To Bricker’s credit, he has previously said that he supports thumbprints or cameras in lieu of voter ID.
To his detriment, and the reason this entire line of talk is a distraction, is that no one is even talking about actually legislating that. Bricker supports the laws as-is, and saying that he supports something like thumbprints is of no consequence, it will never happen while the current iteration of the GOP is here.
To be honest, I was asking about the technical aspects of implementation with the goal of punchlining with “Now, regarding this calm discussion of implementation, do you know of any politician who is speaking out against voter fraud who is also even hinting at anything like the mechanics of preventing it such as we have been casually doing these last ten posts or so, because if not, then that is why your ideas remain firmly in the realm of propagandist fantasy.”
But then he asked how I felt, so I went with that instead.
I asked a very similar question, but he couldn’t answer because liberal hypocrisy. Nonetheless, the answer is obvious, they didn’t do it because they didn’t want to. There was, IIRC, an exception, and I think it was Rhode Island, wherein the push to voter ID was accepted but with appropriate safeguards and outreach to negate any possible partisan impact. I emphasize that is only on the basis of a memory weakened by age and youthful chemical enthusiasms.
Nonetheless, I stand ready to heap praise upon the Republicans of Rhode Island who have met the dreadful threat of voter fraud and its corrosive impact on voter confidence in a reasonable and sensible fashion. Further, I commend their example to others of their, ah, ilk. For reasons I cannot fathom, their splendid example was not followed by other Republicans.
Actually, I can understand it quite easily, perhaps its only that I wish I didn’t. That the party of Barry Goldwater is now the party of Ted Cruz. Alas.
I asked too, back in 4344. Unfortunately, I fell into the sucker trap of letting Bricker answer a question with a question, then foolishly answering his question in a manner that he could nitpick, thus giving him a chance to evade mine.
I should have held a tougher line, or just not forgotten the nature of the person I was dealing with.
I had asked previously if anybody had any sort of “box score” compilation so that we might have some idea how this was all playing out in the broader context. Here is something by way of Daily Kos, well known distributor of liberal cooties…
Disclaimer: your correspondent from the conservative wing of the extreme left has not read nor reviewed said compilation, and will not put his spotless reputation at risk. It is offered for review, criticism, and rebuttal as need be.
I suggest Dopers might best focus on what it says about your own resident state, and see if it comports with your personal knowledge of same.
Egotist te absolvo. Boy is as slippery as a catfish in a barrel of motor oil.
You’re not a programmer. But do you understand what programmers mean when they talk about IF…THEN statements?
IF** Bricker **does not like the line of question AND/OR reasoning, THEN he will invite you on to a tangent that, with any luck, will lead you as far away from your original point as humanly possible.
What an absolutely elegant example.
Bricker: You’re not a fisherman, but do you know how to clean motor oil off a catfish?
My degree in software engineering, mentioned earlier, might indicate otherwise.
Yes. Feel free to elaborate on the relevance to the discussion at hand.
=IF(Bricker=unabletoargue, misdirectingtangent, belligerent_twattery)
Dude is totally 286.
I thought you were joshing about that degree, given your apparent inability to parse the following exchange. This exchange is relevant to your post 4344, which you complain I evaded:
(color and bolding of the word “if” added for emphasis)
(color and bolding of the word “then” added for emphasis)
Now we get to Post 4344, your post:
See, in an IF…THEN construct, the portion following the THEN is executed only IF the condition in the IF portion is true.
So, IF the number of very few people unable to cast votes is historically larger than than the number of very few known cases of voter fraud, THEN I’d be extremely supportive of mandating additional resources towards removing whatever barriers were creating the inability.
See? IF…THEN.
So before I start naming politicians, you need to name the person who is unable to vote. I even asked you, specifically, whether you really meant “Unable.” Remember? IF there’s a person unable to vote, THEN I can name the politician that is supportive of mandating additional resources.
IF…THEN. Say it with me.
If you weren’t lying about that degree, then you’d be absolutely justified in demanding a tuition refund. Of course, since the preceding sentence is framed with an IF…THEN structure, you’ll need someone to explain it to you.
I am not a programmer, so I welcome the chance to learn a skill. Let me try:
“IF **Bricker’s **daughter is a prostitute, THEN her cunt smells like spoiled mackerel.”
Do I get a gold star?
Nope. I can prove it and everything.
You did evade it. I direct your attention to posts 4347 and 4350:
Very convenient, focusing on the “Sure” and ignoring the sentence that followed it, since it was about naming “politicians who are advocating for voter ID laws who are also advocating for streamlining of the issuing of said IDs”, i.e. actually doing what you claim you would support.
Your focus on the IF THEN part is misplaced. It’s the follow-up question about actual efforts to install voter ID laws and then taking steps to not disqualify or discourage legitimate voters in the process that matters. In fact, it’s been what matters since the very beginning of this thread, you’re just too locked in your ideologically self-limited outlook to admit it.
By the way, using stupid logic to try to claim that I am stupid is too stupid to inspire my anger, only my further contempt.
Right there, that’s the non squirter thing I was talking about. Sez who? Is this written somewhere? You have some special dignity, some privilege? Who gave it to you, and when do we get some?
In Florida, I see ten bills proposed to expand voting rights/access/etc., one to restrict, all failed. Many other states are similarly stalemated.
Not until you fish it out with your tongue.
Oh, no, not falling for that one again! She’s lyin’, Fear, it ain’t in there!