voter ID laws are being used for voter suppression

I'll dumb it down for you since my last post didn't seem to cut it. Where I start a discussion isn't where I plan to end up. If you weren't too <insert whatever> to answer simple, direct questions we might have had a conversation. I call that communication. Seems to be you who can't address the issue in circumspect, based on how badly you need to contain your narrative to whatever boundary I'm crossing. :(

Ok, let's start completely fresh, because it seems to me that you came into this thread and talked about nothing contained in the OP. But I do want to have this conversation, so lets start anew:

The OP outlines the many ways voter ID laws are used to suppress votes as well as quotes from Republicans who acknowledge that is what is happening.

Which of those points would you like to discuss first?
 
jfc my sources are not garbage, they are solid, factual evidence, and no one is saying the problem is that they are asking for a piece of ID. Did you read any goddamn part of the OP? No, you wandered in here with your head up your ass and started typing the first ignorant, knee-jerk message that came to you.

I am not going to read anything authored by any of the sources you posted. No chance. Providing proper ID should be all that is required.
 
I am not going to read anything authored by any of the sources you posted. No chance. Providing proper ID should be all that is required.

What you really mean to say is that your mind is shut tighter than a steel trap and you refuse to consider any information that hasn't been carefully curated for you.

Got it. Thanks for jumping into this thread and letting us know how determined you are to be ignorant.
 
Ok, let's start completely fresh, because it seems to me that you came into this thread and talked about nothing contained in the OP. But I do want to have this conversation, so lets start anew:

The OP outlines the many ways voter ID laws are used to suppress votes as well as quotes from Republicans who acknowledge that is what is happening.

Which of those points would you like to discuss first?

Great.

The OP lost me when I saw college id's being compared to concealed carry licenses. There's a world of difference in terms of validity. I felt it sufficient to acknowledge that dirty pool in order to suppress votes should be punished.

First I'd like to establish the central point of contention. Is it reasonable, considering every other facet of modern life and the standards of security we impose upon each other, to carve out voting as the only significant legal matter that doesn't require an id? Is it unreasonable to insist the activity meet the same scrutiny as we've already permitted as a prerequisite to exercising a Constitutionally enumerated right?
 
Voter ID laws work for nearly every European nation, but those same rules are racist for Americans. Got it.


The Bigotry of Low Expectations strikes again. I know who the real racists are.


exactly. the level of stupidity and detachment from reality of the progressive left is so severe in 2017. can it get any worse for them in 2018?

it's not even funny anymore how deliberately stupid and brainwashed these people are.
 
What you really mean to say is that your mind is shut tighter than a steel trap and you refuse to consider any information that hasn't been carefully curated for you.

Got it. Thanks for jumping into this thread and letting us know how determined you are to be ignorant.

No, what I really mean to say is you choose shitty "news" sources not worth my time. All you need to know is that people being required to provide their ID to prevent voter fraud is more than reasonable.
 
No, what I really mean to say is you choose shitty "news" sources not worth my time. All you need to know is that people being required to provide their ID to prevent voter fraud is more than reasonable.

Yeah, you already made it abundantly clear that you're intellectually dishonest.
 
Great.

The OP lost me when I saw college id's being compared to concealed carry licenses. There's a world of difference in terms of validity. I felt it sufficient to acknowledge that dirty pool in order to suppress votes should be punished.

First I'd like to establish the central point of contention.
Is it reasonable, considering every other facet of modern life and the standards of security we impose upon each other, to carve out voting as the only significant legal matter that doesn't require an id? Is it unreasonable to insist the activity meet the same scrutiny as we've already permitted as a prerequisite to exercising a Constitutionally enumerated right?

That is not the central point of contention. No one in this thread is opposing the requirement for specific ID, but people like you are jumping in and defending it, refusing to acknowledge the aspects of the law that are really being opposed (and are really, egregiously, stripping people of their rights).

You can't look at the one component of the voter ID law that is reasonable for preventing fraud and ignore all the obstacles and hoops that are coming with it because it's the obstacles and loops that are quite clearly stripping voters of their right to vote.

In the OP I outline what these extraneous obstacles are; I quote the judge that instituted the law who said he regrets it because it's not being used to prevent fraud, but is being used to disenfranchise voters; and I link to articles quote all the Republican lawmakers who have openly talked about suppressing votes with the voter ID law.

