Rasmussen Poll: Most Democrats Think Illegal Immigrants Should Vote

What if one of the reasons why criminals went to prison in the first place was due to a lack of money, would jobs in jail paying $1 an hour be a good solution? The problem is with jails is that no one cares about them, because they don't have a political voice. So by giving them the right to vote, politicians would be forced to listen to their issues. An example of this is how the Civil Rights movement started. During the Great Migration, thousands of African Americans left the south to go to the north. While the North was still racist, they let African Americans vote. When WWII came along and African Americans flooded to cities, they became a swing vote. Politicians had to pay attention to their concerns or they would lose the election. So having a political voice can work.

I think it's similiar to a kid who won a game his dad let him win. It's a bit more cruel then I'm trying to make it sound but basically because they think that they earned it, even if they didn't that it gives them some sort of perspective on the issue. In one sense they do because they did come across legally, but at the same time they didn't go through same struggles as someone else did.

 

Actually I think they could, but I would rather not put that to the test.

 

From where I sit - the "issues" of inmates are not high on my list. That is not to say that I don't want them treated humanely - I do, but they have (at present) lost their right to voice their concerns. They have to earn back that voting privilege.

Granted, but those African Americans were legitimate American citizens. It was their legal privilege to vote.

I think the idea that we should all have the same thing is counter to societal progress. Some people DO win the financial lottery via wealthy parents, or the physical lottery via genetics, but we all have to accept that no one is born beholden to another and no one is born with the right to something he does not earn. We create laws that we hope serve the common good. We force parents to care for their young until the children are of age. Some children have highly educated parents that support them, encourage them and help them with their homework. Some children come from abusive homes where their parents belittle the idea of an education. But, that's just life. If we allow those children to pass from one grade to the next without learning the subject matter - we only undermine our educational system.

The only fair way is to make everyone adhere to the same laws. Those who are born here and get instant citizenship - have a foot-up, for sure when it comes to living in the US. But, many of them are also poor, some have bad health, some are bullied in school. Being born a citizen is no guarantee life will be smooth sailing.

And, just because we have laws that offer our citizens greater benefits - does not mean non-citizens automatically deserve those benefits. Just as the inmates who would vote to free themselves, does not mean they deserve that privilege.

I think the best way to sum it up is that voting is truly a privilege - not a right. It's a privilege to be earned by following our laws and it should never be taken for granted.

 

I don't even think most states let former inmates vote. There in lies the problem, the average person doesn't care about their issues, so it is ignored by politicians. If they had the right to vote, then politicians would care about their issues. For example, dealing with recidivism. One of the reasons why investing in private prisons is good, is because of high recidivism. That's bad for everyone because they then have to pay for housing an inmate for decades instead of a few years.

But we see the effects of giving a group of people formally disenfranchised the right to vote has on that group's political goals.

I wouldn't say that it's a question of legality. It has more so to do with the idea that not every destination was arrived at the same way. Yes, the kid won a game by earning it, but so too did the kid who was let won. They're both wins, just different types of wins. So even if it was illegal now, it doesn't mean it was a wrong path to take. Speeding might be wrong in some cases, but if we hold the same standard for everyone to not speed then what if it's for an emergency? Should a person be allowed to speed if there is an emergency going on?

 

I've been reading your discussion with Cautiously Conservative, and I think CC is nailing the argument correctly. You seem to either not fully know the laws or you are simply arguing from a position of compassion as CC stated. So allow me, if you would, to address some of your opinion.

Here I have a few questions for you: 1) Did they not have that voice prior to them committing the crime and being found guilty of said crime? What is it that makes you believe that a convicted felon needed to address his issues that would have him not become a convicted felon? Most of our laws have been around for the better part of 400 years. There are only 3 states that deny and impose a lifelong denial to vote for prior felons.

What if it is society that defines the issues and those criminals were in jail for what society deems a crime? Why does one commit crimes again after they are released for their first offense? They know full well what the laws are. There are self help organizations along with mandated help from the state, if the person truly wants the help, thy can easily get it, the problem is most don't want the help and are rather intent on making their own choices. You can't help or force those that don't want the help.

