Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingScot
No, it should not be hard if it exists in any sort of significant way. Interestingly, the panel that the President appointed to look into this had the same problem. To the President's credit--once he saw there was really nothing there, he disbanded the panel. (Similar to him catching up when he realized covid was actually dangerous)
Also, please do not opine on what I am interested in or not--I have not accused you of wanting to suppress votes, you should not accuse me of being indifferent to stuffing the ballot box.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/u...ommission.html |
It's impossible to PROVE fraud when the very means to determine it are not available. Similar to proving somebody has COVID 19 without actually testing them to confirm it even though they may show all the symptoms.
By requiring an ID there is no suppression of voting, get an ID you're good to go, fail to do so and you can't. That is not suppression, it's simply putting a simple requirement to ensure the law is being followed.
By taking the position of not requiring an ID would infer the consequences of doing so are acceptable.