|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 31 2017 00:34 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 00:30 zlefin wrote:On May 30 2017 23:42 Danglars wrote:On May 30 2017 23:07 KwarK wrote:On May 30 2017 13:41 Danglars wrote:On May 30 2017 12:59 NewSunshine wrote:
So we have one party that's completely useless, with another party actively looking to fuck over minorities, in the name of "eliminating waste". They gotta cut something in an attempt to balance the budget. It alternates between being sad and funny, but more sad these days. I'm guessing one of the more "completely useless" facets of the Democratic Party is pretending the GOP is "actively looking to fuck over minorities." It's a cute propaganda line, but pretty sad and funny in its own right. When really we all know that whether African Americans have the right to vote in Alabama is a states rights issue. Sessions told me so. Then you look into the issue, and it becomes any and all ID's required to vote is racism 1-2-3. You could have free hand-couriered photo ids and it would still be discriminatory bullshit in the eyes of the left. false. most of the left would be fine with that. it's just that as a question of fact, the setups proposed by Republicans aren't those kinds of methods; the only ones they propose are the ones that have actual discriminatory effect (because that cuts down on Democratic votes). though I do wonder why people wanna spend so much money on something that doens't fix an actual real problem; so much for fiscal responsibility. i don't mean to be incendiary here but rather to highlight the claims. to the right, people voting left is the problem. spending this money solves that problem by restricting some leftist voters from getting to the polls.
yes; which makes it an understandable political tactic. immoral and wrong of course; but it's a clear and understandable basis for it.
oh, you added a bit; and to that part; I know, i'm just making a poke at their often false claim to care about fiscal responsibility when they go do something expensive for little to no actual gain to society.
|
On May 31 2017 00:36 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 00:34 brian wrote:On May 31 2017 00:30 zlefin wrote:On May 30 2017 23:42 Danglars wrote:On May 30 2017 23:07 KwarK wrote:On May 30 2017 13:41 Danglars wrote:On May 30 2017 12:59 NewSunshine wrote:
So we have one party that's completely useless, with another party actively looking to fuck over minorities, in the name of "eliminating waste". They gotta cut something in an attempt to balance the budget. It alternates between being sad and funny, but more sad these days. I'm guessing one of the more "completely useless" facets of the Democratic Party is pretending the GOP is "actively looking to fuck over minorities." It's a cute propaganda line, but pretty sad and funny in its own right. When really we all know that whether African Americans have the right to vote in Alabama is a states rights issue. Sessions told me so. Then you look into the issue, and it becomes any and all ID's required to vote is racism 1-2-3. You could have free hand-couriered photo ids and it would still be discriminatory bullshit in the eyes of the left. false. most of the left would be fine with that. it's just that as a question of fact, the setups proposed by Republicans aren't those kinds of methods; the only ones they propose are the ones that have actual discriminatory effect (because that cuts down on Democratic votes). though I do wonder why people wanna spend so much money on something that doens't fix an actual real problem; so much for fiscal responsibility. i don't mean to be incendiary here but rather to highlight the claims. to the right, people voting left is the problem. spending this money solves that problem by restricting some leftist voters from getting to the polls. yes; which makes it an understandable political tactic. immoral and wrong of course; but it's a clear and understandable basis for it. oh, you added a bit; and to that part; I know, i'm just making a poke at their often false claim to care about fiscal responsibility when they go do something expensive for little to no actual gain to society.
Well those are the two pillars politics are built on... (not a troll just my honest opinion)
|
On May 31 2017 00:33 Mysticesper wrote:
My issue with voter ID laws is that they always seem to come up right before an election instead of after, thus creating confusion and undue 'hardships' to procure an id.
though it still baffles me how people don't have one on them at nearly all times, they are required to do almost anything, and if you don't drive, you get a state ID card instead of a state DL, its like ~20 bucks every 4 years or so (varies by state)
I honestly can't think of the last time I did anything that required a photo ID outside of driving and picking something up I ordered online from Best Buy. People that don't have them most likely don't have a need for them outside of when they realize they need one for the election, when it's too late to get everybody through the production pipeline. After that, they don't have a need for one again.
|
On May 31 2017 00:48 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 00:33 Mysticesper wrote:
My issue with voter ID laws is that they always seem to come up right before an election instead of after, thus creating confusion and undue 'hardships' to procure an id.
