We're talking about voter ID here and there are enough sources from pols unabashed in what they meant to do with these laws.
Protip: It had nothing to do with preserving the integrity of elections. Anything else is either your conjecture or just red v. blue spin.
Again, prove the massive fraud or your theory is about as credible as the Ancient Aliens dude.
Random Politics & Religion #00
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
superliberalhappyfuntimespecialwishprogresshour.org sounds legit.
[+]
More red vs blue please this place has been boring lately.
I mean ice cream and coffee are fine but we need more craziness ! Democrats are using vaccines to indoctrinate your children discuss ! Leviathan.Chaosx said: » superliberalhappyfuntimespecialwishprogresshour.org sounds legit. http://www.whitehouse.com sounds pretty legit too. But, at least many years ago, it had nothing to do with the White House the POTUS lives in. What about the Jews how long has it been since we blamed them ! Two three pages ?
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121304/generational-divide-american-jews-israel fonewear said: » More red vs blue please this place has been boring lately. I mean ice cream and coffee are fine but we need more craziness ! Democrats are using vaccines to indoctrinate your children discuss !  Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Lakshmi.Flavin said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Lakshmi.Flavin said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Seraph.Ramyrez said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Seraph.Ramyrez said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » How does eliminating the absolutely asinine electoral college/votes system hurt representative government again? The electoral college system naturally gives individual states more leverage in the national stage. The same way Wyoming having 2 senators like California does. United STATES of America. The electoral college allows for gerrymandering and generally turns voting into a big damned mess. Also, allows those who lose the popular vote to win elections (see: 2000). Getting rid of the electoral college allows every vote to count. How does it allow for "gerrymandering"? I would disagree that it's a big mess. It certainly does allow for candidates to be capable of loosing the popular vote and still winning the election. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, especially when dead people and illegal aliens vote and vote often. Not to mention that electoral votes wouldn't eliminate the potential dangers of voter fraud. Electoral votes usally always side with the popular vote so if voter fraud is pervasive it will still net them the votes that they are looking for. According to the article, fraud is so easy that's it's essentially "undetectable", as in someone pointing out that it isn't ever cited is meaningless as it goes on undetected all the time. If we have a nationally popular vote, all the perpetrators of voter fraud need to do, is to set up shop in a very small handful of large cities and just pump out the fraud. Instead of today where contested states are the "battleground" and there is at least some degree of awareness. They can't say that it goes on all the time if it goes undetected. It's an oxymoron. Take my word for it guys! It's undetectable but we know its happening anyways! Dead people's or otherwise inactive voters can't really be suppressed.
Are people really suggesting that a system in which the volunteer only requests an address for a registered voter (which anyone can look up and access) is a secure enough system to elect the next leader of the free world? Ever see the (Democrat) party affiliate that checks off your name as it is read by the volunteer? They're keeping track of who votes and who doesn't so if needed, they can "find" them come crunch time. Black suppression is a lie, many black people vote republican. Low income suppression is a lie, many poor people vote republican. The only qualified reason to oppose showing an ID to vote while still requiring one to drive is because fraud is the backbone of their electability. At least if people are required to present a form of official identification, you will limit anyone being capable of pretending to be someone else (of which inquiring off is not permitted). Quote stuff *
Citation needed ! Seraph.Ramyrez said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » superliberalhappyfuntimespecialwishprogresshour.org sounds legit. http://www.whitehouse.com sounds pretty legit too. But, at least many years ago, it had nothing to do with the White House the POTUS lives in.
[+]
whitehouse.com is porn and you know it ! (used to be at least)
Rule number 323421 of the internet everything is porn ! Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Dead people's or otherwise inactive voters can't really be suppressed. Are people really suggesting that a system in which the volunteer only requests an address for a registered voter (which anyone can look up and access) is a secure enough system to elect the next leader of the free world? Ever see the (Democrat) party affiliate that checks off your name as it is read by the volunteer? They're keeping track of who votes and who doesn't so if needed, they can "find" them come crunch time. Black suppression is a lie, many black people vote republican. Low income suppression is a lie, many poor people vote republican. The only qualified reason to oppose showing an ID to vote while still requiring one to drive is because fraud is the backbone of their electability. At least if people are required to present a form of official identification, you will limit anyone being capable of pretending to be someone else (of which inquiring off is not permitted). I was going to let you say that but...citation needed ! Verda said: » Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » How is making someone show their ID to vote wrong again? Because the underlying motive has nothing to do with ID. And voter fraud is damn near unheard of. You can't even get people to show up for local races if you begged them! Yah pretty much this, it was came up with by a few racist people to solve a non problem of voter fraud. You just get all kinds of issues when racist people have to handle black people's paper work. I can see it going down: Year 1: "I'm sorry, your paperwork wasn't filled out right guess you can't vote this year." "This happens every year, it's because I'm black isn't it?" "You'll have to fill out the paperwork next year properly if you wish to vote." Year 2: "I had your aid help me fill it out, it was right." "I'm sorry sir but it appears your paperwork was lost you won't be able to vote this year." Yah. But that wouldn't involve racism at all and stuff like that neeeeever happened.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Dead people's or otherwise inactive voters can't really be suppressed. Are people really suggesting that a system in which the volunteer only requests an address for a registered voter (which anyone can look up and access) is a secure enough system to elect the next leader of the free world? Ever see the (Democrat) party affiliate that checks off your name as it is read by the volunteer? They're keeping track of who votes and who doesn't so if needed, they can "find" them come crunch time. Black suppression is a lie, many black people vote republican. Low income suppression is a lie, many poor people vote republican. The only qualified reason to oppose showing an ID to vote while still requiring one to drive is because fraud is the backbone of their electability. At least if people are required to present a form of official identification, you will limit anyone being capable of pretending to be someone else (of which inquiring off is not permitted). Again you have no proof. I also like how you seem to imply that only democrats are capable of this type of fraud lol...
