Racism & election interference

[88BuckeyeGrad]

To add to the last point I made, one of the candidates, Captain Bonespur, wants you to not have faith in the system, to believe that America is not a great nation, and that Democrats (and some Republicans, and Facebook, and people who stutter, and...) are America's enemies. Get enough people to buy into that, and Russia & China will be the least of our worries. They won't have to lift a finger to destroy us, and won't even have to buy a ticket to watch us destroy ourselves.

The best medicine for corruption is sunshine. Captain Bonespur would not be able to do all the dastardly things you think he's doing if the systems were so trustworthy that no one would believe they could be corrupted.

[88BuckeyeGrad]

- Yes, Mikey I let you slide, but only because you can cook, appreciate good wine, and would also avoid Screwy, Poptard and Diego at a Troll Stop, restaurant or other location where sane people can scoot politely away from droolers).

Thanks for the vote of confidence. I think.

I've been tempted to jump into this discussion, but it's hardly worth the time. Your argument is 100% based on counterfactuals and strawmen. As an attorney, I would have thought that you were better than this.

You do know what a counterfactual argument is, don't you? It's impossible to "prove" that there was no rampant fraud, other than the fact that, despite the best efforts of experts on both sides, there is no evidence of it, on either side. So, let's see your evidence. It consists, basically, that without this assumed widespread fraud, there's no way that Biden could have won. And what are you basing that on, besides the fact the Trump says so? Really, you should be better than this. Without some "proof" that there was no fraud, there is not way to convince you that the election was legitimate. I guess there will never be a legitimate election where your side loses.

It's kind of telling that the only time you people talk about voter fraud is when your guy loses. So, was there no fraud in all those Congressional districts won by Republipukes?

The issue isn't about the 2020 election. It arises every time (remember 2016?). It will be raised after 2024 no matter who wins or loses.

You are happy with the outcome of the last election and thus think the system is operating just fine. If it turns out differently in 2024, I hope you come here and post that the system is operating just fine. only time will tell.

Systems must be protected. Voters can fuck up. When they do, the next election cycle can clean up the mess. But you cannot let the system get compromised. That is fatal. When people quit on the system, your system collapses and you have Haiti.

Yes, systems must be protected. And they are being protected. The people undermining the system are the ones, like you, who claim that the results are invalid, without a shred of evidence to show it to back it up. Like I said, it can't now, and never will be able be proven that there was no fraud, other than that the systems we have in place have not found it.

I have not said the election results are invalid. I said that the system is not secure and until it is secure there will be doubts regarding the results. See the first sentence below:

I don’t know whether Dump got more votes than Bidet in 2020. No one else does either.

I, for one, know that Biden got more votes. Feeling sorry for you here. Because you will never feel comfortable with the results of an election where your guy loses. After all, if YOU think he's the better candidate, how can anybody vote the other way?

You cannot possibly know what you claim to know. This has nothing to do with Dump.

It makes little sense to me that a guy who wouldn’t leave his basement would get 20M more votes than Obama. And it is hard to understand how Dump could get more votes than any incumbent president in history, and get more black and Latino votes than any Repuke ever, yet still lose. But shit happens. It’s possible. It is also improbable. That’s why you need unassailable systems. Roll snake eyes 32 times in a row. But use clean dice and let all of us see what’s happening. Don’t put paper over the windows etc.

It makes little sense to me that a known liar, fraud and serial rapist could ever be nominated but either party. But there you go. And why are these other things so hard for you to understand? There a all sorts of explanations, but obviously conjecture like all of your arguments here. Maybe more people were motivated to vote in 2020. And how you do you know that more blacks and Latinos voted for Trump than any Republican ever? Polls? We all know how accurate they are. Can you present this convincing analysis?

BTW...here's your strawman.

We will agree to disagree. And you will continue to fight against efforts to improve election integrity unless and until it benefits your preferred candidates. Free and fair elections should be the desire of all. Especially those claiming that their political adversaries are threats to democracy.

