Didn’t say they didn’t exist, said your cite didn’t say anything about it. And it didn’t. Now, if you didn’t intend to imply that it did say that, perhaps you should have cited it by itself. Wait a second, I’ll fetch a ladder so you can climb down off your high horse.
But shall we cut to the chase? Do you want to suggest, imply or otherwise insinuate that Mr. Husted’s actions are totally kosher and meet your daunting standards for correct civil procedures? Then do so.
It is my expressed opinion that Mr Husted is a rotten sumbitch, politically speaking, and making an obvious and concerted effort to rig the election to suit the Republican agenda. Have you any opinion on that, or would you rather talk about me?
Actually, scratch my earlier response to this question, Bricker, because I misread it. I thought you said "And didn’t the Sixth Circuit say that they can do that?
No room in your worldview, Horatio, for you being wrong about this being goat-fucking? You’re right; those that disagree are goat-fuckers? You’re right, and voters have no responsibility to learn where they’re supposed to go?
I can see why you’d feel that way. After all, a voter who’s too fucking stupid to figure out where he’s supposed to go[sup]*[/sup] sounds like a reliably Democratic lever-puller, so your alarm is understandable.
"Ohio law requires election officials to provide notice to voters of where they are eligible to vote after they register or if their precinct changes. See Ohio Rev. Code §§ 3503.16(E) (change in address of voter); id. § 3503.17 (change in precinct boundaries); id. § 3503.19(C)(1) (new voters). Furthermore, information about where to vote is easily accessible by calling county boards of elections or accessing the Secretary’s webpage. See, e.g., “Find Your Polling Location,” Ohio Sec’y of State. "
What about a voter who is so fucking stupid that he’d support making it harder for millions of people to vote, so he could stop maybe a dozen in person votes?
That guy sure sounds like a stupid cunt, doesn’t he Bricker, old chum?
Well he might not be stupid, he might just be a lying hypocrite.
Since Voter ID laws are so highly favored by the populace, I just have one question: is this just your opinion, or the official position of the Democratic Party that so many people in this country are lying hypocrites?
And if it’s the party’s position, a follow-on question: don’t they have some kind of obligation to reveal the contempt in which they hold so many people?
“Since* banning interracial marriage* is so highly favored by the populace, I just have one question…”
It’s almost like rights shouldn’t be up to popular vote. :rolleyes:
You’re smart Bricker. Not real smart, but you’re smarter than average. The reason you have to resort to such drivel, is that you can’t find real arguments.
You know what that means. Deep down you do. It means that you’re flailing because your partisan side wants this to be true, but your mind can’t write the check.
I hold you in contempt. Because you are one of the folks that spread misinformation and try to craft a narrative that supports your desired vote suppression.
You’re just to cowardly to admit it. Now go out and vote, you floppy clown-shoe pussy. It’s your civic duty. Try not to keep any poor people from doing it though.
Or they’ve been subject to an organized campaign of propaganda by goat fuckers that goat fucking is necessary to prevent a problem that in reality is practically non-existent.
Bricker himself ins one of those propaganda mills, actually.
In this very thread as I recall, he implied that ACORN was responsible for voter fraud.
When actually they had false registration names (because their contractors tried to scam them), and one incident where a guy in charge of a local office had an incentive program that was against Nevada law. No voter fraud. But Bricker’s such a partisan liar, he pushed that misinformation knowing full well that it suggested something that wasn’t true.
Bricker isn’t just partisan. He is perfectly willing to win because he lied to you.
But voter ID laws are very popular. This has been proven. If they were not popular, then Mr Husted’s actions might well be considered corrupt and contrary to our principles. However, as has been proven, voter ID laws are very popular, so therefore they are not. Did I mention that voter ID laws are very popular? Well, they are.
Not necessarily in every case. But in this case, yes, those who are using the pretext of the necessity of voter ID and other procedures that make it more likely that some people will be unable to successfully cast votes are goat fuckers.
This question has no meaning to me. People make mistakes, they have bad days, they can be temporarily misinformed. Einstein was known for having trouble finding his way home. Ensuring that people aren’t unnecessarily disenfranchised is important, far more important than the ability to set unnecessary standards for … I don’t know … what is the standard here, “responsibility”? Whatever the desired responsibility is in cases like this, measuring it shouldn’t result in people’s failure to vote.
While standing in line to vote today, a gentleman behind me suddenly experienced a moment of confusion and disorientation and was unsure whether he had come to the right place to vote. He didn’t look like an obviously irresponsible person to me, or an extraordinarily stupid one. He just looked like someone who might have make a mistake. That mistake shouldn’t be the cause of his being unable to cast an effective ballot.
This part is a bit fuzzy to me, and I haven’t found a clear and precise citation. My understanding, or misunderstanding, as the case may be…is that before Mr Husted’s most recent dicktat, the responsibility for ensuring correct info on provisional ballots rested with election officials, but Mr Husted has placed the responsibility on the voter. Which, I further understand, is in direct contradiction to Ohio state law. Which means, if hyper-technically interpreted, that even the most minor error on the part of the voter could invalidate the provisional ballot.
Correction or revision with appropriate citation appreciated.
I disagree. The state has no responsibility to count your vote if you show up at the wrong place.
Moreover, this is a matter of opinion. It’s not a statement of incontrovertible scientific fact that a mistake like that shouldn’t be the cause of a voter being unable to cast an effective ballot. You place, obviously, a huge emphasis on the state bending over backwards to capture every vote. I think the state sets up reasonable rules and reasonable notifications, and that’s the end of its responsibility.
Now, since you and I disagree, how shall we resolve this conflict?
I know your idea: declare by fiat that you are right.
And this makes you somehow right? I hadn’t realized that believing one’s opinion to be correct was some new category of logical fallacy.
Regardless, I find the use of the term “responsibility” misplaced here. The state should, as a fundamental aspect of its democratic character, find abhorrent any procedure, rule, regulation, or whatever that results in the failure to count what otherwise would be a valid vote. Responsibility doesn’t even enter into it. It should be no different conceptually than “if I make an attempt to feed myself, the state should not hold back my hand.”
As for “bending over backward,” that implies that there’s some significant effort or cost involved. I don’t see any cost here to counting a vote mistakenly made in the wrong precinct, especially if the mistake was made with the aid of a poll worker. They’ve got the damn ballot; it has been filled out. Just count the damn thing.