How does this hypothetical person apply to medicare/medicaid or whatever welfare? Do they not need to prove their id?

You can't ask people for their ID. That's racist! LDO.

WTF are you talking about? I never said anything about discrimination. We're talking about disenfranchisement.

So 1.5 to 2 million disenfranchised voters in Texas - go.

So these guys go into the precinct and tell the old ladies working there that they're "Joe Smith" or something? And then get away with not showing a voter registration card? I'm curious how you think this would work.

Where did you get the 1.5-2 million figure?

I found one study of a voter ID law in Texas that disenfranchised (by my very conservative estimate) 150-200k voters. You said that you would be willing to disenfranchise one vote to prevent 10 fraudulent votes. So in order to justify that Texas voter ID law we need 1.5-2M disenfranchised voters.

See post 1022 for more details.

What makes you think they are illegals as the video claims?

To give you a helpful hint so you can kinda cheat it is pretty easy to google this up, the internet was going strong in 2006.

Here is the answer sheet, dont look:

I know they (ppl without id) exist. I even started writing "how do these ppl get..." but edited it as I wasn't sure if that would sound racist.

I just have no idea how ppl get through life without an id, and how all kinds of welfare fraud are supossed to be prevented.

You don't say "you don't need papers" to people who are citizens or legal citizens. Doesn't make sense.

Still don't understand the point you're trying to make or where your getting your figures from?!?!?

Assume first. Get facts later.

No worries. Not everyone is good at reading or math. I am giving up on you though.

In what other context would what she have said make sense? Answer me that. You're just being dismissive because it doesn't fit your political world view.

Dude, I'm not the one "making up estimates." I wanted to know how you got 1.5 Million. You never wrote it. Learn how to convey what you're trying to say. I don't have problems comprehending other posters on this forum. Many much smarter and respectful than you.

People are being dismissive because despite giving honest efforts to engage with you at first, you've demonstrated yourself to be incapable of basic reading/math comprehension with **** like this

Every single poster in this thread besides you knows what goofball is talking about

something to consider!

His estimate of 150,000 disenfranchised voters is bogus and made up! He hasn't shown ONE SINGLE SOURCE that shows that many people's votes in Texas have been disenfranchised.

13th,

in the context of this thread and the attempts to pass voter ID laws, when you hear "you dont need papers to vote", what do you think that means?

Also, are you slightly suspicious, or not, that the question she responded to was edited out of the video?

As a third question, given there is a camera crew there in the background and she just did either a recorded or live broadcast when the light went out, what do you think the chances are that the questions he answered "you dont need papers to vote" is either:
a, I am not a citizen, can I vote?
b, I do not have ID, can I vote?

Like a roughball estimate of the chances she is running competitively as a mainstream candidate with some kind of journalist team there in public and she is encouraging illegal migrants to vote. Think about it.

To save you a trip to google not only did she not get arrested for attempted voter fraud she has ran in two more elections since then.

OK, let's ask the reverse question. How much vote fraud is there in Texas that would be stopped by an ID law? Divide that by ten, and we get the number of cases of disenfranchisement we need to prove.

Whats your point?

Im pretty sure most ppl will apply for medicare in some point in their life, even, drumrole.mp3, white ppl.

A social security card is enough to get social security, but it's not enough to vote with.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...e-poor/254572/

not a source? maybe you can expand on which part of his methodology you disagree with rather than spewing angrily at your keyboard that he's making **** up