It seems that many are willing to sacrifice the absolute count for a higher potential participation rate. In other words, some are cool with a 5% fraud rate if there is a 15% higher participation rate. That is fucking stupid. And yes, I’m drinking Mikey’s wine and looking at you. Chan.

Presenting data that have no basis in fact, and implying that others are willing to accept these completely imaginary values.

Its not data. It was an example. The sentence could have been written as "In other words, some are cool with a significant fraud rate if there is an even higher participation rate."

[88BuckeyeGrad]

You aren’t interested in fairness. You’re interested in your own selfish interest. You and your fraudulent ilk are sickening.

You better get something for that sickness. Maybe one of Diego's masks.

[Bill in Houston]

the system has to be nearly perfect.

Getting there is a noble and worthy goal. Depending on what you consider nearly, it may be unattainable. But let's assume it can be reached. What would it take for you to be 100% convinced that such a system has been created? How would it be verified? And if it can't be at the 100% level, then what? You throw up your hands and consider the election to be a sham? Why vote then?

That is a lot of questions. But I'll try to answer them. First of all, you can do all kinds of things to improve election integrity. You could require all votes to be cast at supervised polling locations in person, as they do in some countries. You could require that every person who wishes to cast a vote produce identification establishing that they are qualified to vote, as they do in some countries. You could require that every vote be cast on a paper ballot, which includes information sufficient to identify the person who cast the vote, as they do in some countries. And, you could mark the voter who cast the vote with a dye that lasts for a few days, again as they do in some countries. There are lots of other things that can be done to improve election integrity. And I'm not advocating for any of them here. There is obviously a balance to be struck between convenience, participation and accuracy/integrity.

Or we could require anyone interested in voting to submit a DNA test sixty days prior to any election and be accept an implant chip to be scanned when submitting a ballot.

Why not that, HUH?

When you have a situation as we have now, where whenever anyone loses (Clinton 2016; Trump 2020), the loser claims that the election was rigged or corrupted, you need to make efforts to tighten up the election rules. If you do not, the voters will decide that the game is rigged, and then all hell breaks lose. I've never seen more people talking about election fraud from both sides of the political spectrum in my life. The situation is not good.

There you are again with your lies and bullshit. The response after the election in 2016 was NOTHING like 2020. To claim so is just more of your echo chamber cult messaging.

It seems that many are willing to sacrifice the absolute count for a higher potential participation rate. In other words, some are cool with a 5% fraud rate if there is a 15% higher participation rate. That is fucking stupid. And yes, I’m drinking Mikey’s wine and looking at you. Chan.

Well, I hope you like what you see, although it is creeping me out a little. And it appears it's not Mikey's wine you're drinking, but rather Cheetoh McTinyhands' Kool-Aid. I'm not willing to sacrifice an iota of accuracy and/or integrity for convenience. I was merely pointing out the challenges faced in trying to shore up whatever vulnerabilities need to be.

Yes you are. If you oppose voter identification requirements, the purging of voter rolls that are not accurate, requirements to closely monitor ballot drop-boxes, rules prohibiting ballot harvesting, rules that prohibit mass-mailing of actual ballots to every potential voter etc., then you are not serious about improving election integrity.

Making up more shit.
We have voter ID requirements.
We have monitoring of ballot drop boxes.
We have rules prohibiting ballot harvesting.
We have rules prohibiting mass-mailing of actual ballots to every potential voter.
JFC, Hyperbole much???

[Systems must be protected.

You'll get no argument from me on that. Not sure who in their right mind would argue against it. And given that no one knows the extent to which voter fraud was conducted in the 2020 election or any election before, how does anyone know if the rate of fraud has risen, fallen, or remained about the same throughout history? It seems plausible to perhaps assume that it has become more rampant with increased mail-in and electronic voting, but I won't jump to the conclusion that it has because there's been no evidence presented to support it. Were systems better protected back in the good ol' days of in-person voting only? I dunno. Do you? And if so, how? As a realist, I know there's no going back to those days. As technology progresses, it will be further introduced into election systems. And as is usually the case, it may not get addressed at the proper level until an election occurs during which massive fraud is uncovered. 2020 was not that election.

