GOP voter disenfranchisement in Mississippi

[Ame®icano]

It is the first step

Once voter ID is in place, the next step will be making it more difficult to get an ID. Throw up enough roadblocks and people will get frustrated and stop trying

They've already closed down ones in heavily populated areas making it more difficult to get one. So you're right. First they'll require an ID, then they'll choke off the places that you can get the ID. Then they'll charge a "small" fee..

The whole time neglecting to say...Like 4 pages right here. Why the ID is needed in the first place.

1. Start putting ID locations at Motor Vehicle agencies where you have to drive to get there
2. Make documentation requirements more stringent
3. Tie voters up in red tape about their ID
4. Charge an increasingly higher fee
5. Time ID cards to expire right before the election

Won't chase everyone away but every vote that is not cast counts

In Michigan, ID is free for everyone over 65, disabled person or with revoked DL.

DL's and ID's are usually valid 4 years. They expire on the birthday date.

So question for you, how do you time that everyone has birthday just before the election?

 

[ClosedCaption]

It is the first step

Once voter ID is in place, the next step will be making it more difficult to get an ID. Throw up enough roadblocks and people will get frustrated and stop trying

They've already closed down ones in heavily populated areas making it more difficult to get one. So you're right. First they'll require an ID, then they'll choke off the places that you can get the ID. Then they'll charge a "small" fee..

The whole time neglecting to say...Like 4 pages right here. Why the ID is needed in the first place.

Name few that closed.

Google It For Me!

 

[Ame®icano]

A lot of Amazement in here. Fewer answers tho

Answers to what? Why ID is required for proof of identification?

What purpose will an ID serve for voting? Feel free to be amazed once again

What purpose ID have when purchasing gun?

Lets have the same requirements for both constitutional rights, including waiting time, background checks, etc.

 

[RKMBrown]

Not just someone but the guy who wrote the law. His ID didnt match his registration so he couldnt vote. Its a good thing he can get an affidavit and sign it himself. Other people would have a tougher process tho.

Its not a horror but it is an undue burden

Bolded for ya, cause you apparently can't find and/or remember stating that "he couldnt vote."

 

[kwc57]

Answers to what? Why ID is required for proof of identification?

What purpose will an ID serve for voting? Feel free to be amazed once again

What purpose ID have when purchasing gun?

Lets have the same requirements for both constitutional rights, including waiting time, background checks, etc.

I would agree except........voting is not a constitutional right. Constitutional amendments specify things that you can not use to exclude people from voting like race or gender, but nowhere does the constitution declare voting a right......like the right to bear arms.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Not just someone but the guy who wrote the law. His ID didnt match his registration so he couldnt vote. Its a good thing he can get an affidavit and sign it himself. Other people would have a tougher process tho.

Its not a horror but it is an undue burden

Bolded for ya, cause you apparently can't find and/or remember stating that "he couldnt vote."

AHAHAHA yes by taking it out of context. He couldnt vote UNTIL what? He got the affidavit signed like I said idiot. You think I'm some sort of fool to try that bullshit. Guess what? You can now lie and say I said "Im some sort of fool" and take that out of context too you little lying piece of shit.

I see the software is letting you quote me now. Amazing how that changed too.

 

[RKMBrown]

I didnt say he couldnt vote and you know that. Thats why you didnt include the quote.




All hypothetical. Because getting an affidavit is not that easy. And thats why you think its not a big deal. Because you dont know the process.

Your just a lying little bitch aren't you?

When someone hits the quote button the software does not include every prior statement you clicked the button on. Not when it gets past to many sub quotes. One layer gets tossed when it goes over the site limit.

Further, I did quote you. When someone says you said "". The Stuff between the quotes is a citation, a quote of what you said. I quoted you WORD FOR WORD.

No you are wrong, it's not hypothetical, making an affidavit is that easy. Affidavits are made by the hundreds at poling places and registration sites every single day they are open. You assume I don't know the process. You are wrong. As far as I know, in this conversation, you are the only one that does not know the process of making an affidavit.

So you mean when you said "Closed Caption is the muthafucking man" that is a direct quote from you?

This bitch here is blaming the software for not quoting me saying something. Dude you need better excuses than "the software wont let me"

When I quote someone, I quote exactly what they said. I do that because I'm truthful. When you quote someone and lie about that they said, like you just did, it is because you are a lying little bitch.