Society has removed certain rights from certain groups simply because those groups, as CC stated, would vote to better themselves and not society. Who would you rather be in charge of the hen house, the rooster or the fox?

Society has deemed that the only ones that can speed for an emergency are those that are in the position of being protective of society, i.e. police officers, firemen, ambulance. Even then they are limited to keeping the rest of the public safe if they go over the speed limit. One persons situation does not trump the rest of the surrounding society. The general public comes first over ones own issues.

Now, immigrants, even some illegal ones, can vote in local elections in some states, however our very own USC states what the eligibility is to vote in Federal elections in the US, it is a right reserved for citizens.

 

The privatization of prisons is problematic because it's profit-driven. There's a lot of political pressure to keep prison populations high - even within the prison industry itself.

If you ever get a minute, you should scan this report - it's really telling.

http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents/gaming_the_system.pdf

Whereas that might indeed have an effect on the groups, themselves, is that effect desirable to society as a whole. I'm not opposed to members of any community, legal or illegal, getting together with neighbors and implementing programs to help their community.

They can certainly help themselves and their communities without voting. That doesn't mean that they one day won't be able to vote - just not until they're citizens.

Now, there we agree. Everything is relative when comparing the risk to the potential reward.

 

Im not surprised you view knowledge as poison.

 

How you frame the knowledge is poison.

 

As I said, Im not surprised you think that way.....at all.

 

I have to reply to about 5 or so more people. While I do that and read this report, if you like John Oliver, he covered this story as well.
[video=youtube;_Pz3syET3DY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Pz3syET3DY[/video]

So then, I'm curious what would you say to this problem. Let's say a business wants to cut wages to its illegal workers. They can't survive on the cut wages. So where would they go to protest this injustice? How would they go about protesting this?

Glad to hear that. It's good to know that we can work through our differences.

 

EDIT: Sorry, I thought you were Alpha Omega. Please excuse me, I did not notice your name.

1. Yes they did.
2. Recidivism and the rise of debator's prison.
3. "Thirty-five states prohibit at least some people from voting after they have been released from prison. The rules about which felonies are covered and when the right to vote is restored vary widely from state to state, and often defy logic. In four states, including New York, felons on parole cannot vote, but felons on probation can. In some states, felons must formally apply for restoration of their voting rights, which state officials can grant or deny on the most arbitrary of grounds."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/11/opinion/felons-and-the-right-to-vote.html

http://www.fairvote.org/research-and-analysis/voting-rights/felon-disenfranchisement/

To that I ask this question, if they know the law, why are people arrested for a crime provided a lawyer? Because they don't know the law. It's complicated. So even if there are all these programs, it doesn't mean they're the right programs or well funded. So all those self help programs might not really work as well as they promise. Nor does it deal with the factors that lead a person to prison in the first place. How about the School to Prison pipeline where thanks to high levels of police in schools, students are increasingly being suspended from school. What if by letting them vote, we can get rid of it?

Name one group that does not vote for their own self interest or their own goals.

Is that so? Society says that murder is not allowed, yet there are self defense laws that state you can kill another person if your life is threatened. It would appear that we have decided that such emergencies are allowed.

Cool. Nice fact to know.

 

Of course you shouldn't. I understand how speech works and know that how something comes across affects what the recipient will think. Like if a person yelled hello vs. said it in a normal friendly voice.

 

No worries

Did the potential felon not have the right to vote prior to being convicted? Debtors prisons have no bearing on a felons ability to vote or not. Recidivism is the persons own choice.

So what. A felon in prison has lost all but his basic rights, once released it is up to the state itself to allow or not.

In some states immigrants are allowed to vote in local elections. Why should every state allow it? Is each state not its own sovereign?

Lawyers do nothing other than look for loopholes around the law. People in court also have the ability to provide their own counsel, be their own lawyer.

If a person is apprehended for drugs, they most certainly know they are illegal. If the person is apprehended for driving a vehicle without tags, they most certainly know they were doing so and that it is a violation. Pretending people are that stupid that they don't know what the laws are is rather dishonest.

Now you want to let kids vote? Why do you think those officers are at those schools to begin with? Those schools have a high rate of criminal activity, from rape to drugs to gang violence. Those officers are their to protect the kids not involved and the faculty.