It does not matter whether voter fraud increased or decreased in prior elections. That it could have occurred and there is no way to audit it with any reliability should be reason enough to do something to make sure it is not happening. Where are you going to get evidence of fraud if no one is looking for it and there is no way to identify it using the records that are maintained?

Again with your gaslighting. ‘No way to audit’ our elections? Fuck you and your lies. ‘Make sure fraud is not happening’? Stop your lies. There was no fraud that altered the outcome of the 2020 election. ‘No one is looking for fraud ‘? Really? What in the hell makes you state that? You’re just more lies and it certainly isn’t helping you make a point.

After the Bush/Gore election in 2000, the news media made a full-court press to independently audit the Florida election (finding more votes for Bush, by the way). But there has been no comparable effort by the major news outlets to see if the election in 2020 was conducted in an honest manner. The Press (and the droolers on this board) just say that no one has found any evidence of fraud, while knowing full well that there has been no serious effort to attempt to find it.

BWAAAHAHAHAHAHA. What you mean is the media didn’t find any evidence to overturn the Dump loss. Now this will be quite difficult for you to comprehend, but the reason the media didn’t publish that evidence is because it doesn’t exist. No matter how much you keep crying you can’t change the facts.

If you don’t give credence to Mr Pillow Biter, Kari Lake and Donnie Fat Ass, then don’t regurgitate all of their BS. Try working with the truth.

[The Seer]

You are happy with the outcome of the last election and thus think the system is operating just fine. If it turns out differently in 2024, I hope you come here and post that the system is operating just fine. only time will tell.

Prepare for the apoplectic frenzied reaction should that come to pass.....

[Softball Bat]

There you are again with your lies and bullshit. The response after the election in 2016 was NOTHING like 2020. To claim so is just more of your echo chamber cult messaging.

I was going to respond to that take by 88, but you beat me to it, Bill.

88, the great pretender.

[Smackie Chan]

There is obviously a balance to be struck between convenience, participation and accuracy/integrity.

But earlier,

It seems that many are willing to sacrifice the absolute count for a higher potential participation rate. In other words, some are cool with a 5% fraud rate if there is a 15% higher participation rate. That is fucking stupid.

So are you now ditching that position? I thought your take was that accuracy and integrity were paramount and nothing should get in the way of or compromise achieving 100%. Are you now accepting what you previously said was "fucking stupid"? You seem to be a bit of a train wreck here. You ok?

When you have a situation as we have now, where whenever anyone loses (Clinton 2016; Trump 2020), the loser claims that the election was rigged or corrupted, you need to make efforts to tighten up the election rules. If you do not, the voters will decide that the game is rigged, and then all hell breaks lose. I've never seen more people talking about election fraud from both sides of the political spectrum in my life. The situation is not good.

There is evidence that Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election. Not sure to what extent it was successful. Hillary essentially faded into obscurity shortly afterward. The attempt to rig the election was not the centerpiece of the next general election campaign, and Democrats were not sounding the alarm that our voting system was under siege and that Americans should abandon their faith in it, even though their party was the apparent "victim." The same cannot be said of what Trump has done since losing. It seems to be all he thinks and talks about other than the border and being able to end the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza in one day. The situation is not good because Trump has convinced you and the MAGAts that the sky is falling. And since he said it, it must be true.

It seems that many are willing to sacrifice the absolute count for a higher potential participation rate. In other words, some are cool with a 5% fraud rate if there is a 15% higher participation rate. That is fucking stupid. And yes, I’m drinking Mikey’s wine and looking at you. Chan.

Well, I hope you like what you see, although it is creeping me out a little. And it appears it's not Mikey's wine you're drinking, but rather Cheetoh McTinyhands' Kool-Aid. I'm not willing to sacrifice an iota of accuracy and/or integrity for convenience. I was merely pointing out the challenges faced in trying to shore up whatever vulnerabilities need to be.

