Trump to sign executive order to require voter ID

[CouchPotato]

Quote

President Donald Trump says he plans to sign an executive order aimed at requiring voter ID in elections across the country.

Trump made the statement on social media late Saturday night, saying he is also seeking other reforms to how U.S. elections take place.  

"Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!! Also, No Mail-In Voting, Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-he-require-voter-id-executive-order

[Michael Hardner]

I can't wait for the backlash on this... old folks showing up at the polls to vote MAGA and being denied because they're using their Social Security cheque as ID...

It's problematic all around....

[Deluge]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I can't wait for the backlash on this... old folks showing up at the polls to vote MAGA and being denied because they're using their Social Security cheque as ID...

It's problematic all around....

They'll still pass because they're not communist psychopaths like the democrats. 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, CouchPotato said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-he-require-voter-id-executive-order

The POTUS has NO AUTHORITY over how states manage ELECTIONS. LMAO

Quote

he President of the United States has no direct authority to regulate how states manage elections. The U.S. Constitution grants this power primarily to the states and Congress, not to the president. 

Here is an explanation of the constitutional division of power over elections:

• State Authority: The Constitution's Elections Clause (Article I, Section 4) gives state legislatures the power to prescribe the "Times, Places, and Manner" of holding elections for federal offices. States also retain the primary authority for running their own voting systems, including registering voters, counting ballots, and certifying results.
• Congressional Authority: The Elections Clause also gives Congress the power to "make or alter" any state regulations regarding federal elections. Throughout history, Congress has used this authority to pass federal laws, such as the Voting Rights Act and the Help America Vote Act, that set national standards for federal elections.
• The President's Limited Role: The president's role is not to create or alter election rules. Instead, the president is responsible for ensuring that the laws passed by Congress are faithfully executed by the executive branch. While presidents have issued executive orders concerning elections, these can only direct federal agencies and have a negligible impact on state and local election administration. Any attempt by a president to unilaterally rewrite election laws is likely to face immediate legal challenges.
• Enforcement of Federal Law: The Department of Justice, which is part of the executive branch, enforces federal election laws. It does not, however, have the authority to set the rules governing elections or to supervise the officials who run them at the state and local levels. 

 

[Nationalist]

Oh my.

Now how are the Libbies gonna cheat?

[LinkSoul60]

The lengths that Trump and republicans will go to try and stay in power is an embarrassment and should be a concern to any democracy.  But it's the US under Trump so to be expected....

[robosmith]

5 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Oh my.

Now how are the Libbies gonna cheat?

Trump is going to use his National GOONS to strongly discourage blacks from voting in the Democratically run major cities. 

That's why he's NOT deploying them to RED STATES even though they have higher crime rates in many cases. Duh

Unfortunate you're unable to figure that out. LMAO

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Trump is going to use his National GOONS to strongly discourage blacks from voting in the Democratically run major cities. 

That's why he's NOT deploying them to RED STATES even though they have higher crime rates in many cases. Duh

Unfortunate you're unable to figure that out. LMAO

Well I'll say this for ya robo...

You do have a fertile imagination. 

[Shady]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I can't wait for the backlash on this... old folks showing up at the polls to vote MAGA and being denied because they're using their Social Security cheque as ID...

It's problematic all around....

I bring my photo ID when I vote in elections in Canada, pretty much everyone does.  There should be no backlash to common sense.  Many states offer photo ID at no cost for people that don't have drivers licences, passports, etc.

2 hours ago, CouchPotato said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-says-he-require-voter-id-executive-order

It's about time.

[robosmith]

18 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Well I'll say this for ya robo...

You do have a fertile imagination. 

Which YOU CANNOT REFUTE with ^your DRIVEL.

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Which YOU CANNOT REFUTE with ^your DRIVEL.

I dont need to.

Its over. All your Libbie chickenshit is being dismantled.

[robosmith]

2 minutes ago, Shady said:

I bring my photo ID when I vote in elections in Canada, pretty much everyone does.  There should be no backlash to common sense.  Many states offer photo ID at no cost for people that don't have drivers licences, passports, etc.

It's about time.

You've fallen for right wing talking points that pretend voter impersonation fraud is a threat to legitimate election outcomes.

Everyone else knows that the way to throw elections is by vote counting fraud or VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Do you even understand WHY?

Here's a clue: to throw an election you NEED MASS vote flipping. IF you try to do that with impersonation fraud MANY PEOPLE KNOWING ABOUT THE PLOT ARE REQUIRED. Those are WITNESSES and IT WILL GET OUT. Duh

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

I dont need to.

Its over. All your Libbie chickenshit is being dismantled.

No, YOU CANNOT and just LIE about SHIT.

[Shady]

4 minutes ago, robosmith said:

You've fallen for right wing talking points

Complete nonsense.  I just think that voting is important, and should be as secure as possible, and that photo ID makes perfect sense.  

[robosmith]

3 minutes ago, Shady said:

Complete nonsense.  I just think that voting is important, and should be as secure as possible, and that photo ID makes perfect sense.  

The POTUS has NO AUTHORITY over election management as stated IN THE CONSTITUTION; it is totally STATE CONTROLLED.

[Nationalist]

6 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The POTUS has NO AUTHORITY over election management as stated IN THE CONSTITUTION; it is totally STATE CONTROLLED.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-hurdle-banning-mail-voting-republican-party-rcna227256

Trump and the Republicans are shutting you cheating Libbies down.

Deal with it.

[Michael Hardner]

28 minutes ago, Shady said:

1. There should be no backlash to common sense. 

2. It's about time.

1. I agree.
2. I don't think fake voters is much of a problem though.  Any time the problem has been brought up here, the evidence is what they call 'mice nuts'.

