"If its too easy to vote, the Democrats might win."

[ivwshane]

This is the type of response that is given when there is no real reply. The thing I listed cannot be refuted. Some things in America REQUIRE an ID, that's a fact.

She (I think?) suggested I lived with my mother because I agree with having an ID. Fact is, it would be FAR harder for someone to move out from their mothers house without an ID, that with one. Want to rent an Apt? Gotta prove who you hare, have background check, etc. Want utilities, gotta prove who you are. These require ID's. The list goes on and on. So her attempt at insulting me, actually proved my point. Good try though?

Whoosh!!!

 

[Jhhnn]

This is the type of response that is given when there is no real reply. The thing I listed cannot be refuted. Some things in America REQUIRE an ID, that's a fact.

So what? I mean, honestly. If you said "I don't understand how people live w/o ID." it would be perfectly honest. OTOH, it really is perfectly clear that it does happen often enough for the federal courts to step in & protect voting rights.

The other side of it is that voter ID advocates have not shown anywhere near sufficient evidence of fraud to inconvenience any voter in the slightest. Show us a real problem & we can talk about solutions.

 

[Meghan54]

Guess the point I was making struck too close to home.

As usual, resorting to insults. I do understand that things are different in different areas, laws, etc. I am lived in a lot of different areas in the US, and in the world. I would venture to say I have been more places, and experienced more things than most on these forums. Some things are the same everywhere however. Since you think I live with my mother (weak jab btw), I am 42 with a wife and 4 kids. Recently bought a new home, what do you think I needed to buy the house? An ID. What do you think I needed to have to hook up the gas, electric and water (all separate for some damn reason), an ID. They would not have let me hook up any of them without an ID. I financed some furniture for the house, what did I need? An ID. What do you need to cash a check? An ID. Open some bank accounts? An ID. I had to have one to rent a bounce house for a birthday part because its an expensive piece of equipment. Had to have one to rent equipment at Home Depot too. I had to have one to buy Dayquil at a local Food City, and over the counter medicine that is very common. I had to have one to send a money order. Have I gotten a drink and not been carded? Sure I have, I think most have. At least 9/10 times I am carded though when out eating and having a drink. Every single time in a grocery store when we buy beer or wine. I have seen bars deny people entry who didn't have an ID many times. Drive a car? Obviously a license aka ID. Trying to argue that there are things that are required to have an ID for in this country is silly. There are simply some things you cannot do, without one. That is a fact. But if someone wants to limit themselves, then by all means don't get an ID. Could someone survive without an ID? Yeah they can, without all the same possibilities that someone who has an ID has. Because that is exactly what they are doing, limited themselves compared to someone who has an ID. Many, many "grown up" things require an ID, that's just a fact.

Living with your "mum", no you probably don't need an ID. So there is that.

 

[Meghan54]

One, I'm a guy, using one of my dog's names.

Second, I didn't infer you lived with your mother. I said you never moved far from you mother, which is a completely different circumstance, and if you'd ever researched that, you'd find the great majority of Americans move no more than 75 miles from their mom during their life. This, in turn, creates a very narrow world view that's not challenged, but instead insulated by that same lack of world exposure.

This is the type of response that is given when there is no real reply. The thing I listed cannot be refuted. Some things in America REQUIRE an ID, that's a fact.

She (I think?) suggested I lived with my mother because I agree with having an ID. Fact is, it would be FAR harder for someone to move out from their mothers house without an ID, that with one. Want to rent an Apt? Gotta prove who you hare, have background check, etc. Want utilities, gotta prove who you are. These require ID's. The list goes on and on. So her attempt at insulting me, actually proved my point. Good try though?

 

[zinfamous]

This is the type of response that is given when there is no real reply. The thing I listed cannot be refuted. Some things in America REQUIRE an ID, that's a fact.

She (I think?) suggested I lived with my mother because I agree with having an ID. Fact is, it would be FAR harder for someone to move out from their mothers house without an ID, that with one. Want to rent an Apt? Gotta prove who you hare, have background check, etc. Want utilities, gotta prove who you are. These require ID's. The list goes on and on. So her attempt at insulting me, actually proved my point. Good try though?

eh, it can be refuted because you ignored the nature of the argument: this isn't about your experience specifically, it's about average and other specific experiences. Considering the actual topic, the only thing that it takes to refute everything that you say, is someone else with exactly different experiences as you. That's it.

