Liberty Amendments

[Husker_x]

Wow. That's right out of the democratic play book.

 

The Republican Party is flicked up. I totally agree with you on that but the Dems have mastered the art of taking every issue and making it look like that conservatives are nothing more than racist rich white men.

 

I'm not talking about every issue. I'm talking about one issue, an issue which happens to involve a person's right to an unimpeded vote. The vote is the cornerstone of our democracy. Republicans deliberately manufacture controversies over voter fraud that do not in fact exist, and then use their nonexistent boogeyman issue to disenfranchise voters. They do it deliberately. If you want to pretend that race is not a factor in this (i.e. the black and latino vote), there's not much I can do for you except to suggest you get a library card.

 

The conversation is not about what all conservatives believe all the time; rather, it's the plain reality of anti-immigrant (and black) sentiments that regularly manifest within Tea Party conservative movements and demonstrations--including and especially the talk radio lunatics. This week a group of conservative wingnuts stood in front of a border crossing to block busses carrying immigrant refugees into the country, waving American flags and chanting "Go back to Ecuador/Mexico/Guatamala."

 

If the shoe fits, holmes.

[BigRedBuster]

It doesn't have to be impeded just because of an id. It's simple but because Dems don't want it they have mastered the act of making it into sons type of racist warfare against poor people. It's political mastery at its best.

[Husker_x]

It doesn't have to be impeded just because of an id. It's simple but because Dems don't want it they have mastered the act of making it into sons type of racist warfare against poor people. It's political mastery at its best.

 

Repeating the refuted point doesn't make it any better than the first time you presented it. The motivation doesn't have to be exclusively racist; it's political pragmatism founded in fear mongering. The wingnut Republican base loathes the idea of immigration reform or any policies that help the poor who they consider to be lazy and worthless (Romney's 47%), so you can't propose policies that benefit those groups to win their support without alienating your base. If you can't win the votes of minority groups, your only play left is to suppress those voting blocks, which is what they are attempting to do. It's why immigration reform has been in limbo forever, and it's why hell will probably freeze over before the Republicans ever see another presidency.

 

We don't need stricter voter ID laws. The pretense the Republicans give for them is voter fraud, which is in reality a total nonissue. It is a fabrication of the right wing, a lie, a con, and you've bought it hook, line and sinker.

[tschu]

HuskerX, thank you for being better at putting words together on the subject than I.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

It doesn't have to be impeded just because of an id. It's simple but because Dems don't want it they have mastered the act of making it into sons type of racist warfare against poor people. It's political mastery at its best.

Repeating the refuted point doesn't make it any better than the first time you presented it. The motivation doesn't have to be exclusively racist; it's political pragmatism founded in fear mongering. The wingnut Republican base loathes the idea of immigration reform or any policies that help the poor who they consider to be lazy and worthless (Romney's 47%), so you can't propose policies that benefit those groups to win their support without alienating your base. If you can't win the votes of minority groups, your only play left is to suppress those voting blocks, which is what they are attempting to do. It's why immigration reform has been in limbo forever, and it's why hell will probably freeze over before the Republicans ever see another presidency.

 

We don't need stricter voter ID laws. The pretense the Republicans give for them is voter fraud, which is in reality a total nonissue. It is a fabrication of the right wing, a lie, a con, and you've bought it hook, line and sinker.

Where did I say I've bought it? Very little of this thread is about the need for voter ID. It's about the total joke of the idea that it suppresses voters. It's two completely different issues. But. Sorry you can't see that.

[Husker_x]

If there is no real purpose for voter ID laws, yet Republicans claim there is, why do you suppose they are on this hobbyhorse--the one that will affect many poor or uninformed voters in targeted precincts on election day (e.g. Ohio, a swing state, where students would not even be able to use a student ID card)--and not, say, one of a million other issues of actual substance? Don't be naive.

[Husker_x]

HuskerX, thank you for being better at putting words together on the subject than I.

 

I wouldn't got that far . . .

 

I'm doing my best, but the guy's not getting it.

[tschu]

It's about the total joke of the idea that it suppresses voters. It's two completely different issues.

 

 

No, and no. It's not a joke at all. Unless you think the GOP is advocating literally going to go door-to-door and giving out free IDs (LOL), it will suppress largely Democratic voters. It's not rocket science, and it has been thoroughly explained to you yet you still are putting your finger in your ear and going LA LA LA CANT HEAR YOU.

 

Very simple article that explains things well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/opinion/voter-id-is-the-real-fraud.html

 

Another general overview:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/04/24/the-myth-of-voter-fraud

 

I mean if you personally are for spending millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to do the only thing that won't suppress voters (again, literally going door-to-door, to EVERY door, and giving out FREE IDs) in order to combat a problem that doesn't exist, then that doesn't really make you a very good fiscal conservative. On the other hand, if you want people to either have to pay for IDs or have to transport themselves to a government office to get an ID, then you're still actively suppressing voters, regardless of your opinion of that person's laziness. Voting shouldn't require any work at all.

[BigRedBuster]

If there is no real purpose for voter ID laws, yet Republicans claim there is, why do you suppose they are on this hobbyhorse--the one that will affect many poor or uninformed voters in targeted precincts on election day (e.g. Ohio, a swing state, where students would not even be able to use a student ID card)--and not, say, one of a million other issues of actual substance? Don't be naive.

you have absolutely no ability to look at an issue without political party hackery.