[Shady]

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The POTUS has NO AUTHORITY over election management as stated IN THE CONSTITUTION; it is totally STATE CONTROLLED.

If that's the case than the order is meaningless, so why are you so worked up about it?

[Shady]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I agree.
2. I don't think fake voters is much of a problem though.  Any time the problem has been brought up here, the evidence is what they call 'mice nuts'.

I agree that fake voters isn't much of a problem, but I still think voter ID is a good idea, especially to keep it that way.  If we need ID to rent a car, fly, buy cigarettes, alcohol, rent a hotel room, pick up certain medical prescriptions, etc, I don't see why requiring ID to vote is a problem.

[LinkSoul60]

6 minutes ago, Shady said:

I agree that fake voters isn't much of a problem, but I still think voter ID is a good idea, especially to keep it that way.  If we need ID to rent a car, fly, buy cigarettes, alcohol, rent a hotel room, pick up certain medical prescriptions, etc, I don't see why requiring ID to vote is a problem.

Most would agree that requiring ID to vote should be mandatory.  The problem is the other reform he wants to help skew voting in republicans favour;

"Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!! Also, No Mail-In Voting, Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He's a POS....

[Shady]

1 minute ago, LinkSoul60 said:

"Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!! Also, No Mail-In Voting, Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.

He's a POS....

I think he's partly right.  I would severely restrict the drop boxes for mail in voting.  There's already been a lot of fraud and abuse associated with them.  But I wouldn't completely do away with them.

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I can't wait for the backlash on this... old folks showing up at the polls to vote MAGA and being denied because they're using their Social Security cheque as ID...

It's problematic all around....

Republican voters are smart enough to figure it out

We have the same thing in canada mike and it's not been a problem since it as introduced. 

A bigger question is 'doesn't it have to go through congress and the senate'. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, Shady said:

I think he's partly right.  I would severely restrict the drop boxes for mail in voting.  There's already been a lot of fraud and abuse associated with them.  But I wouldn't completely do away with them.

One of the better ways to deal with it is to require people to request a ballot and provide a reason, such as they'll be out of town or they're in the hospital or the like, and then require it to be sent in by regular mail (postage paid by gov't).  Sounds like he's going a little too far in saying that there won't be very many accepted reasons but he's on the right track. 

That severely helps keeping the cheating down. 

9 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Most would agree that requiring ID to vote should be mandatory.  The problem is the other reform he wants to help skew voting in republicans favour;

How? And if you're going to make that argument doesn't that mean the existing rules skew it in favour of the dems?

Quote

"Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!! Also, No Mail-In Voting, Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.

How does that skew anything to the republicans? 

And quick reminder, we have that in canada already. 

[LinkSoul60]

3 minutes ago, Shady said:

I think he's partly right.  I would severely restrict the drop boxes for mail in voting.  There's already been a lot of fraud and abuse associated with them.  But I wouldn't completely do away with them.

Why restrict drop boxes....  there is no evidence there is a 'lot of fraud and abuse' associated with them.  This is only Trump trying to take away peoples rights by feeding a false narrative that his supporters hang onto.

 

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/11/nx-s1-5147732/voter-fraud-explainer

But voter fraud remains a very rare occurrence across the country.

“Research has been consistent over time that voter fraud is infinitesimally rare and almost never occurs on a scale that would affect an election outcome,” said Alice Clapman, senior counsel for voting rights at the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates for expanded voter access.

And it’s not just research. Clapman said courts have also looked at this issue, as well as government commissions and prosecutorial offices.

“And the answer has overwhelmingly been throughout the years that this is extremely rare,” Clapman said. “Oftentimes courts, once they look at specific evidence, conclude that the evidence just isn't there.”

[Shady]

10 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Why restrict drop boxes....  there is no evidence there is a 'lot of fraud and abuse' associated with them.

Because there has been evidence of fraud and abuse.  Drop boxes should be in secure locations that can be monitored.

Authorities investigate potential fraud in Hamtramck's 2025 primary election

Quote

Two Hamtramck City Council members have been arraigned on charges related to alleged fraud in the 2023 election. And now authorities are investigating potential fraud in the Aug. 5 primary election.

CBS News Detroit obtained footage after submitting a Freedom of Information Act request to the clerk's office for surveillance camera footage pointed at a ballot box outside City Hall. City officials confirmed to CBS News Detroit that it handed the footage over to Michigan State Police, which is now investigating the potential fraud. MSP declined to comment, but confirmed it is investigating. 

Video from July 29 to Aug. 5 showed several individuals dropping off a handful of ballots, including someone in a black Nissan Maxima who made multiple trips. The video showed the person stuffing ballots in the box on each trip in the days leading up to the election. Another person in a red Tesla was also seen making several stops at the box, dropping off a handful of ballots.

https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/authorities-investigate-potential-fraud-hamtramck-primary-election/

[LinkSoul60]

1 minute ago, Shady said:

Because there has been evidence of fraud and abuse.  Drop boxes should be in secure locations that can be monitored.

Authorities investigate potential fraud in Hamtramck's 2025 primary election

https://www.cbsnews.com/detroit/news/authorities-investigate-potential-fraud-hamtramck-primary-election/

But to the point and what repeated looks into and court challenges have found....nothing has been proven to suggest fraud is a widespread problem and that an election has been influenced because of it.

The bottom post is an investigation into 'alleged' or 'potential' fraud.

You know full well why he's doing this....to help try and keep republican seats during midterms.  That's the only reason.