And if both House and Senate remain in the GOP’s hands? What excuse will you make?
It would be to the detriment of the country.
Dishonest. The majority of people favor Voter ID laws. This hurts you, so you ignore it?
Doesn’t matter – their names should still be struck, and future elections use a photo ID.
And what if the poll question were framed honestly:
*Do you favor systemic disenfranchisement of blacks and other likely Democrat voters?
*
Since you bloated-amygdala fiends think everyone’s as despicable as you are, I suppose you think the majority, at least among the franchised in the red racist states, would favor your policies even when phrased honestly.
And your response, as usual, would be: You lost. Eat shit. Lol.
ETA: And though you give up all pretense at principle to support the GOP, you can’t think of an admirable GOP philosopher other than Karl Rove? Lol, indeed.
Sure, provided free from the government as part of a well-funded permanent ID distribution program that will set up offices in disadvantaged neighborhoods as well as visiting high schools, all in an honest determined effort to ensure that every citizen can get one with the absolute minimum hassle.
Know of any Republican efforts along these lines, because if not your take on what “should” happen is disingenuous at best.
Could be done in a booth no bigger than a booth at a county fair. Room enough for a computer, a digital camera, quality color printer, and a card-embossing device. Take a picture of the registering voter, one copy goes on the card, one in the database. (Gonna need a server, maybe Hillary will give us hers…). Registering voter supplies some form of proof of address, utility bills, official correspondence, that sort of thing. Naturally, he attests that he is qualifed to register under penalty of mega-perjury, which is a super-felony and subject to prosecution by Bricker channeling Javert.
Maybe add on the Minnesota model: if a registered voter with oodles of ID will vouch for John Jones under the same dread consequences above, that he/she knows John Jones of 123 Maple Ave. to be a qualified boney-fido American citizen and resident of the precinct, parish, whateverness.
Badda-boom, badda-bing, registered voter. Ten minutes. A computer, a modem, and camera and a temp. Set 'em up all over, Piggly Wiggly, Wal Mart, senior centers, libraries, universities…churches? Sure, why the hell not! Easy-peasy, dwarf named Sneezy.
And I’m not even all that smart! Get some *smart *people working on it, could be even more easy, convenient and foolproof.
See post #8020.
We could change the Constitution of the thread so that is only about voter ID as a discrete entity, and whether that has any conceivable value, however slight. Then we’d have to amend the title to elide any reference to “voter suppression”, so that malign misuse is not pertinent.
Of course, amending the thread requires a three quarters majority of the posters…
That’s not honest. An honest question is already asked: do you favor the existing Voter ID laws? That question adds nothing to the mix; it’s an accurate description of the information sought. The only way pustules like you can possibly hope to win is by lying about the effects. Propaganda is your weapon, as it has been from Marx and Stalin onwards to the modern loony left.
Personally, I’d like the loony right to stop lying about the effects of voter fraud.
That is to say, they lie when they clam there are any.
Sure. Why not chauffeured limo rides to the voting booths and free blowjobs provided while voters wait? It could be a twofer: keep Democrats in office with their massive turnout and sex worker jobs programs.
Or we could continue the belief that reasonable societies accept that some effort is perfectly acceptable in the realm of casting a vote. No high school outreach necessary.
I’m waiting to hear what the downside might be… So far, I’m fully in favor of this.
I suppose that’s fair, since the voter fraud problem is clearly on the verge of utterly destroying America and repeating ass-raping all its children, and I feel okay in saying so since you demonstrate a casual willingness to abandon reality, thus making it clear that serious discussion of the issue is at best a minor diversion.
A reasonable society would not be as heavily motivated by fears of nonexistent problems as America has been for… pretty much ever, truth be told. It’s proven shockingly and dismayingly easy to get large segments of the American population whipped up by irrational concerns such as Wars on Christmas, Negro Uprisings, Government Gungrabs and, yes, Fraudulent Voters. You can try to rationalize these concerns by misapplying a college-vocabulary to describe them, but you are ultimately arguing on behalf of stupidity.
Republican “blowjobs”. OK, if you are too lazy to jerk off. Personally, I’d hold out for the food stamps and free heroin.
Incidentally, is there something patently absurd about the idea of registering high school students? It strikes me as a fairly sane and rational notion, since they’re already gathered in one place and they typically get photographed already for student IDs and/or yearbooks and whatnot.
Can I assume Bricker was just being reflexively stupid in his guffawery, with him making no effort to engage a thought process not already vetted by his Republiscript?
Good point! I’ll opt out. These are the people who keep insisting on legislation that “has teeth.”
Judging by the performance of the Republican Congress to date, that isn’t a big worry.
I think the crux of this whole voter ID issue is that some people are so paranoid about the idea that a few dozen noncitizens might vote that they are more than willing to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of citizens in order to prevent it. Whereas rational people are so unwilling to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of citizens that we’ll gladly take a risk of a few dozen noncitizens voting.
It’s actually a smart idea, for the reasons you mention.
What it’s not is a prerequisite to the legality of Voter ID. A state can, quite legitimately, require photo IDs for voting without a single dollar spent on high school outreach.
So I’m not calling the idea itself patently absurd: I’m heaping well-deserved scorn on the notion that a mandatory photo ID scheme would require such measures to grant it any kind of legitimacy.
Your track record in the past hasn’t been admirable in determining what was, and was not, a “big worry.” You have predicted Democratic victories that have failed to materialize in past elections. And your critique of the prior Republican Congress was just as strong, and you confidently predicted the Senate would remain in Democratic hands after the 2014 elections – and it didn’t. Remember that?
Why, now, are you so confident about this prediction that you cannot even provide a straightforward answer to the question, “What excuse will you make if both House and Senate remain in the GOP’s hands following the 2016 elections?”