I think he just proved my point!

Tom Foley, aka Illusory Tenant marks the same story I did this morning about the Senate holding the voter ID vote. He remarks regarding those being prosecuted for voting fraud:

And I bet you every one of them already had a photo ID in their wallet.

Bingo. This new law won’t be nearly the hardship the left demands. After all, most everyone has a photo ID in their wallet. 🙂


  1. jimspice says:

    If you ever plan on going to law school, you better work on your modi before taking the LSAT.

    The following is not a valid argument:

    IF felons vote,
    AND IF all felons have IDs,
    THEN all voters are have IDs.

    Then again, I’d also argue with IllyT’s assertion that all the felons who voted have ID’s. But his statement is closer to fact than yours. The verifiable fact IS that requiring IDs would not stop felons from voting. And that is the vast majority of “fraud” that currently occurs.

    (I use the quote marks on “fraud” because I don’t believe the voting felons are doing so intentionally, but mistakenly, so this “crime” lacks the intention required. But that is really neither her nor there.)

    If there is no ID avoidable fraud (please, prove me wrong), why is this legislation going forward?

  2. That wasn’t my argument at all, jimspice. Foley made a bet, and I capitalized on the sentiment.

    This legislation is going forward because a majority of Wisconsin voters have elected representatives who think the legislation is a good idea. Why I know you are a clever man, have you gone all this time without understanding how laws are made?

    (And PS, are you arguing ignorance of the law deems those poor voting felons innocent?)

  3. requiring IDs would not stop felons from voting

    Correct. However, it would stop ILLINOIS RESIDENTS from voting in Wisconsin, whether Milwaukee, Beloit, Kenosha, or all of the above…

    And Milwaukee residents from voting in Waukesha.

  4. jimspice says:

    29, please show evidence as to the frequency with which this happens. If you can’t find it, why do you think it happens? Just ‘cuz?

  5. The point, dear Jim, is not “whether” it happens.

    The point is to PREVENT it from happening.

    And–by the way–the reason it’s called “fraud” is that it is, by design, impossible to detect. So the fact that a certain Milwaukee ward had more votes than registered voters points to fraud; but proving “who did it” will be impossible.

  6. John Foust says:

    Wow, Dad29 has taken a step forward in the growth of big government and endless laws, by supporting new laws that prevent problems that are demonstrably not happening. And Cindy again demonstrates her uncanny ability to “Follow the logic”, as I often put it.

  7. jimspice says:

    29: 100%+ turnout? I’d love to see evidence of that, as well! Link?

  8. Randy in Richmond says:
  9. And here I thought it as about creating 250,000 jobs NOT about making it harder to vote in WI than any other state….quick google searched and I came up blank on a republican running on that platform….

  10. I do hope you guys get over it. The bill will be signed next Wednesday.

  11. can we get the republican party to pay the millions of dollars that it will cost the state defending this in the courts?

  12. Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008)

    In a 6-3 decision, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the photo ID requirement, finding it closely related to Indiana’s legitimate state interest in preventing voter fraud, modernizing elections, and safeguarding voter confidence.

    Requiring an identification to vote is Constitutional, as deemed by the highest court in the land. Get over it. Cry somewhere else.

  13. jimspice says:

    A little late on the response here, but for posterity sake…

    Yeah, a lot of people gave that initial report a lot of attention, but hardly anyone followed up on the final findings: http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/case_studies_by_state/wisconsin_2004.html. The takeaway? “There were 7 substantiated cases of individuals knowingly casting invalid votes that counted — all persons with felony convictions. This amounts to a rate of 0.0025% within Milwaukee and 0.0002% within the state as a whole. None of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.”

    The more votes than voters allegation is also covered at the link. A VERY thorough and documented investigation.

  14. John Foust says:

    Jim, the Republicans were concerned about massive INVISIBLE fraud promulgated by Democrats. They don’t need facts. They just feel it in their gut.

  15. “After all, most everyone has a photo ID in their wallet.”

    Spoken by someone who probably hasn’t had much experience dealing with folks in Milwaukee, especially Milwaukee’s inner city. I’m sure most everyone in Brookfield has a photo ID in their wallet, but that’s not the reality in large parts of the City of Milwaukee.

  16. Zach aka Know-it-all. I’ve worked in the inner city. The people who try do try very hard. They will put an ID in their wallet in order to vote if they know it’s required.

    Get over yourself. Soon, if possible. It’s getting old.

  17. I could say the same to you, but your schtick was old a while ago.

  18. If it bugs you, go play somewhere else.