Yes you are. If you oppose voter identification requirements, the purging of voter rolls that are not accurate, requirements to closely monitor ballot drop-boxes, rules prohibiting ballot harvesting, rules that prohibit mass-mailing of actual ballots to every potential voter etc., then you are not serious about improving election integrity.

Link me up to where I said or even hinted at any of that. I do vote by mail, though, and haven't lost a minute's sleep worrying about it. There's nothing I can do about it anyway (whining about it on a message board seems pretty ineffectual to me). AZ, which until recently was among the most reliable red states, has had a long history of mail-in voting with little to no issues, the previous two-term Republican governor supported it, as does pretty much everyone else in the state except that whack job Kari Lake, who is being sued by Republican Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer for her slanderous statements, and the MAGAts. If you're so serious about "improving election integrity," are you doing anything about it?

Help me reconcile this, and I'll have to make the assumption that more than a little $$ would be required to overhaul ALL the different voting systems and processes across the nation to implement everything you'd like to see to ease your troubled mind over this. You've conceded that no one knows the extent of the problem - could be inconsequential, could be huge. Agree? Isn't this the same as anthropomorphic climate change? You've gone on record, and even loaned me a book about it (have I returned it?), saying that since the scope and cause of the problem is unknown, significant funding should not be spent on it. But we should spend a bunch to fix the election issues that no one really knows is even a problem? How do you rationalize that?

It does not matter whether voter fraud increased or decreased in prior elections. That it could have occurred and there is no way to audit it with any reliability should be reason enough to do something to make sure it is not happening. Where are you going to get evidence of fraud if no one is looking for it and there is no way to identify it using the records that are maintained? After the Bush/Gore election in 2000, the news media made a full-court press to independently audit the Florida election (finding more votes for Bush, by the way). But there has been no comparable effort by the major news outlets to see if the election in 2020 was conducted in an honest manner. The Press (and the droolers on this board) just say that no one has found any evidence of fraud, while knowing full well that there has been no serious effort to attempt to find it.

Really?

While the "audit" was widely considered to be a miserable failure because it didn't yield the results those who called for it expected or wanted, I think AZ Republicans would be insulted by your considering their attempt to find fraud as not being serious.

If you have faith, but refuse to look objectively at things, you end up living of a flat erf filled with conspiracies.

I'm not the party to this discussion buying into the conspiracies.

We should improve election integrity. Anyone who opposes efforts to do so lying frauds.

The issue here, as you pointed out, is one of perception. And it is important. But the perception that there is an election integrity problem has taken a larger hold than it rightfully should, imo, and has been propagated and fueled by a sore loser who holds a hypnotic trance over his idiot followers. Again, the system isn't perfect and never will be. In economics, there's a term you're likely familiar with called the point of diminishing returns represented by "the bend in the knee" of a curve on a graph. It's the point at which further allocation of resources does not yield enough in return to make it a worthwhile investment. To make that determination, one must know where that point lies. You've conceded that neither you nor anyone else knows where it is, but you're still in favor of throwing money at something that may result in little to no positive results? Why on this issue, but not climate change? What's the difference between the amount of info we have on one of these issues versus the other, and if it's roughly the same, why take different courses of action on them?

[smackaholic]

I don’t trust it.

Seems to be you have a lot of hand wringing to get to. Or better yet, don’t vote.

So your message to a rather substantial chunk of the country who don’t trust the system
Is too bad, go fukk yourselves?

Would it not make more sense to try implement a voting system which simply requires a person to show up in person and produce a photo ID?

Or is that racist?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Screw_Michigan]

So your message to a rather substantial chunk of the country who don’t trust the system
Is too bad, go fukk yourselves?

Correct

[Screw_Michigan]

The GQP strategy is that if you scream long enough and stomp your feet hard enough about "voter fraud," people will eventually get tired of your antics and give you what you want. Like five year olds.

Conservatives are warning about noncitizens voting. It's a myth with a long history

https://www.npr.org/2024/03/13/12381025 ... acy-theory

[Smackie Chan]

I don’t trust it.

