And they would do this, why, exactly? A whim, perhaps? The are just sitting around the house, eating a bowl of huevos con chingalo, and they say “Hey! I’m gonna fucking vote! Yeah!”
Voter ID Laws: Necessary to combat rampant fraud or subtle subjugation of the Democratic demographic
You really can’t see the motivation? To keep democrats in power who work to keep them in the country, primarily, and secondarily, for many of them, getting welfare benefits?
Oh goody, tyranny always does love to wear the flag.
Why not literacy tests, and poll taxes too? Don’t want dummies voting, right? Isn’t that why your ancestors in the South implemented them?
Did your southern ancestors do any fighting for African American rights? Why or why not? Women’s rights? Were their rights just not as important? See I find this just as ugly as resulting Poll Taxes, and Literacy Tests your southern ancestors instated in the south. They claimed to only want “responsible” people voting.
Bottom line it wasn’t “land owners” it was male white land owners your ancestors limited it to. Does that sound “reasonable”? Black people are all irrational? Women?
Are you saying I’m not a reasonable person, given the trouble I had? No reasonable person ever ends up in a bad situation?
Reasonable people fact-check their claims before posting:
You weren’t planning on voting where you? You didn’t do the reasonable action of fact checking simple claims. Why should we trust you with a ballet? You don’t even know what’s going on!
And for all we know that guy just had some bad luck. You try to paint a negative stereo type. People are people, you can wag a shriveled judgmental finger like that, but people have bad luck. The world is not a just place, good people get hurt.
How about instead of posting with a scowl and selfish hate in your heart, about how you want undesirables to suffer, you help institute a program to help anyone get an ID?
If an ID is trivially easy for any voter to get, no matter their life situation, ID check at the poll all you want with my blessing. Suffrage belongs to us all.
Why do you vote?
Wait, I’m confused. Are you opposed to PA’s scheme or supporting it?
You see why I ask elucidator to make simple, clear statements?
Because these little wrong assumptions are hidden amongst the fluff.
The word “they” does not mean or require any particular majority share. I assaying that illegal aliens march, in public, in full view of news cameras, in favor of the DREAM Act. They do this. This statement does not require that the majority of marchers are illegal.
Same reason you vote. Same reason to go protest: to assist in shaping public policy in ways they favor.
There’s nothing mysterious about it.
Well, let’s go further with the hypothetical. I know this is crazy, but bear with me, Imagine that there was some wild-eyed legislation being proposed that, again this is total hypothetical, we could create some special rules for children of illegals to become citizens if they came here while they were very young. Under this complete hypothetical, could you imagine that an illegal immigrant might be motivated to vote?
So, just so we’re clear here, the people who demonstrate for the DREAM act are mostly genuine Americans, yes? With every right to voice such views, publicly or otherwise. Just so we’re clear, you understand.
The US House of Representatives as I have linked to already. But you seem to be ignoring my example of a time when ballots were checked and illegitimate votes were found.
If IDs are easy for any eligible voter to get, no matter what. Then they are not a barrier to voting. The PA ID program is in the right direction, but it does not satisfactory achieve that goal. As documented, there’s the Social Security card issue. For one thing at least.
OK. Let me see here…
You know that illegal aliens are demonstrating in favor of the DREAM act. How you know this we are left to surmise, but its not a crazy idea in itself. How many, of course, is a matter of imagination. Six, a dozen, a hundred, a thousand, we get no guidance on that. But you know they’re there, and that’s all you need.
But anyway, with that fact we can deduce that they are probably motivated to take the risk of voting illegally, and perhaps impoverishing their families and losing any hope of naturalization. Because they are so fervently and insanely devoted to passing the DREAM act as soon as possible.
That’s not a conspiracy, that’s a fever dream.
Therefore any patriotism is tyranny, gotcha.