 

You can hypothesize all you want about the republican motives. That has nothing to do with my comments that just the simple fact that a voter ID would be required would suppress voters.

 

In another thread it is being proposed that all employees must go through the e-verify system. They must verify who they are and that they are citizens.

 

Why isn't that looked at as discriminating against poor minorities? It's basically doing the same thing. Why? Because it's simple for the person to do and it doesn't discriminate.

 

Now. One party has poor minority votes wrapped up right now and they will do anything to keep those votes. How? By scaring them into thinking every issue the other side proposes will hurt them.

 

It has nothing to do with the validity of the issue.

 

It has everything to do with keeping power with the help of poor minorities.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

It's about the total joke of the idea that it suppresses voters. It's two completely different issues.

 

No, and no. It's not a joke at all. Unless you think the GOP is advocating literally going to go door-to-door and giving out free IDs (LOL), it will suppress largely Democratic voters. It's not rocket science, and it has been thoroughly explained to you yet you still are putting your finger in your ear and going LA LA LA CANT HEAR YOU.

 

Very simple article that explains things well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/30/opinion/voter-id-is-the-real-fraud.html

 

Another general overview:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/04/24/the-myth-of-voter-fraud

 

I mean if you personally are for spending millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to do the only thing that won't suppress voters (again, literally going door-to-door, to EVERY door, and giving out FREE IDs) in order to combat a problem that doesn't exist, then that doesn't really make you a very good fiscal conservative. On the other hand, if you want people to either have to pay for IDs or have to transport themselves to a government office to get an ID, then you're still actively suppressing voters, regardless of your opinion of that person's laziness. Voting shouldn't require any work at all.

Finally someone slightly admits it is possible to have voter ID without suppressing votes.

[tschu]

When Voter ID is being discussed on the national political scene, it isn't BigRedBuster's highly specific, idealized, expensive "solution" to the non-problem... it is our esteemed GOP's vote-supressing Voter ID solution.

[Husker_x]

 

If there is no real purpose for voter ID laws, yet Republicans claim there is, why do you suppose they are on this hobbyhorse--the one that will affect many poor or uninformed voters in targeted precincts on election day (e.g. Ohio, a swing state, where students would not even be able to use a student ID card)--and not, say, one of a million other issues of actual substance? Don't be naive.

you have absolutely no ability to look at an issue without political party hackery.

 

You can hypothesize all you want about the republican motives. That has nothing to do with my comments that just the simple fact that a voter ID would be required would suppress voters.

 

In another thread it is being proposed that all employees must go through the e-verify system. They must verify who they are and that they are citizens.

 

Why isn't that looked at as discriminating against poor minorities? It's basically doing the same thing. Why? Because it's simple for the person to do and it doesn't discriminate.

 

Now. One party has poor minority votes wrapped up right now and they will do anything to keep those votes. How? By scaring them into thinking every issue the other side proposes will hurt them.

 

It has nothing to do with the validity of the issue.

 

It has everything to do with keeping power with the help of poor minorities.

 

 

This is getting a little silly, but hell, if all you wanted to hear was it would be theoretically possible to do a voter ID system without suppressing voters, okay. Great, grand, wonderful. It's also possible to build a Great Wall of America w/ a moat across the southern border to stop immigrants from coming in.

 

But the point here is not what's possible; it's what's practical and reasonable and necessary. The GOP is the only party that believes this measure is necessary, not because we have rampant voter fraud in this country, but because they know their nefarious schemes will drive down voter turnout in unfavorable precincts. It's not like my position is theoretical. You keep trotting out the "scare tactics" and partisan lines like I haven't already addressed them. It's almost as if you think the Republicans have some pure motive for dying on this hill. You have not even attempted to make a case for why this would be necessary, and it's not hard to imagine why. Accept the facts, then move on.

 

And the last line actually made me chuckle. Yes, the Democratic party is interested in gaining power. What is that supposed to be, some kind of discovery? Did you come up with that all by yourself? Both parties vie for power. Democrats tend to do it through outreach and programs that benefit the poor, minorities, women, etc. You know, winning votes by proposing policies your constituency groups approve of. I believe that has something to do with . . . oh, what's the word . . . democracy.

[BigRedBuster]

Actually, I think the expense of it is greatly over estimated. Again, we already have e-verify. Expand that and put in a system that someone could contact and have a rep come out and do what's necessary.

 

As for the need for it.....I personally have no idea if it is. Do I think voter fraud has affected elections lately? Probably not. However, it seems like the system could be manipulated if one side wanted to.

 

I just don't trust either side on the issue.

 

Wow....you guys get all worked up simply discussing if it's possible.

[tschu]

However, it seems like the system could be manipulated if nod side wanted to.

 

There are a lot of ways to try to get elections to fall in your favor. Vote supression by however means, Gerrymandering, misleading ballots, fraudulent vote-counting, tampering anywhere up on down the line. Having single voters trying to commit individual voter fraud is literally the most ineffective way to try to influence an election. And it is discouraged by a severe punishment.

[BigRedBuster]

Let me ask this. (Hopefully without enraging all of you with a simple question)

 

Why isn't voter registration considered voter suppression?

 

The person has to go to a court house and register unless they are lucky enough to have a volunteer knock on their door. If they aren't registered by a certain date they can't vote.