[+]
Seraph.Ramyrez said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » I'm curious about this voter suppression accusation. Do you have any hard evidence associated with this? Did you even read the stories I shared or did you just look at the sources and start ranting? -.-; You fell for clickbait articles. Congratulations, you just increased their revenue by X amount of clicks. Seraph.Ramyrez said: » I'd like to see that, actually. I'd appreciate it if you provided a right-wing summary of it as well for comparison's sake. It was long enough ago that I don't remember any specifics and I'd like to see both sides' views. Notice these two little tidbits: Quote: But the problem is that it fails on basic math and will likely put Washington back in the budget wars. And yet, it failed to state where the issue is. I looked over the budget and it not only passed basic math, but also gave an overview on how to bring the deficit down to a more reasonable level (didn't fully eliminate it, but did bring it down towards the levels that the 1998 Republicans in Congress gave us). There's also a huffpost article, but I'm not going to bother you with that ***. The amount of opinions here without citations is troubling.
Leviathan.Chaosx said: » Seraph.Ramyrez said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » superliberalhappyfuntimespecialwishprogresshour.org sounds legit. http://www.whitehouse.com sounds pretty legit too. But, at least many years ago, it had nothing to do with the White House the POTUS lives in. Let's keep in mind this was back in the mid-to-late 90s. 90% of the population was still very unclear on these things. .gov was virtually unknown vs. .com to people. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Black suppression is a lie, many black people vote republican. Low income suppression is a lie, many poor people vote republican. The only qualified reason to oppose showing an ID to vote while still requiring one to drive is because fraud is the backbone of their electability. It's a lie, but Republicans have admitted it anyhow? Out of this whole Clinton email thing it seems to have become a problem for republican presidential hopefuls now as well. It's now which person was worse about it!
The most surprising thing of all though is that Lindsay Graham says he's never used email before lol. Lakshmi.Flavin said: » Verda said: » Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Leviathan.Chaosx said: » How is making someone show their ID to vote wrong again? Because the underlying motive has nothing to do with ID. And voter fraud is damn near unheard of. You can't even get people to show up for local races if you begged them! Yah pretty much this, it was came up with by a few racist people to solve a non problem of voter fraud. You just get all kinds of issues when racist people have to handle black people's paper work. I can see it going down: Year 1: "I'm sorry, your paperwork wasn't filled out right guess you can't vote this year." "This happens every year, it's because I'm black isn't it?" "You'll have to fill out the paperwork next year properly if you wish to vote." Year 2: "I had your aid help me fill it out, it was right." "I'm sorry sir but it appears your paperwork was lost you won't be able to vote this year." Yah. But that wouldn't involve racism at all and stuff like that neeeeever happened. Lots of older voters stand to be disenfranchised and last I checked they don't all go Democratic. These types of rules also coincided with poll sites closing earlier, absentee ballot changes and other nuanced methods to make voting more difficult. The 'lazy blacks' 'immigrant fraudster' jabs must just be about securing votes and not the typical bashing that goes part in parcel with this type of legislation.
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » At least if people are required to present a form of official identification, you will limit anyone being capable of pretending to be someone else (of which inquiring off is not permitted). Great! Just get them the *** ID without jumping through 8,000 hoops and paying a ton of fees, especially if they're poor, disabled, or old! Lakshmi.Flavin said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Dead people's or otherwise inactive voters can't really be suppressed. Are people really suggesting that a system in which the volunteer only requests an address for a registered voter (which anyone can look up and access) is a secure enough system to elect the next leader of the free world? Ever see the (Democrat) party affiliate that checks off your name as it is read by the volunteer? They're keeping track of who votes and who doesn't so if needed, they can "find" them come crunch time. Black suppression is a lie, many black people vote republican. Low income suppression is a lie, many poor people vote republican. The only qualified reason to oppose showing an ID to vote while still requiring one to drive is because fraud is the backbone of their electability. At least if people are required to present a form of official identification, you will limit anyone being capable of pretending to be someone else (of which inquiring off is not permitted). Again you have no proof. I also like how you seem to imply that only democrats are capable of this type of fraud lol... How would we discover if someone voted twice, or otherwise voted somewhere they weren't suppose to? Is there any oversight that checks on this, or are we all to believe that because liberals "say so", it is so? This is troubling can Obama appoint a voter czar ?
Lakshmi.Flavin said: » Out of this whole Clinton email thing it seems to have become a problem for republican presidential hopefuls now as well. It's now which person was worse about it! |
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2025 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.