My statement about how the software works and the site rules is 100% correct. You can taunt me to go against the site rules all you like. But you won't find me going against the site rules like you have done by miss-quoting people. You can make up all the lies you want, but when you make up lies about the site rules and/or miss-quoting people like you have done, you are crossing the line.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Your just a lying little bitch aren't you?

When someone hits the quote button the software does not include every prior statement you clicked the button on. Not when it gets past to many sub quotes. One layer gets tossed when it goes over the site limit.

Further, I did quote you. When someone says you said "". The Stuff between the quotes is a citation, a quote of what you said. I quoted you WORD FOR WORD.

No you are wrong, it's not hypothetical, making an affidavit is that easy. Affidavits are made by the hundreds at poling places and registration sites every single day they are open. You assume I don't know the process. You are wrong. As far as I know, in this conversation, you are the only one that does not know the process of making an affidavit.

So you mean when you said "Closed Caption is the muthafucking man" that is a direct quote from you?

This bitch here is blaming the software for not quoting me saying something. Dude you need better excuses than "the software wont let me"

When I quote someone, I quote exactly what they said. I do that because I'm truthful. When you quote someone and lie about that they said, like you just did, it is because you are a lying little bitch.

My statement about how the software works and the site rules is 100% correct. You can taunt me to go against the site rules all you like. But you won't find me going against the site rules like you have done by miss-quoting people.

The software is letting you quote me now. I thought it wouldnt let you dumb ass. Now tell me how you're truthful again. Or will the software stop you again mean ol software

 

[Uncensored2008]

I would agree except........voting is not a constitutional right. Constitutional amendments specify things that you can not use to exclude people from voting like race or gender, but nowhere does the constitution declare voting a right......like the right to bear arms.

I disagree.

24th Amendment

{Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax. }

I see that as an explicit affirmation of a right to vote.

 

[kwc57]

I would agree except........voting is not a constitutional right. Constitutional amendments specify things that you can not use to exclude people from voting like race or gender, but nowhere does the constitution declare voting a right......like the right to bear arms.

I disagree.

24th Amendment

{Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax. }

I see that as an explicit affirmation of a right to vote.

Nope. Again, it states what can not be used as a reason to deny voting.

shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

A state can set the requirements of who is eligible to vote as long as it doesn't violate those items in the constitution that says can not be used as a reason. We already have age limits and in many states felons do not have the right to vote. The constitution does not guarantee the right to vote. It just isn't there.

 

[RKMBrown]

Not just someone but the guy who wrote the law. His ID didnt match his registration so he couldnt vote. Its a good thing he can get an affidavit and sign it himself. Other people would have a tougher process tho.

Its not a horror but it is an undue burden

Bolded for ya, cause you apparently can't find and/or remember stating that "he couldnt vote."

AHAHAHA yes by taking it out of context. He couldnt vote UNTIL what? He got the affidavit signed like I said idiot. You think I'm some sort of fool to try that bullshit. Guess what? You can now lie and say I said "Im some sort of fool" and take that out of context too you little lying piece of shit.

I see the software is letting you quote me now. Amazing how that changed too.

I also quoted you in the one where you said I did not quote you, you lying POS coward.

Additionally, your statements quoted above do not say "UNTIL what?" That part might have been in your little head but you failed to put it down on paper. Why per chance did you fail to mention that part? You implied, IMO, that he had to run oft to lawyer up and spend money to buy / get an affidavit. This is apparently based on your self-admitted ignorance.

Now, if you had said he couldn't vote until after he signed the little piece of paper swearing by the explanation of why his name changed, then he voted some 15seconds or so later... Well then I would not have said you were wrong and the discussion would have ended.

 

[nodoginnafight]

This is like requiring everyone to have a Hula Hoop and instead of asking "why the fuck do I need a Hula Hoop?"

Republicans see the new rule and ask "Who doesn't have a hula hoop? I mean c'mon"

We must provide ID for nearly everything. No reason why a person should not be required to prove their identity to vote.
States provide ID free of charge. Or for a nominal fee.
Where's the problem?

I tend to agree. As long as the IDs are provided free of charge. If you charge a fee, that is essentially a poll tax.

 

[Ame®icano]

I doubt 360k adults in any state have no ID. We need ID to do just about anything in daily life. Where are these people who have no ID?

Plenty of people don't renew IDs for a variety of reasons at some point in life. If they're retired, and they don't drive, and they live in small towns where everyone knows everyone, there's simply no need for an ID. So, why should they spend a day traveling several miles to a bigger city in order to pay money to get an ID they don't need?