Arguing that certain things require an ID is evidence that this other thing that does not require an ID< should require an ID, is a fallacious argument. ...and I don't wholly disagree with the concept of voter ID, it's just that the only implementation of such is, and only ever is, an attempt to limit the vote from certain groups. (That is never not the case. Fix the practice, and we can talk).

Yes, you went through life this way and these things are true for you. Great. You feel special. That is awesome, man. The whole point of this argument is that not everyone is you. Your personal experiences here are just as meaningless as mine or the next person, really. This is an issue that effects specific populations of people, and is only ever targeted to do so. Maybe call your congress critter if this is important to you and tell them that you will support their efforts to enforce voter ID, but only if they do not target it specifically at unfriendly demographics that are unlikely to vote for them. ....but good luck with that.

 

[Ackmed]

Guess the point I was making struck too close to home.

Nope, you were wrong.

One, I'm a guy, using one of my dog's names.

Second, I didn't infer you lived with your mother. I said you never moved far from you mother, which is a completely different circumstance, and if you'd ever researched that, you'd find the great majority of Americans move no more than 75 miles from their mom during their life. This, in turn, creates a very narrow world view that's not challenged, but instead insulated by that same lack of world exposure.

The way you said it could have been taken either way. But no actually, I moved out at 16. My mother lives about 3300 miles away. Again, you're wrong. As I said, I have been a lot of places, lived a lot of places, my views are not just from my current location. There are things that you cannot do without an ID. That is just a fact. The things listed are not all from my personal experience. There are so many more opportunities for someone who has an ID, over someone who doesn't. Jobs, house/apt, banking, etc. It is possible to live without an ID however, I never denied that. You just limit what you can and cannot do. That is another fact. It is indisuputable, more possibilities are out there for someone who has an ID over someone who doesn't. Denying these facts would just be silly.

I never said that voting should cost someone money, I have actually said in the past that it shouldn't. Perhaps some sort of free voters ID that is not hard to acquire.

 

[woolfe9998]

Jhhnn said:

So what? I mean, honestly. If you said "I don't understand how people live w/o ID." it would be perfectly honest. OTOH, it really is perfectly clear that it does happen often enough for the federal courts to step in & protect voting rights.

The other side of it is that voter ID advocates have not shown anywhere near sufficient evidence of fraud to inconvenience any voter in the slightest. Show us a real problem & we can talk about solutions

The bolded point is entirely sufficient. There is hardly a need to even address the red herring of how difficult it is to get an ID. Because it is axiomatic that one shouldn't pass laws to solve problems that don't exist. Showing that there is no need for a law is enough. One need not prove the law's detrimental effects.

As to the effects, they are detrimental regardless of how much trouble is entailed in getting ID. The fact is, no democracy has 100% turn out for its elections. Most fall vastly short. The reasons are many fold, but the primary reason is that large numbers of voters lack sufficient motivation to even walk to a nearby polling station, let alone undergo any degree of additional hassle. The most common reason is that people just don't think their individual votes will make a difference, and to make matters worse, technically they are correct which makes it that much harder to persuade them that voting is worth the trouble.

In theory, democracies need high turnouts so that election results reflect the will of the people rather than just a sub-set. Yet it's a constant fight against the perception that voting is a futile endeavor. Put up any roadblock, even the slightest one, and voter participation is bound to go down. Remember what they are weighing this additional trouble to get an ID against - casting a vote which they know will not change the outcome of the election. These people are what the Montana GOP chair aptly referred to as "low propensity voters."

When someone has a low propensity to vote, for whatever reason, making it in any way harder to vote is a deal breaker. Accordingly, since lower turnouts are inevitable with these voter ID laws, there really does need to be a purpose served by them. Yet there isn't. Unless you count serving the interests of a political party which benefits from lower turnouts, that is.

 

[Jhhnn]

Nope, you were wrong.