Well, as I’m not in favor of poll taxes and literacy tests, (and you must remember that striking down literacy tests had more to do with Jim Crow than with despising responsible voters) I don’t see why I should argue for them; and if you’re not in favor of them, I do not see why I should argue against them. Neither is an equivalent; neither is designed to ensure that elections are honest, which is my polestar here.
Well, if you’re finished with all the stereotyping, (I guess you didn’t make any effort to find out the facts here) I would have you know that the three who died were one branch of the family who lived in Massachusetts. The other branch, the Rankins, have some measure of historical significance. Alexander Rankin, my great great (several times) grandfather was an abolitionist even though (gasp) he defended some southern territory. As soon as slavery issues became prominent in the mid 1800’s, many of his descendants were in northern Kentucky and southern Ohio. And guess what?
John Rankin was Alexander’s grandson. He started the underground railroad that inspired Harriet Beacher Stowe to write Uncle Tom’s Cabin. He faced gunfight attacks on his home from pro-slavery people and stood trial for violating the Fugitive Slave Act. You probably should pick on some other southern family to pour your bile upon.
I am sure you can note that I stated that the idea wasn’t perfect, and that many responsible people weren’t land owners. I said the idea had some merit, not that it couldn’t be abused. Abused it was. I’m not sure how it is you think I am somehow claiming blacks and women are not worthy of voting. Are they irresponsible in your view? What makes you think I think they are irresponsible as a class? I don’t care if the bum who can’t keep from losing his I.D. because he passes out in alleys is a woman, black, white, male, or a Martian. I’m not bending over backwards to help him vote if he doesn’t really care to begin with, especially not to the point that I can’t be confident an election is honest.
I’ve got some sympathy for a first time bad position, but those who refuse to take steps to prevent a bad position they’ve been in before, well, isn’t that their fault?
You built my simple claim into something it’s not. I didn’t say there was no-one; I said I see more people with a possible and probable political motive complaining about it than I do the people who are actually disenfranchised. I stated what I saw and you’re contradicting me.
There’s about a dozen people who come to my house over an average two weeks. of those, I am really not certain if two have I.D. or not. of the ten I know one way or the other, only one doesn’t have I.D., and the real reason he doesn’t is because he’s in bed until three o’clock every afternoon and sleeps 14 hours a day. He’s been “looking for a job” for six months but I’m not sure when he does that as nearly every day he’s at my house soon after getting up. If he wasn’t the best/most dedicated drummer I can find, I wouldn’t want him around. I constantly have to provide for this guy. If he ever has a job, it’ll be because I created an opportunity for him as a musician.
I encourage him to get I.D., if for no other reason he can at least run the errand of getting the cigarettes he wants me to buy for him. I gave him some work and he earned fifty dollars (with me having to keep him working the whole time) a we agreed this was specifically for the purpose of getting his I.D.
He bought cigarettes, a sack of weed and some munchies instead. What do you think I should tell him if he complains he can’t vote?
So, be it anecdote as it may, it is what I see in my life. Who are you to gainsay what I say I see and demand some kind of fact check for some other fact you substituted for what I said?
Have bad luck with I.D. and miss one election isn’t of great concern. Permanent disenfranchisement is of some concern, but permanent disenfranchisement because you keep on and on having “bad luck” with your I.D. because you don’t take steps to prevent it is something else.
Did you fact check my “scowl” and my heart before you posted that?
I do not want undesirables to suffer. I’d prefer the drunk get up and have a good life instead. But how far should I go to do for him what he doesn’t care so much for himself?
I’m not against making I.D. easier to get. It’s not fun going to the DMV twice in the same day to be sure I NEVER have a problem exercising rights or privileges I don’t want to lose and take steps to guard against that problem.
Almost certainly, yes. But we’re talking abut your number, 1,000, remember? You couldn’t imagine that 1,000 illegal immigrants could be motivated to vote. Are you still maintaining that position?
After you clearly demonstrating Bricker’s point about clarifying issues with you as true, I can’t be sure I am clearly understanding you without you defining what all the key words here mean to you. Umm, come to think of it, you’d better define the pronouns as you use them too.
