- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Trump will sign Executive Order Mandating Voter ID
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:48 pm
New York Times
Trump to sign EO requiring voter ID. He will also restrict mail-in voting and require paper ballots.
I absolutely voted for this.
Trump to sign EO requiring voter ID. He will also restrict mail-in voting and require paper ballots.
I absolutely voted for this.
This post was edited on 9/2/25 at 4:53 pm
40
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:50 pm to KCRoyalBlue
I wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:55 pm to KCRoyalBlue
This is how it should be.
In person, with ID, on paper.
In person, with ID, on paper.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:56 pm to KCRoyalBlue
Will never survive litigation.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:57 pm to SoFla Tideroller
Idea is to get it to the USSC?
Posted on 8/31/25 at 1:58 pm to KCRoyalBlue
Im shaking right now. How am I supposed to get an ID just to vote? This screams voter suppression.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:02 pm to KCRoyalBlue
This one is going to get interesting. Not sure it survives USSC.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:04 pm to KCRoyalBlue
Voter ID is the biggest litmus test issue out there.
If you bend over backwards to oppose it; you suck and i disagree with all of your positions, dont need to know anything else.
If you bend over backwards to oppose it; you suck and i disagree with all of your positions, dont need to know anything else.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this.
My reaction is that I don’t want to be governed by a system which relies on the results of elections in states that intentionally look the other way from illegals voting. (EDIT: or intentionally uncontrolled mail voting.)
Thanks for asking.
This post was edited on 8/31/25 at 2:15 pm
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this.
When electing for a federal office, I see only benefit in having this rule.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
Since this only applies to federal elections, none.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:09 pm to KCRoyalBlue
Newscum’s Nightmare
He was counting on those 12 million votes from Jose, Juan and Edgar.
He was counting on those 12 million votes from Jose, Juan and Edgar.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this.
That would include me.
I recognize that there is a conceptual flaw in the way national elections are constructed by constitution, by legal precedent, and/or by assumptions made in practice. Maybe your sharp legal mind can sort this out for me.
I get and respect that the idea was to create some system that respected the independence of the states. So much so in fact, that they were constantly talking about and conceiving of ways to prevent a federal government from taking too much power. They wanted a form of confederation of states with just enough power in the federal government for war, regulating conflicts (interstate commerce) between the states, etc.
Over time, these separations of the states and minimization of the fedgov were shown to be insufficient and unworkable if we were going to continue to be a nation. The Civil War was one major crack in that system.
I think its obvious that certain election processes in one state can definitely affect the citizens of other states. I don’t even think that the vast majority of Americans even understand this wall of separation and assume that national elections are national in fact and in essence, and not processes of the individual states.
I think we SHOULD have one set of standards for voting in national elections.
I DO object to the president just declaring this by executive order. Trump is not the first POTUS to simply use “his phone and his pen”, and I think he is engaging in a counter-revolution to the one the Dems have been conducting on numerous fronts for decades and certainly in overdrive since Obama.
Trump is not so much establishing precedence as he is cementing it by participating in it on the opposite side, which legitimizes it. I don’t know how we put this genie back in the bottle.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:11 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this
Blue states aren’t even following their own laws. Frick them.
Not a fan of transparency brah?
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:12 pm to Pendulum
quote:
Voter ID is the biggest litmus test issue out there. If you bend over backwards to oppose it; you suck and i disagree with all of your positions, dont need to know anything else.
So true.
Not having to prove you are who you say you are to vote is just insane to me.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:12 pm to KCRoyalBlue
quote:
Trump to sign EO requiring voter ID. He will also restrict mail-in voting and require paper ballots. I absolutely voted for this.
I mean, I’m all for this but who can he do that. I’m pretty sure that the states are free to conduct their elections the way they see fit.
Congress should work on changing that though for elections for Senators, House Reps and the President.
There’s simply no reason for us to not all follow the same rules. It’s ludicrous really. And it’s insane that Florida can count 10 million+ votes in one night but other states take weeks.
Whatever Florida does is what the rest of the country should be doing.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this.
What’s the remedy if a state has lax rules and even less oversight?
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:14 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
wonder how the "states rights conservatives" react to this.
Congress should address it. States should have this particular right for elected offices that serve at the federal level.
If California wants to act like a banana republic when they elect their dog catchers then they can go right ahead.
Posted on 8/31/25 at 2:14 pm to deathvalleytiger10
Slow is just popping off.
Page 1 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News