The way you said it could have been taken either way. But no actually, I moved out at 16. My mother lives about 3300 miles away. Again, you're wrong. As I said, I have been a lot of places, lived a lot of places, my views are not just from my current location. There are things that you cannot do without an ID. That is just a fact. The things listed are not all from my personal experience. There are so many more opportunities for someone who has an ID, over someone who doesn't. Jobs, house/apt, banking, etc. It is possible to live without an ID however, I never denied that. You just limit what you can and cannot do. That is another fact. It is indisuputable, more possibilities are out there for someone who has an ID over someone who doesn't. Denying these facts would just be silly.

I never said that voting should cost someone money, I have actually said in the past that it shouldn't. Perhaps some sort of free voters ID that is not hard to acquire.

Why accept that we need to bother with it more than we already do in the face of the fact that it's a solution in search of a problem?

Or because greater participation is a problem for Republicans?

 

[agent00f]

Nope, you were wrong.



The way you said it could have been taken either way. But no actually, I moved out at 16. My mother lives about 3300 miles away. Again, you're wrong. As I said, I have been a lot of places, lived a lot of places, my views are not just from my current location. There are things that you cannot do without an ID. That is just a fact. The things listed are not all from my personal experience. There are so many more opportunities for someone who has an ID, over someone who doesn't. Jobs, house/apt, banking, etc. It is possible to live without an ID however, I never denied that. You just limit what you can and cannot do. That is another fact. It is indisuputable, more possibilities are out there for someone who has an ID over someone who doesn't. Denying these facts would just be silly.

I never said that voting should cost someone money, I have actually said in the past that it shouldn't. Perhaps some sort of free voters ID that is not hard to acquire.

Just a heads up that bragging about how much of the world you've seen only makes it look worse when you still lack any perspective.

 

[Meghan54]

A shining example of a steel trap mind, rusted shut, observing the world through a keyhole and wanting the hole to be smaller. Congrats.

Nope, you were wrong.

The way you said it could have been taken either way. But no actually, I moved out at 16. My mother lives about 3300 miles away. Again, you're wrong. As I said, I have been a lot of places, lived a lot of places, my views are not just from my current location. There are things that you cannot do without an ID. That is just a fact. The things listed are not all from my personal experience. There are so many more opportunities for someone who has an ID, over someone who doesn't. Jobs, house/apt, banking, etc. It is possible to live without an ID however, I never denied that. You just limit what you can and cannot do. That is another fact. It is indisuputable, more possibilities are out there for someone who has an ID over someone who doesn't. Denying these facts would just be silly.

I never said that voting should cost someone money, I have actually said in the past that it shouldn't. Perhaps some sort of free voters ID that is not hard to acquire.

 

[Ackmed]

A shining example of a steel trap mind, rusted shut, observing the world through a keyhole and wanting the hole to be smaller. Congrats.

Not hardly. I could say the same thing about you, mind rusted shut because you haven't changed your opinion. I am sure there are other things that you won't either, we all have them.

I have given you facts, you haven't attempted to refute them. Because you cannot. There are things in the US that you need an ID to do. Period. Not having an ID limits a person on what they can do compared to someone that has an ID. Period. These things cannot be argued with, its just the way it is. The simple fact that a protest by the NAACP designed to argue against voter ID laws, asked people attending to bring an ID. Sure doesn't seem like its that oppressive if they're asking for one, when protesting against one.

Out of curiosity I google'd a few states (heaven forbid I use my own experiences!) to see what their laws were on renewing and updating an ID/license. Seems that ID's generally last for 4 years. With a renewable process able to be done online, by mail, or in person. Same goes for address change. So getting and ID appears to not be a yearly thing, or even biyearly thing. Could there be exceptions? Yeah I didn't search every city in America. Seems pretty plausible that a person can go 8 years or more without having to physically get an ID, doing updates and renewals by internet or mail. Really doesn't seem like a burden to me, but I guess some people would argue anything that requires a bit of effort is. One thing which you seem to have to go in person to do is change the name because of marriage. But I suppose you would argue that is oppressive as well?

My opinion isn't going to change, neither is yours. You call that having a closed mind, yet you're doing the same thing. I don't mind debating things, that's part of what these forums are about. Not really any sense in debating anymore, I have said my piece. Laid out facts that cannot be refuted. Shown were ID's are needed for several things in life, I am sure you could think of more if you wanted. We'll just agree to disagree, I am done with it.

