44d
@divegeester saidDistrust is not an argument.
There is significant distrust of the airtightworthiness of some elements of the voting process, I’ve seen both sides of the political spectrum complaint and blaming the other here in this forum and elsewhere in the media.
I think your resistance to any changes or improvements to improving the security of it is quite interesting to observe.
@divegeester saidUMM, that's what the thread is about and the only thing we're discussing.
Are you being deliberately stupid in order to be annoying?
How many times have I said I’m not talking about your pet hate of photo ID.
Good grief.
Maybe you should start another thread talking about your incorrect belief that I was referring to anything else.
43d
@divegeester saidHere's some i9nformational material for you since you quite obviously have no idea what the real issues are: https://www.democracydocket.com/analysis/how-id-requirements-harm-marginalized-communities-and-their-right-to-vote/
Are you being deliberately stupid in order to be annoying?
How many times have I said I’m not talking about your pet hate of photo ID.
Good grief.
Here's something for Mott:
"While only 8% of white Americans do not have a driver’s license, 21% of Black Americans and 23% of Hispanic Americans do not have access to this form of ID."
https://www.democracydocket.com/analysis/how-id-requirements-harm-marginalized-communities-and-their-right-to-vote/
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121016
43d
@no1marauder saidIncorrect. Have a look at our exchange and try to stop whinging.
UMM, that's what the thread is about and the only thing we're discussing.
Maybe you should start another thread talking about your incorrect belief that I was referring to anything else.
43d
@Mott-The-Hoople saidFrom a previous state.
just trying to see your side
where did that previous state come from?
Where dis god come from?
43d
@sh76 saidDid the SCOTUS get it wrong in Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966) where it ruled that poll taxes levied to qualify to vote in State elections were unconstitutional violations of the Equal Protection Clause? There the amount of the poll tax was a mere $1.50 a nominal amount.
I think providing a free ID is a perfectly reasonable compromise, but it's not like it costs much as it is. In NY it's between $6.50 and $14. Even for people of limited means, that not much money.
https://dmv.ny.gov/non-driver-id/non-driver-id-fees-and-refunds
If they were to give free ID, I'm sure the next thing we'll hear is that working class people don't have time to g ...[text shortened]... ing place. Nominal costs associated with engaging in a right doesn't mean the right is being denied.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/383/663/
@divegeester saidTake at look at the title of the thread and try to stop lying.
Incorrect. Have a look at our exchange and try to stop whinging.
EDIT: Who said this:
Ok so some people are, for some strange reason, conscientious objectors to General and voting ID cards, despite us having diving licence ID cards, bank and credit cards (essentially IDs), digital IDs for websites, facial ID for unlocking devices, government ID cards and digital IDs for accessing tax accounts, passports which have all our identity attached, our cars have ID plates which are registered with the government, our homes have an ID registration and even some animals and pets have IDs.
But the bottom line is that voter ID needs to happen and it needs to be airtight secure.
Note that poster, whoever it was, is adopting the right wing definition of "voter ID".
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121016
43d
@no1marauder saidThat’s right and I saw your point in reply and immediately talked about general wider tightening of voting security. But you just kept banging on about voter photo ID to try and avoid addressing it.
Take at look at the title of the thread and try to stop lying.
EDIT: Who said this:
Ok so some people are, for some strange reason, conscientious objectors to General and voting ID cards, despite us having diving licence ID cards, bank and credit cards (essentially IDs), digital IDs for websites, facial ID for unlocking devices, government ID cards and digital IDs ...[text shortened]... secure.
Note that poster, whoever it was, is adopting the right wing definition of "voter ID".
Are you going to pretend that that a thread in here can ONLY talk specifically about exact the thread topic wording in order to weasel out?
Honestly I’m starting to doubt you’re a even lawyer because your hopeless.
43d
@divegeester saidYou gave no specific examples of how to "tighten voter security" besides adopting the incorrect definition of "voter ID" that right wingers endorse with the aim of disenfranchising millions of Americans, most of whom are low income and/or minorities. You are being disingenuous.
That’s right and I saw your point in reply and immediately talked about general wider tightening of voting security. But you just kept banging on about voter photo ID to try and avoid addressing it.
Are you going to pretend that that a thread in here can ONLY talk specifically about exact the thread topic wording in order to weasel out?
Honestly I’m starting to doubt you’re a even lawyer because your hopeless.
You believe many things that aren't true so feel free to believe whatever you wish about me personally.
43d
@no1marauder saidNo, SCOTUS wasn't wrong, but not all ancillary expenses can be considered poll taxes. I'm still not seeing the difference between paying a few bucks for a photo ID and paying a few bucks for an Uber to get to the polling place.
Did the SCOTUS get it wrong in Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966) where it ruled that poll taxes levied to qualify to vote in State elections were unconstitutional violations of the Equal Protection Clause? There the amount of the poll tax was a mere $1.50 a nominal amount.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/383/663/
43d
@sh76 saidVoting is huge, @sh76.
No, SCOTUS wasn't wrong, but not all ancillary expenses can be considered poll taxes. I'm still not seeing the difference between paying a few bucks for a photo ID and paying a few bucks for an Uber to get to the polling place.
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,..."
In our republic, "the governed" only have one sure way to "consent" and that is by voting. If we put ANY barrier in the way of a voter, that voter has the right to ABOLISH this government and put another one in its place. That's why the government never has any business making voting harder. It can only make voting easier. That's THE principle on which our country is founded.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121016
43d
@no1marauder saidThat’s right I talked about ensuring voter registration and voting processes were as tight and secure as possible.
You gave no specific examples of how to "tighten voter security" besides adopting the incorrect definition of "voter ID" that right wingers endorse with the aim of disenfranchising millions of Americans, most of whom are low income and/or minorities. You are being disingenuous.
You believe many things that aren't true so feel free to believe whatever you wish about me personally.
You got very upset about that and launched into a salvo of insults.
Curious.
43d
@sh76 saidThe government is forcing you to pay for the former, but not the latter.
No, SCOTUS wasn't wrong, but not all ancillary expenses can be considered poll taxes. I'm still not seeing the difference between paying a few bucks for a photo ID and paying a few bucks for an Uber to get to the polling place.
See it now?
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147610
@divegeester said“Honestly I’m starting to doubt you’re a even lawyer because your hopeless”
That’s right and I saw your point in reply and immediately talked about general wider tightening of voting security. But you just kept banging on about voter photo ID to try and avoid addressing it.
Are you going to pretend that that a thread in here can ONLY talk specifically about exact the thread topic wording in order to weasel out?
Honestly I’m starting to doubt you’re a even lawyer because your hopeless.
BAM !
43d
@Mott-The-Hoople
Oh man, you NAILED it. YOU THINK. Well, you don't actually THINK but what the hey.