though it still baffles me how people don't have one on them at nearly all times, they are required to do almost anything, and if you don't drive, you get a state ID card instead of a state DL, its like ~20 bucks every 4 years or so (varies by state) I honestly can't think of the last time I did anything that required a photo ID outside of driving and picking something up I ordered online from Best Buy. People that don't have them most likely don't have a need for them outside of when they realize they need one for the election, when it's too late to get everybody through the production pipeline. After that, they don't have a need for one again.
i need it every time i buy booze, because evidently i look like an 18 year old.
|
On May 31 2017 00:33 Mysticesper wrote:
My issue with voter ID laws is that they always seem to come up right before an election instead of after, thus creating confusion and undue 'hardships' to procure an id.
though it still baffles me how people don't have one on them at nearly all times, they are required to do almost anything, and if you don't drive, you get a state ID card instead of a state DL, its like ~20 bucks every 4 years or so (varies by state)
when I've done google searches on the topic, I've found good explanations for why some people don't have ids. don't have any of the links handy, but they were pretty easy to find iirc.
|
On May 31 2017 00:22 KwarK wrote:
Danglars is obsessively eager to gather evidence that preserves the integrity of the ballot in some cases, going as far as to say "sure, there's no evidence of it being a problem but can you prove that it doesn't exist, I say "no", you can only prove that you haven't found it yet, we must look harder and keep looking until we find that it is a problem" but in other cases is strangely relaxed. It's almost as if this isn't really about the integrity of the ballot.
He needs to research it when it's come up half a dozen times (and is over 100+ years old) yet he seems to know that racism is not a big deal, so how could he not have already known about a blatantly racist law impacting the most basic and necessary right in this country?
Is it possible he has no idea about the state of racism in this country and has been talking out of his ass this whole time?
|
On May 31 2017 00:22 KwarK wrote:
Danglars is obsessively eager to gather evidence that preserves the integrity of the ballot in some cases, going as far as to say "sure, there's no evidence of it being a problem but can you prove that it doesn't exist, I say "no", you can only prove that you haven't found it yet, we must look harder and keep looking until we find that it is a problem" but in other cases is strangely relaxed. It's almost as if this isn't really about the integrity of the ballot.
Zero chill Kwark. We got two states, constitutional amendments in and prior to reconstruction era from our previous conversation and regular state laws. Depending on implementation, they can develop a problem or fix a problem. Sorry if in addition to painting me as a slavery supporter on constitutional law you want to ascribe my need to look into the laws and court decisions as similarly ill intentioned. I just can't help you if your principle of charity doesn't override your preconceptions of racism and racists.
|
I've always wondered about automatic voter registration... is there any reason (beyond partisan stances) we couldn't do it similar to the way we do auto draft registration? When I turned 18, I got a letter saying "you're registered for the draft, yay!" It seems pretty simple to just say
if Person.Age >=18
vote.Register()
but I assume there's something I'm missing.
|
On May 31 2017 01:02 jcarlsoniv wrote:I've always wondered about automatic voter registration... is there any reason (beyond partisan stances) we couldn't do it similar to the way we do auto draft registration? When I turned 18, I got a letter saying "you're registered for the draft, yay!" It seems pretty simple to just say if Person.Age >=18
vote.Register() but I assume there's something I'm missing.
Politicians have convinced the half of Americans that vote to vote for them, having 60million+ new voters would completely change the political landscape.
Plus the overwhelming majority of people who don't vote are lower income, a dangerous proposition for parties designed to serve the elite donor class.
|
On May 31 2017 01:05 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 01:02 jcarlsoniv wrote:I've always wondered about automatic voter registration... is there any reason (beyond partisan stances) we couldn't do it similar to the way we do auto draft registration? When I turned 18, I got a letter saying "you're registered for the draft, yay!" It seems pretty simple to just say if Person.Age >=18
vote.Register() but I assume there's something I'm missing. Politicians have convinced the half of Americans that vote to vote for them, having 60million+ new voters would completely change the political landscape. Plus the overwhelming majority of people who don't vote are lower income, a dangerous proposition for parties designed to serve the elite donor class.
Which is why I said "beyond partisan stances". I'm looking more to find out if there is a component that renders it infeasible rather than undesirable.
|
On May 31 2017 01:11 jcarlsoniv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 01:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 31 2017 01:02 jcarlsoniv wrote:I've always wondered about automatic voter registration... is there any reason (beyond partisan stances) we couldn't do it similar to the way we do auto draft registration? When I turned 18, I got a letter saying "you're registered for the draft, yay!" It seems pretty simple to just say if Person.Age >=18
vote.Register() but I assume there's something I'm missing. Politicians have convinced the half of Americans that vote to vote for them, having 60million+ new voters would completely change the political landscape. Plus the overwhelming majority of people who don't vote are lower income, a dangerous proposition for parties designed to serve the elite donor class. Which is why I said "beyond partisan stances". I'm looking more to find out if there is a component that renders it infeasible rather than undesirable.
