New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Inconvenient Information Update: Voter I.D.

Spamature

President
I'm not.

We require people to register so that we can identify them, and help prevent voter fraud.

What a concept.
But this kind of voter fraud essentially does not happen.
What about the greater number of rightful voter who will be disenfranchised ?
It is a concept, alright.
A concept on how to shave votes from your opponents by denying rightful voters their constitutional rights in hopes of disenfranchising more of the other side's voters.

All of your excuses have been exhausted, and you are starting to repeat them.
The only thing that prevents you from admitting it is a lack of honest.
 

EatTheRich

President
Nope. Very nearly every adult in this country has valid picture ID. This is just one of many reasons why you extremists are opposed even by your fellow party members on the issue.

You guys can keep typing it over, and over, and over again. Even your lefty constituents overrule you on the matter. Democrats overwhelmingly favor voter ID. Hispanics, African-Americans, Asians, women, homosexuals…every single micro-constituency that you marxists have sought to hyper-politicize and balkanize into disparate islands…they ALL favor voter ID.

Because they all have it.

So, PJ leftists…keep arguing. Your own disagree…and not by a small margin. You’ve just about lost working class Americans. May as well throw caution to the wind and bet it all.

Little wonder you are so desperate to maintain a wide channel for electoral fraud…you continually hang out to dry your most loyal constituents time and again. Keep it up. You are effectively “Hillarying Pennsylvania” on this.

Go man, go!
I provided a link with evidence that MANY adults lack the kind of very specific ID required under restrictive voter ID laws, and you ignored the evidence in the link. You can keep typing "that's not so" as much as you want, but rational people will trust the documentation I provided over your unsourced claim.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
But this kind of voter fraud essentially does not happen.
What about the greater number of rightful voter who will be disenfranchised ?
It is a concept, alright.
A concept on how to shave votes from your opponents by denying rightful voters their constitutional rights in hopes of disenfranchising more of the other side's voters.

All of your excuses have been exhausted, and you are starting to repeat them.
The only thing that prevents you from admitting it is a lack of honest.
Every fraudulent cancels out a legitimate vote, no?

I believe in taking reasonable measures to secure the integrity of elections.

To me, this sounds like a perfectly reasonable step in that direction.

And, as polls show, most Americans agree.
 

Spamature

President
Every fraudulent cancels out a legitimate vote, no?

I believe in taking reasonable measures to secure the integrity of elections.

To me, this sounds like a perfectly reasonable step in that direction.

And, as polls show, most Americans agree.
Where is the evidence that these fraudulent votes are happening ?


Hell, even in 2020, you didn't claim that it was fraudulent in person votes that lost you the election.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Where is the evidence that these fraudulent votes are happening ?


Hell, even in 2020, you didn't claim that it was fraudulent in person votes that lost you the election.
You believe it never occurs?

That either means that absolutely everyone is honest, or that the system is perfect.

Which do you believe?
 

RickWA

Snagglesooth
I provided a link with evidence that MANY adults lack the kind of very specific ID required under restrictive voter ID laws, and you ignored the evidence in the link. You can keep typing "that's not so" as much as you want, but rational people will trust the documentation I provided over your unsourced claim.
Dude, it’s:
1) False
And
2) Irrelevant because each state enacting voter ID rules has a requirement to provide said ID to any and all who need them.

I understand certain citizens want to maintain avenues and channels for cheating. I do not favor this. No normal person even argues this point. We put dudes on the moon 53 bloody years ago - ensuring folks have valid picture IDs just isn’t difficult. It’s easy. We’re pretty much there already. It’s what most folks in every demographic want - by large margins.
 

Spamature

President
You believe it never occurs?

That either means that absolutely everyone is honest, or that the system is perfect.

Which do you believe?
I am saying that it will likely disenfranchise more voters in a single election than it would prevent incidences of fraudulent in-person voting in all previous elections combined.

Do you believe every eligible voter has the required ID for voting?


Or

Do you believe your suspicions trumps someone else's constitutional rights?

Which is it ?
 

EatTheRich

President
Dude, it’s:
1) False
And
2) Irrelevant because each state enacting voter ID rules has a requirement to provide said ID to any and all who need them.

I understand certain citizens want to maintain avenues and channels for cheating. I do not favor this. No normal person even argues this point. We put dudes on the moon 53 bloody years ago - ensuring folks have valid picture IDs just isn’t difficult. It’s easy. We’re pretty much there already. It’s what most folks in every demographic want - by large margins.
NO state guarantees that such ID will be available to any and all who need them at no monetary or opportunity cost.
 

RickWA

Snagglesooth
NO state guarantees that such ID will be available to any and all who need them at no monetary or opportunity cost.
Yes, it’s written into every proposal. And…again…nearly EVERYONE already has this.
But if fraud demands that you continue to portray a stinking picture ID to be some elusive exotic unicorn unobtainium… so be it.

This is retarded on its face and I won’t waste more time on it. Good grief!
 

EatTheRich

President
Yes, it’s written into every proposal. And…again…nearly EVERYONE already has this.
But if fraud demands that you continue to portray a stinking picture ID to be some elusive exotic unicorn unobtainium… so be it.

