I think white people got a little scared and voted...

We've tended to be Sony buffs but both of the kids have Samsung which are brilliant, especially with all that modern software stuff. Have an old LG and, although it's now quite obsolete, is still fit for purpose.....TV which shows things such as TV programmes...and nothing else to speak of.

Eeerrrrrrrr.....what's this thread supposed to be about?

 

You know nothing .

An ID is proving who you are : I need an ID to buy medication, to be served in a hospital, etc, to vote

A passport is only needed to travel to some countries outside Europe ; with a passport I can't buy medication, I can't vote , I will not be served in a hospital, etc.

The same for a driver's licence .

If you don't need to prove your identity with a ID at a polling station, the result will be fraud . As the Democrats oppose the obligation of an ID to vote, it is obvious that they want to preserve the possibility of cheating .

 

Both a passport and a Drivers License with photo are valid forms of ID in the US.

 

He apparently is unaware there are other entities known as "countries" outside of Belgium, which follow different rules than does Belgium. He apparently is also unaware that there are separate "states" within the country known as the "United States", which follow different rules as well, particularly with regards to the question of what constitutes a "valid" form of identification, if required, for voting.

His lack of knowledge goes far to explain a lot that his evident insanity does not.

 

The usual strawmen to hide the following fact :

If Smith wants to vote in polling station X, Smith needs

1 ) To prove that he is Smith : this can only be done with an ID,not with a driver's licence or passport:if it could be done with a driver's licence /passport ,there would be no need for the use of an ID, and if it could be done with driver's licence /passport there would be no mass fraud (as now in North Carolina ) : the presence of mass fraud proves that an ID is absolutely needed .

2 ) to prove that he has the right to vote

3 ) and that he can (only ) vote in polling station X .

If 1 ) is impossible (and it is ) 2 and 3 are also impossible :if no one can prove that the man claiming to be Smith is Smith, it is impossible to prove that he has the right to vote and only in polling station X .

The persistent turning up of mass fraude proves that the system is totally failing ,this is also proved by the fact that those who are responsible for the fraud oppose a changing of the system .

All the rest are Democratic excuses .

The opposition of the party of Tammany Hall, Landslide Johnson, Daley, mass fraud in NC against the obligatory use of ID for voting proves that the obligatory use of the ID is absolutely needed .

 

This is a strawman : the question is not if they are valid forms of ID, but if they are preventing/creating mass fraud . Ass they are creating mass fraud, they must be throwed away .

A driver's licence proves that Smith has the right to drive, it does not prove that he is Smith,otherwise it would not be called drivers licence but ID . As it is not called ID, it is a drivers licence . It is the same for the ID : an ID does not prove that Smith has the right to drive .

 

Wrong. Driving licences ARE an accepted form of ID, at least in Britain.
I always carry my photocard licence; I don't need to, it's just force of habit.

 

Old Chinese saying 'To talk much and arrive nowhere is the same as climbing a tree to catch fish'

 

Thanks, Grasshopper.

 

I was quite surprised that back in the summer when buying alcohol from US supermarkets I had to show ID , used my UK driving licence.
Quite funny as in UK I don't need to as I'm nearer 50 than 40 now.
Usually you only asked for ID if you look under 18.
The last supermarket wouldnt accept my license to sell me beer & wine as it didn't say ''Date of Birth'' next to my date of birth.
It has a number with a key on the back. DoB is number 3.
I moaned that everyother supermarket had accepted it over the previous 2 weeks.
The cashier called her supervisor who said store policy said I couldnt use it so had to dig out my passport.

UK driving licence looks like this. Mine has the Union Flag on it too, this is an older version.

 

We are governed by the "Rule of Lawyers" here. They card everyone in an effort to avoid getting sued.

 

No,its to avoid being fired and/or having the store shut down in an ABC sting.

 

That's a fake! We all know the real one lives in Nelson Mandela House.....

 

I never said that it was not a valid form,I say that it is not efficient and creates fraud .Valid means legal, it does not mean efficient .Early voting is also legal, but very bad . The use of checks is valid but medieval

A few years ago even the Washington Post asked the Democrats to stop their opposition against the obligatory use of the ID to vote, but the Democrats are still blocking it, and we know why .

And in the past , Jimmy Carter and James Baker (who can not be suspected of hostility to the Muslims ) argued for the obligatory use of the ID during the elections ; what now is used creates fraud .
Source /NYT 2008/02/03..

Is it not so that in California anyone with a drivers licence can vote ? And that an illegal foreigner can have a drivers licence ?

Conclusion : An illegal foreigner can vote .

The Democrats want to continue this system,because illegal foreigners vote Democrat .

Why do you think that there is a Commission on Federal Election Reform ?

And why do you think there is no reform ?

 

You don't just walk in present your ID (Drivers License, Passport, etc.) and vote. In my state you first fill out a form listing name, address, and certifying under penalty of law that you are said person, are legally registered, and understand the penalties for voting fraudulently. You then present your ID with form and they match your name, and address against a printout of Registered voters. Then a precinct worker checks you on a computer linked to the state elections commission, annotates that you are voting (so you can only vote once), and the computer loads a card (looks like a chip credit card) that you use in the voting machine. You put the card in the machine, cast your votes, when done you remove the card and turn it in on your way out.
You could beat the system, as you can any system, but you can't just walk in and vote if not registered and not a citizen, just because you have an ID. IIRC, when I first registered in this state I had to have a certified birth certificate, either a Driver's License, Passport, Military ID, or State issued ID, then something showing I lived at my residence.

 

Well.....

Your own words. Sure sounds like "passport and driver's license are not ID" to me. Yes, "you know nothing".

As an aside, what are these "some countries outside Europe" that do not require a passport to travel to?

 

Of course they are not ID, otherwise there would not be a need for an ID;the fact that they are used /accepted as ID in some states of the US does not prove that they are ID .If drivers licences could replace IDs, why is the Commission on Federal Election REform asking for IDs only to vote . And why are ID required to travel by aircraft ?

I heard that Britains can visit Canada without passport .

 

If the system was good, why is the Commission on Federal Election Reform advocating deep changes .

 

Almost-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_passport#Visa_requirements