The obstacles and hoops coming with the requirement for ID are: changes being announced right before an election; government offices shut down in certain districts to prevent people from getting proper ID; voting stations shut down so that people have to wait up to 6-8 hours to vote; Republican lawyers on site to challenge voters who then need to find someone to come down and sign an affidavit stating that their friend is who they claim to be (even if they have the proper ID!); workers on site telling voters that they have the wrong ID when they in fact have the correct ID. There are more obstacles detailed in the OP.

So, to repeat, you can't look at the one reasonable aspect of the law and ignore what the real problem is and what people are trying to fight: the vast bullshit of legal mandates instituted alongside the requirement to carry specific ID.
 
Don't misuse terms like "intellectually dishonest." You become like the little boy who cried wolf.

It does not surprise me that "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" is the one thing you're willing to read. Well done.
 
It does not surprise me that "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" is the one thing you're willing to read. Well done.

Is that the only thing I am willing to read? Talk about "intellectually dishonest!" You've got that down pat. :D
 
Is that the only thing I am willing to read? Talk about "intellectually dishonest!" You've got that down pat. :D

You've made your determination to be ignorant quite clear. You don't have to struggle to be witty, too; we already assumed you fail at a lot of things in life.
 
You've made your determination to be ignorant quite clear. You don't have to struggle to be witty, too; we already assumed you fail at a lot of things in life.

There you go again. It's always the ones standing on a weak foundation that retort with personal insults. :D
 
That is not the central point of contention. No one in this thread is opposing the requirement for specific ID, but people like you are jumping in and defending it, refusing to acknowledge the aspects of the law that are really being opposed (and are really, egregiously, stripping people of their rights).

You can't look at the one component of the voter ID law that is reasonable for preventing fraud and ignore all the obstacles and hoops that are coming with it because it's the obstacles and loops that are quite clearly stripping voters of their right to vote.

In the OP I outline what these extraneous obstacles are; I quote the judge that instituted the law who said he regrets it because it's not being used to prevent fraud, but is being used to disenfranchise voters; and I link to articles quote all the Republican lawmakers who have openly talked about suppressing votes with the voter ID law.

The obstacles and hoops coming with the requirement for ID are: changes being announced right before an election; government offices shut down in certain districts to prevent people from getting proper ID; voting stations shut down so that people have to wait up to 6-8 hours to vote; Republican lawyers on site to challenge voters who then need to find someone to come down and sign an affidavit stating that their friend is who they claim to be (even if they have the proper ID!); workers on site telling voters that they have the wrong ID when they in fact have the correct ID. There are more obstacles detailed in the OP.

So, to repeat, you can't look at the one reasonable aspect of the law and ignore what the real problem is and what people are trying to fight: the vast bullshit of legal mandates instituted alongside the requirement to carry specific ID.


Can you highlight the portion where you showed me the courtesy of answering my questions?
 
There you go again. It's always the ones standing on a weak foundation that retort with personal insults. :D

Oh, I'm sorry. What is the correct way to let you know, as someone who loudly affirmed that you are deliberately ignorant, that I think you are some sort of excrement stinking up my thread with your wasted brain? Please tell me as I worry terribly about etiquette with internet crackheads.
 
Can you highlight the portion where you showed me the courtesy of answering my questions?

Looks like we have to start fresh again.

Read the OP, which is not about condemning the prerequisite of specific voter ID because it is generally a reasonable effort to prevent fraud. What do you think about the terrible, mandated obstacles that come with it and the effects they have on voters likely to vote Democrat? What do you think about the Republican judge and the Republican lawmakers who have openly acknowledged that these laws are being used to disenfranchise voters instead of preventing fraud?
 
Oh, I'm sorry. What is the correct way to let you know, as someone who loudly affirmed that you are deliberately ignorant, that I think you are some sort of excrement stinking up my thread with your wasted brain? Please tell me as I worry terribly about etiquette with internet crackheads.

th


Just be sure to show your real ID when you vote. I don't want you to do repeat trips to vote as deceased persons. I wouldn't put that kind of thing past you. :D
 
th


Just be sure to show your real ID when you vote. I don't want you to do repeat trips to vote as deceased persons. I wouldn't put that kind of thing past you. :D

I am not at all surprised that you can only communicate ideas using pictures of super heroes. That is exactly what I've come to expect from you based on the quality of thought you brought to this thread. Well done, you special guy.
 
Back
Top