No, I haven't heard any, and I mean to say it's not partisan, it's a bipartisan resistance to more (of the wrong) Americans voting.
|
On May 31 2017 01:02 jcarlsoniv wrote:I've always wondered about automatic voter registration... is there any reason (beyond partisan stances) we couldn't do it similar to the way we do auto draft registration? When I turned 18, I got a letter saying "you're registered for the draft, yay!" It seems pretty simple to just say if Person.Age >=18
vote.Register() but I assume there's something I'm missing.
a bunch of states already have it. a lot more are proposing it. Oregon massively increased turnout of the younger vote after they passed theirs.
|
In the UK you don't need an ID to vote.
|
In FL you need an ID to vote. Every time I vote, I need to bring my ID.
|
On May 31 2017 00:48 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 00:33 Mysticesper wrote:
My issue with voter ID laws is that they always seem to come up right before an election instead of after, thus creating confusion and undue 'hardships' to procure an id.
though it still baffles me how people don't have one on them at nearly all times, they are required to do almost anything, and if you don't drive, you get a state ID card instead of a state DL, its like ~20 bucks every 4 years or so (varies by state) I honestly can't think of the last time I did anything that required a photo ID outside of driving and picking something up I ordered online from Best Buy. People that don't have them most likely don't have a need for them outside of when they realize they need one for the election, when it's too late to get everybody through the production pipeline. After that, they don't have a need for one again.
I can't even get nonprescription allergy medicine without my photo ID. Beer, airports, some city buildings I better have brought it ... voting nope.
|
On May 31 2017 01:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
In the UK you don't need an ID to vote.
How does voter verification happen? Is it biometric?
|
On May 31 2017 00:29 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2017 23:39 Plansix wrote:
It isn’t like she came out of no place either. She has been a political figure since the fall of the Berlin Wall. She has more than a few reasons to be tired of the post 2000 US. Merkel actually got along with Bush quite well, while she had a lot of issues with Obama in the beginning. Only during Obamas second term they found together.
Interesting, that is not something I have heard. Though I will admit my memory of Merkel and Bush is forever colored by the failed shoulder rub. And it has been more than 10 years and I wasn’t paying attention to German/US relations at the time.
|
I get that voter fraud is a small number relative to entire population, but Florida should be an example to completely debunk that line of reasoning. It is one of the most important swing states, and is usually razer thin. TBH this debate to me smells of racism from both sides, who are doing nothing more than looking out for their political power rather than fighting for some type of justice. I don't sympathize with either, and I think the solution should be to do what the poster above suggested, which is to have it be similar to the draft.
Oh apparently florida voters need an ID. nvm.
|
On May 31 2017 01:19 ShoCkeyy wrote:
In FL you need an ID to vote. Every time I vote, I need to bring my ID.
Do you personally consider that law prejudicial and discriminatory towards poor blacks?
|
On May 31 2017 01:19 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2017 00:48 Gahlo wrote:On May 31 2017 00:33 Mysticesper wrote:
My issue with voter ID laws is that they always seem to come up right before an election instead of after, thus creating confusion and undue 'hardships' to procure an id.
though it still baffles me how people don't have one on them at nearly all times, they are required to do almost anything, and if you don't drive, you get a state ID card instead of a state DL, its like ~20 bucks every 4 years or so (varies by state) I honestly can't think of the last time I did anything that required a photo ID outside of driving and picking something up I ordered online from Best Buy. People that don't have them most likely don't have a need for them outside of when they realize they need one for the election, when it's too late to get everybody through the production pipeline. After that, they don't have a need for one again. I can't even get nonprescription allergy medicine without my photo ID. Beer, airports, some city buildings I better have brought it ... voting nope.
And I don't personally have any issue with requiring a voting ID to do so. I totally get the argument - ID helps verify right to vote and that you aren't voting more than once (assuming that's logged upon your vote).
I just feel like if it's required in order to participate in your civic duty, then it should also be provided/facilitated in a way that's convenient for all to do so. When it's restricted in any way, doesn't that kind of directly create a "taxation without representation" situation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