Seems to be you have a lot of hand wringing to get to. Or better yet, don’t vote.

So your message to a rather substantial chunk of the country who don’t trust the system
Is too bad, go fukk yourselves?

If that chunk becomes substantial enough and can demonstrate there actually is a problem, the system (as if there's only one) will get changed. Just because some folks are distrustful (and there always will be some regardless of the system) doesn't mean the object of their distrust is valid. The attempts I'm aware of to prove fraud (which is incumbent on the ones claiming it since a negative can't be proven) have been laughable. But feel free to worry about it and distrust it all you want, I'm not trying to stop you. You have my blessing to tilt at that windmill all you want, Senor Quixote.

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

As someone who has never been shy about posting at length and on any subject on these here message boards, surely your concern about election integrity must date back to maybe 2000, or 2004, or 2008, or 2012. When did you first raise the flag in here regarding those concerns? Just curious.

Would it not make more sense to try implement a voting system which simply requires a person to show up in person and produce a photo ID?

So git 'er done, champ.

Or is that racist?

Show me where I've played the race card on this issue.

[Smackie Chan]

The best medicine for corruption is sunshine. Captain Bonespur would not be able to do all the dastardly things you think he's doing if the systems were so trustworthy that no one would believe they could be corrupted.

What the hell does election integrity and what I think Trump might be doing have to do with each other? What is it you believe the sun is not shining on that needs to be exposed to the light? And I don’t have to think about what Trump might be doing. He’s certainly not shy about confessing to it every time he opens his pie hole or clacks out his idiocy on Mistruth Social.

[Softball Bat]

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

Bingo.

I have been *chuckling* when I read some "conservatives" calling for a National ID Card.

[Mikey]

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

Bingo.

I have been *chuckling* when I read some "conservatives" calling for a National ID Card.

Actung!! Haltensie!!You haff paperz?

[Sudden Sam]

Over the last 30 years we’ve turned politics into another form of entertainment. Sports, movies, amusement parks and politics. We’ve been dumbed down to where total idiots can ascend to the top. It’s over and done…there’s no turning back. There are no statesmen. There are no honest, dedicated persons who want to fix the country who can get elected. We nominate clowns. This is where we are. We have to accept that.

[smackaholic]

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

Bingo.

I have been *chuckling* when I read some "conservatives" calling for a National ID Card.

I am not for a national ID card.

What I am for is doing whatever we can to ensure votes are cast by the correct person.

It’s a shame that some of you fukkers don’t share this desire.

Then you jump up and down and scream when people protest about it.

But that’s all part of getting rid of TBOM.

Gotta break a few eggs, I guess. Right comrades?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[smackaholic]

Seems to be you have a lot of hand wringing to get to. Or better yet, don’t vote.

So your message to a rather substantial chunk of the country who don’t trust the system
Is too bad, go fukk yourselves?

If that chunk becomes substantial enough and can demonstrate there actually is a problem, the system (as if there's only one) will get changed. Just because some folks are distrustful (and there always will be some regardless of the system) doesn't mean the object of their distrust is valid. The attempts I'm aware of to prove fraud (which is incumbent on the ones claiming it since a negative can't be proven) have been laughable. But feel free to worry about it and distrust it all you want, I'm not trying to stop you. You have my blessing to tilt at that windmill all you want, Senor Quixote.

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

As someone who has never been shy about posting at length and on any subject on these here message boards, surely your concern about election integrity must date back to maybe 2000, or 2004, or 2008, or 2012. When did you first raise the flag in here regarding those concerns? Just curious.

Would it not make more sense to try implement a voting system which simply requires a person to show up in person and produce a photo ID?

So git 'er done, champ.

Or is that racist?

Show me where I've played the race card on this issue.

I’ve never seen you play it.

The trouble is, the primary complaint from those opposed to mandatory photo IDs and in person voting, which you seem to go along with is that it’s RAAAACIIIIIIST!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[smackaholic]

The best medicine for corruption is sunshine. Captain Bonespur would not be able to do all the dastardly things you think he's doing if the systems were so trustworthy that no one would believe they could be corrupted.

