, I don't think that they should be required. Anyone should be able to vote to me, it's their country, their decisions.

Barathemos : I'm not saying that people shouldn't be able to vote. Anyone can get a photo ID. All it does is prevent voting fraud and prevent non-citizens from voting. And if you aren't a citizen, then it is not your country.

tgags123 : I know, he first thing we need to do is send people back to their country. And truthfully, people should tell if they are American or not.

Yeh, screw immigrants. They ruin countrys.
Like those damn native americans, coming here and stealing the land.

I think you'd be surprised at what would happen to your country without that cheap labour.
I also find it interesting that you want further checks on voters but oppose checks on gun purchases.

The fundamental issue you have here is you believe the election was stolen.
Whether or not it was is up for debate (incidentally what are the sources for these statistics? ), however I doubt you would believe this if the roles were reversed (Romney elected, Obama lost, claims of Romney rigging the vote).

thenumberone : Ah. You. The liberal debater. Lol.

I am not against immigration at all. If it is LEGAL. And I know the Indians and all of that. But I am sure that the Indians didn't like it. And in this case, we are the Indians. And if we can do something about it, we should.

And I agree that you should need a photo ID for a gun, but it is even more important that you have one to vote.

And I would want photo ID either way. Even if republicans were rigging it, I would still want photo ID.

As for the sources, they are from a lot of different places. I got it from a Tumblr account, but I can't remember which. He listed his sources as well, but I cannot find that post. You can Google it though, and a bunch of reliable sources will give you the same statistics.

tgags123 :
thenumberone :
Barathemos:

I just don't think that many people should be allowed to vote. Why should I allow people who run on emotion alone to participate in a sophisticated, complex, and incredibly powerful organization? I shouldn't.

I think about 50% of citizens 18+ should be allowed to vote. I think that 50% might be too many. And I definitely think that there should be some hoops to jump through, just to weed out those that really don't care that much.

So sure, lets bring on the photo ID. It's not that big of a deal and it helps reduce some complaining about voter fraud.

I have mixed feelings on the voting Id Law. 

Voting fraud does exists: Back in 2008 I was an election reporter, which I called in the results of my assigned polling place. While I was setting there and seeing people vote. One thing stood out for me. This man came from a neighboring county trying vote in our county. One of the election workers was going to let him vote until another worker spoke up. So yeah that man may have gotten to vote twice.  I do not mean for this to be offensive but there is a problem with illegals trying to vote as well. So in that case you need a system to keep this from happening. 

Also lets not forget that people who had been dead for years were getting credited with votes I want to think that was back in 2008 maybe. I also remember reading a story were voter machines were determined to have been rigged as it would switch the voters choice after they had made their selection. So to say fraud does not go on is in denial. 

On the other hand I can see were having a voter ID law could be a burden on people who may not have access to get a card. Such as the disabled, lower income and veterans.  So yeah that can be a problem 

What I think states could do is an identify of some kind will count such as a military card, birth certificate, photo ID, social security card, and Drivers licenses. I think if any of those count it would be a win win situation because it would cut down on fraud.  

tornadocam : It does not cost anything to get a photo ID. And social security cards, driver's licenses, and all of those other things you listed are all valid forms of identification. I would even be fine with a birth certificate, even if it doesn't have a photo. You wouldn't need a special card to vote, just some kind of identification. So this would not be a problem for the disabled, the poor, or the veterans. It would only be a problem for illegals and people that abuse the system.

I think ID should be required for voting. For the reasons tgags cited, requiring ID has all benefits and no drawbacks.

Is this really an issue nowadays? I didn't realize that there are even debates about voting IDs (unless it's about the cost that goes along with it, of course) I do believe it is important to have an ID, or at least something to identify that the person is a citizen. Whether there is such a thing as voting frauds or not, there should be actions that at least directs the election to be controlled that it is the people that belong to the country when voting. 

Txgangsta : you did not just call the government sophisticated...
thenumberone : those immigrants make voting take longer with all of this ID stuff, takes too long.

I see no reason why you shouldn't need ID to vote. You need it to do just about anything else so why not voting? Blows my mind that people think this is somehow a race issue. To me it is all about consistency.

Barathemos :

Government/politics in general is "sophisticated", meaning "developed to a high degree of complexity". Certain governments are more simple than others, but international politics, national politics, international economics, macroeconomics, microeconomics, and military strategy and tactics are all components of a decent government. Those guys are not so simple.

tgags123 :
In future, if you are going to debate an issue, you should list the sources, and more than one election
For instance it was widely speculated that bush tampered with the votes during his election.
Focusing only on one culprit creates an image of bias.

Txgangsta :
And exactly how do you decide who gets to vote?
I agree, there are far too many people who vote without a clue what they are giving their stamp to.
But firstly, the vote is a guaranteed right, whether you are stupid or not. And any system of vetting voters would be prone to bias. Jews, blacks, gays, liberals, conservatives, could be tactically stopped from voting to skew the results.
Its like the idea of having really great politicians in complete control. Better efficiency, perhaps, more money, possibly, more dictatorship, quite likely.

In the UK you have a set polling station, typically the one closest to your place of residence. No ID required.

tgags123 : Tumblr is not a notable source, and I was looking for sources of this Obama voter fraud, and I did not find a whole lot of credibility anywhere. I am not 100% sure that this source is credible, but it should debunk some or all of the statistics you may have listed: http://www.factcheck.org/2013/01/voting-conspiracies/. 

thenumberone :

I'm not quite sure what would be necessary. To ensure at least a somewhat educated vote, there could be a test over candidates with their basic positions as questions. Multiple choice. Not hard, just something. I would like a short, temporary ban for voting for some things, maybe on those that have recently been to jail, those that have been to a mental hospital, those that have been homeless (idk how to find that one). Perhaps those that have been out of the country for too long? I kinda don't like the age of 18 either. Perhaps the age of 18 is allowable IF they have a full time job for a month prior to a vote. Idk. Most 18 year olds aren't wise enough to vote. There would be a few, so I think they should be allowed, but I want a way to really limit until 23.

What are your ideas? Mine haven't really be thought though.

sop281 : The post on Tumblr had it's sources listed. All of them were credible sources, from professional newspaper websites and stuff like that.

tgags123 :

You should post those sources. For our benefit and for the benefit of your argument.

Txgangsta : I said above that I don't remember. "I got it from a Tumblr account, but I can't remember which. He listed his sources as well, but I cannot find that post" I'll keep looking for it and I will let you guys know if I can find it again.