24 Jun 21
@suzianne saidLike I told sonhouse, you are trying to change the playing field.
Misplaced priorities.
1. There was not enough "cheating" to change the outcome of a single state's election. This means that the actual incentive for these new laws is voter suppression.
2. Anyone (with a brain) can figure out that reducing the number of polling places in order to create long multi-hour wait times, and then refusing those waiting food and water ...[text shortened]... entive for these new laws is voter suppression.[/i]
What's so difficult to understand about this?
This is not about the charges that he or you make about letting people die of thirst waiting to vote.
That's another issue, another thread for another day.
how difficult is it for you issue dodgers to understand? This is about Democrats refusing to allow
voter ID in contrast to the sharp opinion of their own constituents to do so. And we all know why.
It's because power pig democrats are cheating with the dead person vote and the illegal alien vote.
@earl-of-trumps saidYou keep saying that, but that is demonstrably FALSE.
Like I told sonhouse, you are trying to change the playing field.
This is not about the charges that he or you make about letting people die of thirst waiting to vote.
That's another issue, another thread for another day.
how difficult is it for you issue dodgers to understand? This is about Democrats refusing to allow
voter ID in contrast to the sharp opinion ...[text shortened]...
It's because power pig democrats are cheating with the dead person vote and the illegal alien vote.
24 Jun 21
@earl-of-trumps saidWTH?
The constitution is not necessary. Non US citizens voting is against the law, which is NOT unconstitutional.
24 Jun 21
@earl-of-trumps saidPresent the evidence supporting such claims.
Like I told sonhouse, you are trying to change the playing field.
This is not about the charges that he or you make about letting people die of thirst waiting to vote.
That's another issue, another thread for another day.
how difficult is it for you issue dodgers to understand? This is about Democrats refusing to allow
voter ID in contrast to the sharp opinion ...[text shortened]...
It's because power pig democrats are cheating with the dead person vote and the illegal alien vote.
Republicans are closing voting precincts, slashing voting hours, lessening the time to apply for absentee ballots. And this is all in States with existing Voter Id laws. Therefore you are either incredibly misinformed or being dishonest in your wild, baseless accusations.
24 Jun 21
@mott-the-hoople saidNo one said it did.
where does the constitution give non-citizens the right to vote?
24 Jun 21
@no1marauder saidYou said that they had a voter ID requirement in Georgia. If you can vote without ID, then you do not have a voter ID requirement.
No one said it did.
24 Jun 21
@eladar saidWhat I said was accurate.
You said that they had a voter ID requirement in Georgia. If you can vote without ID, then you do not have a voter ID requirement.
As to States which don't require a photo ID ( which no State did before 2006), they have other procedures to ensure that people who aren't eligible don't vote; my State uses a signature match to one on file.
I know of no reliable evidence that non-citizens voted in any significant numbers.
24 Jun 21
@no1marauder
What you said was misleading. Closing the ID requirement loop hole for absentee voting simply makes your statement no longer misleading.
24 Jun 21
@eladar saidHow could you require a photo ID for an absentee ballot?
@no1marauder
What you said was misleading. Closing the ID requirement loop hole for absentee voting simply makes your statement no longer misleading.
@no1marauder saidThe first one that comes to mind is JFK v. Nixon, 1960.
Present the evidence supporting such claims.
Republicans are closing voting precincts, slashing voting hours, lessening the time to apply for absentee ballots. And this is all in States with existing Voter Id laws. Therefore you are either incredibly misinformed or being dishonest in your wild, baseless accusations.
Votes poured in for Kennedy in Chicago and Las Vegas, taking the electoral votes of Illinois and Nevada.
That swing in votes was enough to change the result of the presidential election.
putting the onus on YOU, No1
Show me cases where people were not able to get ID's
24 Jun 21
@earl-of-trumps saidYou already presented an article which, in fact, concluded there was no real evidence supporting such a claim.
The first one that comes to mind is JFK v. Nixon, 1960.
Votes poured in for Kennedy in Chicago and Las Vegas, taking the electoral votes of Illinois and Nevada.
That swing in votes was enough to change the result of the presidential election.
In actual fact, JFK could have lost both those States and he still would have had 273 EC votes, enough to win. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election
24 Jun 21
@no1marauder saidShow me where people cannot get ID's if so required.
You already presented an article which, in fact, concluded there was no real evidence supporting such a claim.
In actual fact, JFK could have lost both those States and he still would have had 273 EC votes, enough to win. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election
that's just a big lie that liberals keep repeating but never substantiate. SHOW ME.
Face the facts, Democrats have a gold mine in an "anybody can vote" system and they want it left that way