What the hell does election integrity and what I think Trump might be doing have to do with each other? What is it you believe the sun is not shining on that needs to be exposed to the light? And I don’t have to think about what Trump might be doing. He’s certainly not shy about confessing to it every time he opens his pie hole or clacks out his idiocy on Mistruth Social.

What 8s is saying is that Trump crying about stolen elections only gets traction because the 2020 election with its mail in ballots for everyone was a problem.

And yeah, I know, he couldn’t prove it.

So fukking what?

It was an election that couldn’t be proven one way or the other.

Did Trump really win?

Who the fukk knows?

What we do know is circumstantial evidence (ridiculously high turnout in certain areas) point to substantial vote harvesting operations.

Trouble is, how the fukk do you prove it?

You can’t prove a mail in vote is fraudulent just as you can’t prove it’s legit.

It’s a rotten system that needs fixing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Softball Bat]

It was an election that couldn’t be proven one way or the other.

Did Trump really win?

Who the fukk knows?

Trump said he knows that he won.

[smackaholic]

It was an election that couldn’t be proven one way or the other.

Did Trump really win?

Who the fukk knows?

Trump said he knows that he won.

Trump says a lot of dumb shit. What else is new?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Screw_Michigan]

Trump says a lot of dumb shit.

Your type of guy

[smackaholic]

Trump says a lot of dumb shit.

Your type of guy

Not really, but given the choices, I’ll take him.

Been listening to a lot of RFK Jr interviews.

I actually kind of like him. He’s an honest non-batshit crazy liberal. Those folks are getting g hard to find.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mvscal]

You need ID to conduct your personal business in virtually every part of your life.

Maybe you do.

In a free country, someone can choose not to obtain a government-issued ID.
Maybe they have a reason(s) for operating that way.

"Okay, then they can't vote," you say.

Because they have made a choice, in a free country, to live their life the way they want to?

Also, some people have life circumstances which make obtaining a government-issued ID difficult, if not impossible.

The fact is, voter ID laws disproportionately affect low income folks.
Low income folks tend to be non-white.

Total bullshit. Try to sign up for welfare without ID just for starters. Voter ID laws disproportionately affect fraudulent voters. The only circumstance which would make obtaining a government issued ID difficult is if you have a warrant for your arrest or are an illegal alien.

[Diego in Seattle]

You need ID to conduct your personal business in virtually every part of your life.

Maybe you do.

In a free country, someone can choose not to obtain a government-issued ID.
Maybe they have a reason(s) for operating that way.

"Okay, then they can't vote," you say.

Because they have made a choice, in a free country, to live their life the way they want to?

Also, some people have life circumstances which make obtaining a government-issued ID difficult, if not impossible.

The fact is, voter ID laws disproportionately affect low income folks.
Low income folks tend to be non-white.

Total bullshit. Try to sign up for welfare without ID just for starters. Voter ID laws disproportionately affect fraudulent voters. The only circumstance which would make obtaining a government issued ID difficult is if you have a warrant for your arrest or are an illegal alien.

Apparently you didn't get the Republican memo that illegal immigrants are getting handed welfare money hand over foot...

[mvscal]

As you say, handed not applied for at the local office. Just another reason Pedo Joe and his shitted diaper need to be sent packing.

[Mikey]

As you say, handed not applied for at the local office. Just another reason Pedo Joe and his shitted diaper need to be sent packing.

Quite the impressive backpedal.

[Sven Golly]

Maybe you do.

In a free country, someone can choose not to obtain a government-issued ID.
Maybe they have a reason(s) for operating that way.

"Okay, then they can't vote," you say.

Because they have made a choice, in a free country, to live their life the way they want to?

Also, some people have life circumstances which make obtaining a government-issued ID difficult, if not impossible.

The fact is, voter ID laws disproportionately affect low income folks.
Low income folks tend to be non-white.