Every group does, however democracy says he with the most votes wins, The USC says who is eligible to vote in federal elections, each individual State say who can vote in their elections based on prior votes as set by society.

Self defense allows for one to defend themselves, if the attacker dies in the process so be it, you won't be charged with a crime. Is it an emergency or type of an emergency? No.

So you are advocating things you seem to not fully comprehend or lack any knowledge in.

 

Opinion report based on nothing more than advocacy.

If an illegal is working they are either using a forged/fake/stolen SS card and ID, or they are being paid cash daily. If the employer cuts the wages, he could only do so on the cash employee, the other employee has provided the proper documents even though they may be fraudulent. If the employee can prove he was working for said employer and had his wages cut, the employee can go to any EDD and file a complaint, he has limited rights and protections. You again demonstrate you don't know anything in regards to employee rights, whether the person is legal or illegally working.

Are you old enough to have a job? Never mind, your profile says you are a student and that you are 19. You are arguing/advocating things you know very little about.

 

You are a Socialist (Collective Anarchist) which is left of Liberalism, and quite near Communist/Marxist.

 

Who has declared the system to be broken? The illegals themselves? Those Socialists that advocate removing our own identity? Why should a person not recognized in our society be able to vote on what effects our society? Our rights are reserved for ourselves and our posterity, what makes you believe that anybody that is here (illegally or otherwise - immigrants) should have the right to vote?

 

What would you put in place of citizenship? An open society that has no laws, where everybody is out for themselves. Whats to stop me from taking what is yours and making it mine? He who has the most might is the one who is right?

 

They have "borrowed" SS numbers or they use their ITIN numbers on SS cards. If they are having deductions withheld, that still doesn't constitute paying taxes, since when they file their tax forms using their ITIN numbers they receive back more than was withheld and end up with a negative tax rate.

 

They comes up in that sentence all to much. They have no right granted to them in our society, we, as a society, have the inalienable right to deny them all but basic human rights - food, shelter, first aid.

Sales tax doesn't cover their costs. Tax withholding isn't paying federal income tax. Your yearly income tax isn't figured out until you file your tax forms for the year, to which the overwhelming majority receive back more than what was withheld, thereby having a negative tax rate, taking from every other member of society.

 

1) There's a pretty good chance it will remain illegal far into the future.
2) strawman
3) What if they are living in the US illegally and are not recognized by the Federal Govt?
4) Those employees already have some rights , they can speak out against the company if they choose, they can picket the company too, but if the employee doesn't fulfill the agreement then the employer can fire them. States have their own laws in regards to employment at will, an employer can fire an employee for just about anything, you don't have a right to have a job. Employment is a contract where the employer has most of the power since the employee is agreeing to work for the employer.
Go learn basic employer/employee law.

 

What makes you believe they pay taxes now or even after your little scenario? Tax withholdings is not paying taxes. Local sales taxes aren't paying taxes, they are a consumption tax.

 

Govt will never be completely out of the economy, our USC won't allow them to be out completely

Most already have, even in countries where the left is n charge are failing. Cuba, Venezuela. Even Europe and Great Britain are returning to the right.

Anything being possible, but highly unlikely. This makes me think of Dumb And Dumber when Lloyd asks if he has a chance at being with Mary

 

word salad /word sal·ad/ (werd sal´ad) a meaningless mixture of words and phrases characteristic of advanced schizophrenia.

 

Unfortunately, they have no voice other than to risk exposing themselves.

It's like the drug dealer who gets ripped off by his illegal buyer. Where can he turn for help?

The bottom line, in my opinion, is that people take known risks when they choose to operate outside the law, which is why it is vital to follow legal paths.

It's like I taught my children - if you don't like a law - change it - but don't break it. So, I can see you asking next - how do illegal immigrants change this law? The answer is - they cannot from their current position, which is one of breaking it. They first must become legal, and then they will have the standing to make changes.

 

The "borrowed" SSN happens but with today's IRS electronic filing, it doesn't last long before it sends up a red flag.

The ITIN is more for those here on work visas, who can supply the documentation called for when filing a W-7. You can see what supporting documentation is needed in the instructions.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/iw7.pdf