I mean, you do not understand “compelling” or “Interest” or “significant” causing some concern about communication with you; but when you insisted on a new definition of “they” meaning a majority of some other inclusive group only, it really took the cake.
Oh, crap,** John.** So, to obtain my magic number of a thousand, you are speculating into the fog? So, its not a matter of plausibility, or reasonableness, just so you can prove its possible, that means you win? And all of this, and all the hair on fire urgency, all the insult and injustice offered, that’s all justified because its possible?
Sure set a daunting bar, there. Not real hard to get over that one, is it?
and even thoug it is even more implausible to claim that no illegal immigrants vote, and that they have no motivation to vote, and can be guaranteed not to vote because it would call attention to themselves, and utterly implausible that no demonstrator of hispanic issues is an illegal, you should win?
You do realize that the purpose of presumptions in reasoning is to allow us to go on and make a decision even when the evidence is not clear don’t you? it allows things to get done when people like you hamper the reasoning process by insisting on utter undeniable proof of each (especially when you’re advocating a system designed not to produce evidence) fact to the point we cannot even talk about it; when you redefine words unilaterally in order to build strawmen; when you claim ignorance of understanding of ordinary words, yes we look to presumptions to keep obstructors at bay.
They are sometimes built on the plausibility of one proposition over another.
In this case, your ideas are the less plausible.
So once again, why don’t you come up with hard cold facts to support your position. If strict Voter ID laws were passed (requiring state photo ID or passport), how many citizen would be unable to vote simply because of financial reasons. Answer that very straightforward question.
And David42, I owe you a beer sometime. Apparently it is a miracle that over the last 21 years and numerous move I have been able to hold onto my certified birth certificate. Either that or I treat it like an important document that I shouldn’t use. Oh and I have two copies of my son’s certificate along with his passport.
When I lived in states that allow both driver’s licenses and ID, I had both (my ID was in my checkbook). Now we all know that elucidator will come along after reading this and talk about all the people that do not have access to photo ID and maybe he will take my, Bricker’s, or your experiences as “anecdotes” and dismiss them Yet I predict he will offer nothing in return - even anecdotes - that there are people that for financial reasons cannot get photo ID
And Bricker and I have both in various threads addressed the fact that states should provide photo ID and I even pointed out that LA County used to send out cards to registered voters (non-photo, cheap cardstock) to use as ID when voting. What solutions does his side have other than get rid of the laws?
Bricker, if you really want me to go “wow, you got me” because two Democratic states have Voter ID laws, that are similar to laws in Republican states, fine. You got me. Who cares? Democrats are not perfect, they put bad laws into place too. And in this case they did. And Voter ID laws are a bad idea no matter who brings them up. And they are predominantly brought up by Republicans, yes? These two blue states are an anomaly, yes?
None of this changes the fact that:
Sending their kids to school and getting drivers licenses both have a higher personal payoff than casting a single vote, plus the worst possible consequence of these two things is deportation.
Standing around outside Home Depot isn’t illegal plus it’s the whole point of them being here. Taking the risk of standing outside Home Depot is equivalent to taking the risk of being here. There’s no point in being here if it’s not to get work, and the sole consequence is being deported back to where you already were.
Regarding protesting, do we know for certain that they openly protest and state that they are illegal? Has anyone posted a cite for that? (It’s possible I missed it in this long thread). In any case, this also will at worst result in deportation.
Voting illegally is a different ballgame. An illegal person personally gains little or nothing but can be charged with a crime. No one here has shown that this kind of illegal and irrational voting is actually occurring in any meaningful amount (if at all). They make the claim that the lack of evidence is evidence that it’s easy. (Is there a name for that logical fallacy?)
People are claiming that the risk of large numbers of people committing such an irrational act is so high and that the number of people who would do it is so large that it’s worth disenfranchising some legitimate voters and making the act of voting much more difficult for even more. They need to prove this claim before we start putting roadblocks in the path of legitimate voters.