President Obama Re-Elected - Page 934

On October 22 2012 09:46 DeepElemBlues wrote:


If someone can't manage to get an ID to vote when they cost about $10 and the state will provide you with one free of charge specifically so you can vote, then I don't care if you can't vote because you didn't get an ID. The idea that Voter ID laws make it harder to vote is risible.

On October 22 2012 09:57 JonnyBNoHo wrote:


Pay is very close to equal. Unequal pay, rape, domestic abuse - these are things that are already illegal.

Unequal representation is an issue, I'm not sure what you want Congress to do about that.

Yeah, I kinda doubt Congress is debating legalizing the rape of Native Americans so unless you can pony up some evidence you just lost all credibility.

On October 15 2012 06:00 xDaunt wrote:
Oh, and before I forget and because this has come up so often in this thread, I saw this little gem today:



Source.

Needless to say, there wasn't much fanfare with this release, which is really a shame. They should be popping chamypagne because the world isn't fucked like they have been predicting for years.

“However, what is absolutely clear is that we have continued to see a trend of warming, with the decade of 2000-2009 being clearly the warmest in the instrumental record going back to 1850. Depending on which temperature records you use, 2010 was the warmest year on record for NOAA NCDC and NASA GISS, and the second warmest on record in HadCRUT3.”

On October 22 2012 21:24 DoubleReed wrote:
No, Roe v Wade is not the end-all be-all of the abortion debate and any conservativewho argues differently is being intellectually dishonest. This is big government mandating ridiculous financial regulations on abortion clinics to get them shut down, mandating unnecessary medical procedures (which I have no idea how so-called conservatives could ever defend) and weird, creepy shaming tactics trying to misinform women about their bodies.

It actually pisses me off that people try to sweep this under the rug. I suppose it's because as conservatives this is the government being so incredibly invasive in your personal life that it would be impossible for them to condone, so they just pretend it's not happening.

It's really quite sickening. Put yourself in a woman's shoes for once.

On October 22 2012 17:10 HunterX11 wrote:


What exactly is the point of making it harder to vote if not to disenfranchise certain people? Saying it doesn't make it too much harder is just ignoring the question. Why should it be harder to vote? I don't think you "get" the idea behind democracy. We should have MORE people voting, not less people. Yes, this includes undesirables, idiots, poors, blacks, whatever and whomever. You do not represent other people's interests better than they represent their own.

On October 22 2012 22:20 BluePanther wrote:

We've been over this before. It's a perspective thing. If you're not willing to put yourself in their shoes, then of course it makes no sense to you.

On October 22 2012 22:46 jdsowa wrote:


If you can vote without an ID, then you can easily vote multiple times at different polling centers. With early voting, you could conceivably vote 1,000 times and sway an election in favor of your candidate.

Would you agree that it's better to have politically informed people voting, rather than simply more people voting? If you had a serious medical condition, would you want 1,000 untrained people working on you, or a team of a couple skilled and experienced doctors? Citizens should feel a responsibility to have some baseline of political awareness before voting. Instead, we simply get idiotic "vote or die" campaigns, where the point is to cast a vote even if you don't know left from right. Now, we'd never go back to competency tests. But it's not like they're any less democratic in nature than the concept of the electoral college, or elected representatives.

On October 22 2012 22:46 jdsowa wrote:


If you can vote without an ID, then you can easily vote multiple times at different polling centers. With early voting, you could conceivably vote 1,000 times and sway an election in favor of your candidate.

Would you agree that it's better to have politically informed people voting, rather than simply more people voting? If you had a serious medical condition, would you want 1,000 untrained people working on you, or a team of a couple skilled and experienced doctors? Citizens should feel a responsibility to have some baseline of political awareness before voting. Instead, we simply get idiotic "vote or die" campaigns, where the point is to cast a vote even if you don't know left from right. Now, we'd never go back to competency tests. But it's not like they're any less democratic in nature than the concept of the electoral college, or elected representatives.

On October 22 2012 23:43 ticklishmusic wrote:


But then that would be some sort of intellectual oligarchy and a lot of people would complain. I mean, since I would probably be in that group of voters (hopefully), I could vote, but I don't think its right to limit the voters because some are stupid, its better to educate them so everyone can make an informed decision rather than limiting it to the group which is already informed. And remember, the literacy tests from the good ole' days... I see 98% of America failing those. We could have a "where does candidate X stand on ____ issue" text, and sadly we'd see a similar rate of failz. Then again with Romney's flip-flopping, most of his voters would probably be rendered ineligible through confusion.

K, so I understand voter ID and agree with it in principle.

But why does it become such a big issue right before an election? I mean, there couldn't be some sort of ulterior motive, right? Far as my understanding goes, voter registries and other things at polling centers make it so voting multiple times is fairly difficult and tedious. Come back after the election and we can talk.

On October 22 2012 22:55 Velr wrote:
The point of a deomcracy is not that smart people or informed people vote, it's that "the people" vote. Making them eudcated/informed is the job of your schools/government/politics...

Btw. The US voting system seems ridiculously backwards and strange. We just get our voting stuff by mail and can either vote via mail or drop it into the urn at election day... Staggeringly simple and effective, I know .

On October 22 2012 23:09 DoubleReed wrote:


Perspective thing? Mandating unnecessary medical procedures is a perspective thing???

Tell me. If this was literally any other circumstance, would you seriously not be angry over the government mandating an unnecessary medical procedure?

I cannot take a perspective that is bafflingly inconsistent.

On October 22 2012 23:55 AUFKLARUNG wrote:
Saying this, I wonder why we don't hear much of Obama's grassrots campaign that really pushed his 2008 campaign.

On October 22 2012 23:52 necmon wrote:


You know that since the introduction of the mail voting the voting participation in our country has actually dropped? Sometimes making it easier is not really a good thing.