And I am saying that in ultra-close elections, those handful could change the result. Also saying that the “impact” to thousands of voters is not the kind of impact that society recognizes as undue.
Huh, so adding regulations is good. If it makes people feel better/more confident. And regulations that have ‘broad public support’ are also praiseworthy.
You really should go and let the people arguing about Net Neutrality in GD know about this.
It’s not the kind that white society recognizes as undue. Don’t confuse your experience with everyone else’s. You’re using the language of an elitist. You’re invalidating your arguments. Your thoughts and ideas are invalid.
No, because if I did that I’d be making the basic error of conflating two roles of government: government-as-actor and government-as-mediator.
I favor government making rules to manage its own projects and process. This is a necessity if the government is to run any project.
I disfavor the government imposing rules on external projects and processes. Sometimes it is necessary, to be sure, but I content that the initial default position should be to avoid imposing regulation.
Are you under the impression that there’s a non-white legislature somewhere who gets to make different rules for non-whites?
See, there isn’t.
There is one society for the purposes of making law. Now, if you wish to take that brilliant idea and publish some libby lefty sociological journal article about how elitist language invalidates law, go right ahead. You’ll probably win a big grant to study invidious language and its violent attacks on helpless marginalized communities. I think verbs are the most injurious, myself.
Good night, Bricker.
You’re better than this, which is why I’m not being as harsh as I could be. But we’re done. Your arguments aren’t to be taken seriously. Night night, kiddo.
Not here in Minnesota they don’t – we voted them down!
Your link shows
But I assume if I clear my cookies or whatever it takes I’ll learn that the GOP are cheating again. Ho, hum. ‘Dog bites man.’ I’ll waste the clicks to clear my cookies when ‘Man bites dog.’
I’m pretty sure that Moore, losing a close election, would be on his way to the Senate with the assistance of cheaters except that so many GOPsters had disassociated themselves from him. Date a teenager, you’re ineligible; help steal a trillion dollar dollars and you’ll get a plaque at Trump Tower.
Bricker is a one-man philanthropy act, as he’s told us many times. I’m sure he was prowling the alleys to help the fine moral Virginians in this video register to vote.
I think that many of most of these instances likely violate the VRA, as you earlier agreed (as did the courts) the NC case did, though depending on the evidence this is more of less provable depending on the case.
Sorry, but that’s the long and short of it. If we’re legitimately worried about one vote, maybe we should be equally worried about someone’s grandmother who would have voted in this election but couldn’t because she couldn’t afford the fees to get a birth certificate she never had in order to get a photo ID she never needed.
But Myrtle Delahuerta, 85, who lives across town from Randall, has tried unsuccessfully for two years to get her ID. She has the same problem of her birth certificate not matching her pile of other legal documents that she carts from one government office to the next. The disabled woman, who has difficulty walking, is applying to have her name legally changed, a process that will cost her more than $300 and has required a background check and several trips to government offices.
“I hear from people nearly weekly who can’t get an ID either because of poverty, transportation issues or because of the government’s incompetence,” said Chad W. Dunn, a lawyer with Brazil & Dunn in Houston, who has specialized in voting rights work for 15 years.
“Sometimes government officials don’t know what the law requires,” Dunn said. “People take a day off work to go down to get the so-called free birth certificates. People who are poor, with no car and no Internet access, get up, take the bus, transfer a couple of times, stand in line for an hour and then are told they don’t have the right documents or it will cost them money they don’t have.”
There’s more of these people than there are actual cases of in-person voter fraud. Even discounting those who were “discouraged”, the list of people for whom it would be prohibitively expensive is long enough. Oh, and by the way:
What, exactly, was done about Absentee Ballot fraud? Y’know, that thing that’s far more common than in-person impersonation voter fraud? And do you have any actual evidence that there’s a difference in voter confidence in election results between voter ID states and non-voter-ID states, or are you just pulling that assertion out of your ass?
You’re hawking the same bad arguments you were 4 fucking years ago, and literally nothing has changed.
Trump’s voter fraud panel has gone dark. Members don’t know why.
(Emphasis added in shock, horror, and dismay)
Goodness! “Sharply divided”! About what? On the basis of what evidence?
Ah! Well, that clears that up!
.
(emphasis added spasmodically, while puking my guts out…)
This all underscores one of Friend Bricker’s points: clearly, “some” Republicans have malign motives in all of this. Good catch, Counselor, keep up the…ah…good work. The fight for half-truth, injustice, and the American Way. America, where equality before the law actually means…something.
Nothing has changed? Good. Voter ID remains the law? Good! Great, in fact.
So these terrible arguments of mine, which should convince no one . . . actually seem to be working.
And your unassailable arguments, the pinnacle of reason and logic . . . haven’t done jack, or shit.
Is that it?
Good.
See, I don’t need to convince YOU. You’re a lost cause, bedeviled by liberal mush-headedness. If I could convince you, I’d immediately suspect my premise was wrong.
Whatever reputation you get as the board’s “smart conservative” is so unearned that it’s painful.
Which, amazingly enough: I fully support.
I think it’s unwise, mind you, but it’s not my call; Minnesotans get to craft their own procedures after weighing the risks associated with close elections. I support the result obtained by the legislature, either way.
In contrast to my cadre of interlocutors, who support it piously when they agree with it and denounce it as invalid otherwise, running to the courts to cry.
But when the courts disagree? Then what do you think? You still think your view should prevail?
I’m still curious, **Bricker **, on your confidence of the election results when one form of ID is so easily forged?
Indeed, and I have to point out that he is wilfully ignoring that people like me are not in theory opposed to voter ID, only that in practice it has been shown that in several states the ones applying it did it in a way so as to prevent minorities or the poor from voting. Again (like for the 100th time) the problem is that Bricker does not care at all that he ends up supporting bigots and elitists in their voter repression efforts.
The world would indeed be better off were I the supreme leader with complete and irrefutable power.
Is that what you’re asking?
No, not exactly. I am sure you think your views are right – else why would you hold them?
But do you think they are so self-evidently right that they should supplant the actual processes we have in place to govern?