I think you’ve spent a little too long huffing right wing media glue.

There are valid arguments against voter ID requirements. Primarily that not everyone has ID. Any push for voter ID should be paired with a comprehensive program to aid folks in registering for a valid ID.

And yet it rarely is, because the aim of voter ID laws is to disenfranchise eligible voters, rather than clamp down on voter fraud. Voter fraud being something that has never been proven to have any effect on electoral outcomes. There has never been any proof any single election in the US has had its result changed because of voter fraud. It is a made up scandal.

▲

baggy_trough 4 hours ago | parent [-]

I think you’ve spent a little too long consuming left wing media. My evidence is that essentially no other developed democracies treat voter ID in this recklessly casual manner. Even the Obama presidential library requires ID to enter!

	▲	afavour 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		So, like I said in my previous comment, any moves to require ID in order to vote should be paired with comprehensive programs to make sure ID is free and easily available to all eligible voters. You haven’t considered why it isn’t? > recklessly casual I say again: there's absolutely no evidence that fraudulent voting has come anywhere close to changing the outcome of an election. Or had any statistical relevance at all. And there are a lot of people looking for that evidence.
	▲	plagiarist 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Which Amendment in the Constitution outlines the right to enter the Barack Obama Presidential Library?
	▲	ImPostingOnHN 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Repeating talking points instead of actually responding to the comment you replied to, is not making you and your side look very credible or competent. Wait! Wait. Before you reply: I fear you may have read my comment but heard "repeat talking points again, attack person who was unconvinced by them". Please don't do that.