Total bullshit. Try to sign up for welfare without ID just for starters. Voter ID laws disproportionately affect fraudulent voters. The only circumstance which would make obtaining a government issued ID difficult is if you have a warrant for your arrest or are an illegal alien.

Apparently you didn't get the Republican memo that illegal immigrants are getting handed welfare money hand over foot...

To no surprise, you just folded in and obliterated you're own, or one your fellow numbskull progressive's, pathetic argument.

Typical.

[Mikey]

To no surprise, you just folded in and obliterated you're own, or one your fellow numbskull progressive's, pathetic argument.

Typical.

Do you speak English, maybe on alternate days?

[Sven Golly]

To no surprise, you just folded in and obliterated you're own, or one your fellow numbskull progressive's, pathetic argument.

Typical.

Do you speak English, maybe on alternate days?

Do you understand English, or perhaps on alternate days?

And way to skirt the issue.

Haven't heard a solid argument against requiring ID's.

[FiatLux]

Haven't heard a solid argument against requiring ID's.

I lost mine.

DMV can take up to two months to replace it.

Thank god... we have computers that have me in the system.


Crazy times with all this new technology!

[L45B]

DMV

One of the most efficient government agencies. Sadly.

[Diego in Seattle]

DMV

One of the most efficient government agencies. Sadly.

Do tell.

[mvscal]

As you say, handed not applied for at the local office. Just another reason Pedo Joe and his shitted diaper need to be sent packing.

Quite the impressive backpedal.

There is no back pedal other than yours. Try getting food stamps without an ID.

Your theory, presented without evidence, that "people of color" are too stupid to obtain a state ID is patronizing and racist.

[mvscal]

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

Bingo.

I have been *chuckling* when I read some "conservatives" calling for a National ID Card.

We already have those. They're called passports. I presume you are familiar with them.

[Softball Bat]

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

Bingo.

I have been *chuckling* when I read some "conservatives" calling for a National ID Card.

We already have those. They're called passports. I presume you are familiar with them.

A passport is obtained by choice.

Are you advocating for a national ID card for all citizens?

[Bill in Houston]

As a good Republican, you must be in favor of states' rights and the Constitution, correct? Sounds to me like your advocating for a one-size-fits-all Federal solution to a problem that may not exist in violation of what the Constitution mandates. How very big central government of you. Are you happy that you've made Ronald Reagan roll over in his grave?

Bingo.

I have been *chuckling* when I read some "conservatives" calling for a National ID Card.

We already have those. They're called passports. I presume you are familiar with them.

How dishonest can you be?

Can you identify any differences between the mandatory ID voting card being advocated by the fascists and a voluntary passport?

Pause, take plenty of time, read it
V E R Y S L O W L Y

This isn’t your nazi board circle jerk, you’ll be called on your bs.


I

[mvscal]

Are you advocating for a national ID card for all citizens?

I don't see any particular necessity for a national ID at this point per se. If a compelling reason was presented for requiring one, I would consider that rationale. Presumably, the implementation would be tied to the social security number which you already have.

You have to have some form of ID to participate in our society at even the most basic level. I don't see the big, hairy fucking deal here.

[mvscal]

Can you identify any differences between the mandatory ID voting card being advocated by the fascists and a voluntary passport?

There is none. Some form of valid identification is required for a great deal more than simply voting. The more pertinent question is your hysterical opposition to the requirement that people voting in an election be able to demonstrate that they are who they claim to be. How is that unreasonable?

Oh, yes. That's right. You aren't capable of critical reasoning. You are ruled by emotion and prejudice as most faggots are. You are a faggot, yes?

[Sudden Sam]

Someone please explain the strident opposition to voters’ identification being confirmed. I’ve been astounded for years at the left’s determination to keep that at bay.

[Mikey]

As you say, handed not applied for at the local office. Just another reason Pedo Joe and his shitted diaper need to be sent packing.

Quite the impressive backpedal.

There is no back pedal other than yours. Try getting food stamps without an ID.

Your theory, presented without evidence, that "people of color" are too stupid to obtain a state ID is patronizing and racist.

I didn’t present any “theory.” Try again.