Oh, look! He’s talking utter bullshit again! How cute! retch
Hey, whatever rationalizations you need to look in the mirror. Voting is haarrrddddd… It’s a violation of people’s civil rights if they have to do it on Tuesday, in person. Wahhhhh!!! We keep on losing because our voters can’t stumble out of bed before noon, sober up, and head down to the precinct.
Where do you stand on the issue of literacy tests?
This is what your side has to deal with every year. The West Wing helpfully played it for laughs:
Literacy tests? I don’t favor them. The actual act of voting is a sufficient literacy test. If a person cannot find an address, if a person cannot read his ballot, or if he couldn’t fill out his registration form in the first place, then that person is already prevented from voting.
Anger gets people to the polls. And most Republicans are angry because of the nonsense lies they’ve been told by their media. Much of what you, Adaher know is simply not true. You’re a gullible dupe.
Also, poor people have less free time and mobility, so of course the party that caters to the better off will have more turnout.
In any case, more people voting is a good thing. That you think different shows you’re not a particularly good person.
So informed enough to be able to write their name.
That explains a lot, actually.
Nice rationalizations, again, plus it gives you a sense of moral superiority. Congratulations.
More people voting is a good thing, I agree. If they are doing it of their own free will, and knowing what they are voting for(or at least thinking they know). When you’ve got large numbers of people who just don’t care, it doesn’t serve democracy to drag their asses to the polls and instruct them to vote Democrat.
I don’t think I’m better than you, except at assessing when I’m told lies.
Even people you don’t like get a say. You’d rather make it harder to vote so fewer people do it, I get it. You want to win, and fear failure, so you change the rules. I get it.
Most of the rule changes have come from Democrats, in an effort to boost turnout among their base.
Back when the Democrats were the party of the working man, they had no need for this. Since they became the party of the non-working man, they now find themselves with a base that either doesn’t want to vote or can’t vote without major assistance.
Poor people have less free time and mobility. Of course the poor vote less. Especially when you cut down extra voting days and make it harder.
So keep repeating your lies to motivate others via misplaced anger. Since you can’t compete honestly, it’s all you have.
Says the side that wants to reduce the amount of speech during elections so that their voters might not get the wrong ideas.
The poor have less free time? The problem is that they have MORE, not less. People with jobs have trouble voting, yet have always managed.
the poverty rate among full time workers is 2.9%. There is no epidemic of poor working folks who don’t have time to vote. The majority of those who live in poverty are not full time workers and thus have plenty of time on their hands. The reason they don’t vote is the same reason they don’t fill out job applications.
Heck, maybe the Koch Brother’s are totally sincere, maybe they have studied on it for a while, and come to the conclusion that the human species bites the bag, and should be phased out. That would explain their enthusiasm for global warming, maybe a firm commitment to opening up an evolutionary opportunity for the cockroaches or the ants.
So, OK, they want to wipe out humanity. Least they aren’t lazy. Or hypocrites. That would be bad.
Climate change is going to wipe out the human race now?
Those pictures of people standing on line for hours and hours to vote. You saw them, surely. Think those pictures were faked? A big con job to make it look like the economically disadvantaged have a tougher time voting? And Fox News didn’t catch on?
So, OK, that’s the minority of the Dem base, then, the few who are not too lazy, too drunk, or too crippled by STDs to make it to the polls.
But last time out, more people voted for Dem candidates for House seats than voted for Republicans. By about a million, IIRC. So, then, only a relatively small proportion of the people who agree with us actually voted, and they still outnumbered the people who agree with you.
Gonna leave you with one last name to remember. Custer.
And the time before that, more people voted for Republicans than Democrats, by almost FIVE million. Let’s see how much we can run up the score this year.
And they had a majority back in 1860, too. So connect those dots with a straight line and you have the official **adaher **prediction for 2016.
The bastards! How dare they? Republicans should make that a campaign issue.
Not now, but might well eventually. Humanity’s impact on the ecosystem since the Industrial Revolution began already constitutes an extinction-level event.
No need. Making voting easier hasn’t actually helped Democrats bring out their voters. Which is why they’ll keep on trying until they’ve made it so people don’t have to vote at all. Register as a Democrat, and your vote will automatically count as being for the Democrats.
Of course it is.