 

[ivwshane]

A shining example of a steel trap mind, rusted shut, observing the world through a keyhole and wanting the hole to be smaller. Congrats.

He still doesn't get it! That's how strong his fucking bubble is.

 

[agent00f]

Not hardly. I could say the same thing about you, mind rusted shut because you haven't changed your opinion. I am sure there are other things that you won't either, we all have them.

I have given you facts, you haven't attempted to refute them. Because you cannot. There are things in the US that you need an ID to do. Period. Not having an ID limits a person on what they can do compared to someone that has an ID. Period. These things cannot be argued with, its just the way it is. The simple fact that a protest by the NAACP designed to argue against voter ID laws, asked people attending to bring an ID. Sure doesn't seem like its that oppressive if they're asking for one, when protesting against one.

Out of curiosity I google'd a few states (heaven forbid I use my own experiences!) to see what their laws were on renewing and updating an ID/license. Seems that ID's generally last for 4 years. With a renewable process able to be done online, by mail, or in person. Same goes for address change. So getting and ID appears to not be a yearly thing, or even biyearly thing. Could there be exceptions? Yeah I didn't search every city in America. Seems pretty plausible that a person can go 8 years or more without having to physically get an ID, doing updates and renewals by internet or mail. Really doesn't seem like a burden to me, but I guess some people would argue anything that requires a bit of effort is. One thing which you seem to have to go in person to do is change the name because of marriage. But I suppose you would argue that is oppressive as well?

My opinion isn't going to change, neither is yours. You call that having a closed mind, yet you're doing the same thing. I don't mind debating things, that's part of what these forums are about. Not really any sense in debating anymore, I have said my piece. Laid out facts that cannot be refuted. Shown were ID's are needed for several things in life, I am sure you could think of more if you wanted. We'll just agree to disagree, I am done with it.

There's literally factual data for this, not that conservatives are going to let facts & data get in the way of dumbshit blustering.

 

[Ranger Rick]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuSUvWbI2To

You'll have to either wait for 17:25 to come around, or click straight to it.

One good thing is this shows that Republicans trying to fuck with the voting system might not actually be racist, merely a sneaky underhanded tool to win elections.

You mean how like democrats import voters from Mexico?

 

[SMOGZINN]

I have given you facts, you haven't attempted to refute them. Because you cannot. There are things in the US that you need an ID to do. Period. Not having an ID limits a person on what they can do compared to someone that has an ID. Period. These things cannot be argued with, its just the way it is. The simple fact that a protest by the NAACP designed to argue against voter ID laws, asked people attending to bring an ID. Sure doesn't seem like its that oppressive if they're asking for one, when protesting against one.

Here is your refute. There are things that a person does not need an ID to do. Period. Not having an ID does not make one less of a citizen of the United States. Not having an ID does not make ones ability to participate in democracy any less. With there being no evidence that an ID would make any significant improvement to our democracy there is no need to burden people with having to have one to take part of what is their right as a citizen. There is an at least plausible argument that it will hurt citizens that would like to participate in our democracy. Therefore logically the negatives outweigh the positives. That means we should not do it.

 

[Jhhnn]

Insignificant voter frraud? Insignificant problem, obviously, unless it can be used for other ends which is exactly what Repubs are doing.

That's because they see winning as more important than honest & principled democracy.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Insignificant voter frraud? Insignificant problem, obviously, unless it can be used for other ends which is exactly what Repubs are doing.

That's because they see winning as more important than honest & principled democracy.

What do Democrats know about either honesty or principles? " If you like your Doctor, you can keep your Doctor. Period!"................... "I did not email anyone any classified material"

 

[agent00f]

What do Democrats know about either honesty or principles? " If you like your Doctor, you can keep your Doctor. Period!"................... "I did not email anyone any classified material"

I'm curious if you ever try to make compelling arguments, like maybe for work or school once upon a time, and if so why those skills are never applied here. I suspect it's because many liberals have a pathological need to correct the record, and thus it's only in your interest to be erroneous in some trivial to correct way, so as to ensnare them as co-morons. Ironically that would make you not exactly a moron, because it's a game well played.