This is retarded on its face and I won’t waste more time on it. Good grief!
Again, you are pretending any picture ID will be acceptable when it is very specific kinds of photo ID—selected, as proven in court, to maximize the racial disparity in opportunity to vote—that are accepted. You are ignoring the fact that people have spent hundreds of dollars and taken days off work to try to get those IDs and still found themselves unable to vote. And of course you are ignoring that the invented “fraud” these segregation-era laws were ostensibly designed to prevent are shown to occur in fewer than 1 in 100 million ballots cast.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
I am saying that it will likely disenfranchise more voters in a single election than it would prevent incidences of fraudulent in-person voting in all previous elections combined.

Do you believe every eligible voter has the required ID for voting?


Or

Do you believe your suspicions trumps someone else's constitutional rights?

Which is it ?
I believe in taking reasonable steps to preserve the integrity of elections. This is a benefit to everyone who votes legally. Those who prefer a little fraud in their elections will be inconvenienced.

Does everyone have an ID? No.

Are IDs obtainable? Yes.


We can go again if you like, but that's my opinion. I have no problem with you having yours, and unless you're obsessed, you won't have any problem with me having mine.
 

EatTheRich

President
In terms of the “integrity of elections,” in-person voter fraud is one of the lowest concerns. If you really care about the integrity of elections and preventing fraud, your priority would be preventing the efforts to put certification of election results in the hands of partisan officials and mandating that all precincts have sufficient voting machines and judges.
 

RickWA

Snagglesooth
In terms of the “integrity of elections,” in-person voter fraud is one of the lowest concerns. If you really care about the integrity of elections and preventing fraud, your priority would be preventing the efforts to put certification of election results in the hands of partisan officials and mandating that all precincts have sufficient voting machines and judges.
You don’t get to choose for others which aspects of fraud should merit priority prevention.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
In terms of the “integrity of elections,” in-person voter fraud is one of the lowest concerns. If you really care about the integrity of elections and preventing fraud, your priority would be preventing the efforts to put certification of election results in the hands of partisan officials and mandating that all precincts have sufficient voting machines and judges.
False-dilemma fallacy - It is not an either-or scenario.

Thus, your argument is without merit.
 

EatTheRich

President
False-dilemma fallacy - It is not an either-or scenario.

Thus, your argument is without merit.
Not the point. That you are actively opposing measures to reduce the substantial voter fraud without which Republicans have no hope of remaining competitive proves that your claim to be concerned about election integrity are disingenuous.
 

EatTheRich

President
You don’t get to choose for others which aspects of fraud should merit priority prevention.
No, the point is that their priorities reveal whether their concerns are having an honest election (in which case they side with me) or winning at all costs (in which case they side with you).
 

RickWA

Snagglesooth
No, the point is that their priorities reveal whether their concerns are having an honest election (in which case they side with me) or winning at all costs (in which case they side with you).
Empty words. It shows no such thing. Just because you’re a marxist doesn’t mean you get to just invent conclusions that are not demonstrated in the least.

Lordy, why bother…
 

Spamature

President
I believe in taking reasonable steps to preserve the integrity of elections. This is a benefit to everyone who votes legally. Those who prefer a little fraud in their elections will be inconvenienced.

Does everyone have an ID? No.

Are IDs obtainable? Yes.


We can go again if you like, but that's my opinion. I have no problem with you having yours, and unless you're obsessed, you won't have any problem with me having mine.
But if you are disenfranchising people who have the right to vote but can't because you made up a rule to "preserve the integrity of elections". Yet you are not preserving the integrity of the election, you are destroying it, This rule actually defeats the actual will of the people by taking away the enfranchisement of eligible voters.

So you feel the Constitution should be overruled by your ID rule ?

You feel this is good for your side.

It would be no different from saying no one should be allowed in a voting place without a current vaccination card.

Would you be good with that ?
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
But if you are disenfranchising people who have the right to vote but can't because you made up a rule to "preserve the integrity of elections". Yet you are not preserving the integrity of the election, you are destroying it, This rule actually defeats the actual will of the people by taking away the enfranchisement of eligible voters.

So you feel the Constitution should be overruled by your ID rule ?

You feel this is good for your side.

It would be no different from saying no one should be allowed in a voting place without a current vaccination card.

Would you be good with that ?
Same old tired talking point over and over - The players can't even come up with a new word...They just keep repeating "disentrancement" over and over and paint everyone who disagrees with them as a racist.

The good news is that it isn't working, as evidenced by multiple polls. People approve of voter ID, and the harping against it is being ignored.

Now I'm not going to change your mind on this, nor do I harbor any desire to. You can keep saying the same thing over and over for the rest of your earthly existence if that's what you want to do.

I've said my piece - You think of it whatever you like.

It's all good.
 

Spamature

President
Same old tired talking point over and over - The players can't even come up with a new word...They just keep repeating "disentrancement" over and over and paint everyone who disagrees with them as a racist.

The good news is that it isn't working, as evidenced by multiple polls. People approve of voter ID, and the harping against it is being ignored.

Now I'm not going to change your mind on this, nor do I harbor any desire to. You can keep saying the same thing over and over for the rest of your earthly existence if that's what you want to do.

I've said my piece - You think of it whatever you like.

It's all good.
Did I call you a racist ?
I explained to you why you are wrong, that's all.
The problem is, you don't want to accept that you are wrong.
So you try to excuse being wrong by saying the wrong is popular with people.

You could just as well use that excuse for burning witches.
Hey, people agree we should burn witches.
Only thing is there aren't really any witches, and you are just burning women alive based upon your own misinformation or desire to do so.
 
Top