"Spend a day traveling..."

I can drive from Texas to Florida and back in a day. I'm calling BS on the claim it takes a day of driving to get your ID renewed. Why would anyone need to travel a number of states to get an ID renewed? Oh... maybe you are talking about getting an ID for the place you want to vote in vs. an ID for the location where you actually live?

In Michigan we can renew by mail or online.

Now, some would putting stamp on a envelope call a poll tax...

 

[nodoginnafight]

I would agree except........voting is not a constitutional right. Constitutional amendments specify things that you can not use to exclude people from voting like race or gender, but nowhere does the constitution declare voting a right......like the right to bear arms.

I disagree.

24th Amendment

{Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax. }

I see that as an explicit affirmation of a right to vote.

Nope. Again, it states what can not be used as a reason to deny voting.

shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

A state can set the requirements of who is eligible to vote as long as it doesn't violate those items in the constitution that says can not be used as a reason. We already have age limits and in many states felons do not have the right to vote. The constitution does not guarantee the right to vote. It just isn't there.

Yes, it is. That doesn't mean that right cannot be revoked. The Constitution also provides a right for all citizens to own a firearm. But that right can be withdrawn for good cause too.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Plenty of people don't renew IDs for a variety of reasons at some point in life. If they're retired, and they don't drive, and they live in small towns where everyone knows everyone, there's simply no need for an ID. So, why should they spend a day traveling several miles to a bigger city in order to pay money to get an ID they don't need?

"Spend a day traveling..."

I can drive from Texas to Florida and back in a day. I'm calling BS on the claim it takes a day of driving to get your ID renewed. Why would anyone need to travel a number of states to get an ID renewed? Oh... maybe you are talking about getting an ID for the place you want to vote in vs. an ID for the location where you actually live?

In Michigan we can renew by mail or online.

Now, some would putting stamp on a envelope call a poll tax...

No, because that is not THE ONLY way to register/renew.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Nope. Again, it states what can not be used as a reason to deny voting.

Yes it does, right after it affirms that voting is a right of citizens in the United States.

shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

A state can set the requirements of who is eligible to vote as long as it doesn't violate those items in the constitution that says can not be used as a reason. We already have age limits and in many states felons do not have the right to vote. The constitution does not guarantee the right to vote. It just isn't there.

This is no different than the "Well regulated militia" argument. "Why" does not constrain "what."

 

[nodoginnafight]

I also think people should be required to produce an ID to use their food stamp cards. That could cut down on people selling their food stamps to others.

 

[kwc57]

This is like requiring everyone to have a Hula Hoop and instead of asking "why the fuck do I need a Hula Hoop?"

Republicans see the new rule and ask "Who doesn't have a hula hoop? I mean c'mon"

We must provide ID for nearly everything. No reason why a person should not be required to prove their identity to vote.
States provide ID free of charge. Or for a nominal fee.
Where's the problem?

I tend to agree. As long as the IDs are provided free of charge. If you charge a fee, that is essentially a poll tax.

That argument could be made, but the truth of it is that virtually every "functioning" member of society already has a photo ID in order to function. The claim that it puts a burden on people or it's a hardship and it disenfrancises people is a red herring. Most people have them and could easily produce it at the polling place. Democrats use the red herring because they rely on gaming the system to stay in power. Think about it. Requiring an ID benefits both Dems and Repubs because they are playing by a set of rules that keeps people from claiming they are someone they are not in order to provide a false or extra vote for their candidate. Repubs have no problem with abiding by a rule like that. Dems do. You have to ask yourself why they are so against it.......when the vast majority of people have ID and for those who don't it is easily available. The most obvious answer is that they want to game the system.

 

[RKMBrown]

This is like requiring everyone to have a Hula Hoop and instead of asking "why the fuck do I need a Hula Hoop?"

Republicans see the new rule and ask "Who doesn't have a hula hoop? I mean c'mon"

We must provide ID for nearly everything. No reason why a person should not be required to prove their identity to vote.
States provide ID free of charge. Or for a nominal fee.
Where's the problem?

I tend to agree. As long as the IDs are provided free of charge. If you charge a fee, that is essentially a poll tax.

Agreed to a point. Thought... if the cost of the so called free IDs and free elections are funded by taxes on the taxpayers, doesn't that make those taxes a poll tax?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I also think people should be required to produce an ID to use their food stamp cards. That could cut down on people selling their food stamps to others.

It is already a requirement - which is why the bullshit by the left that ID disenfranchises the poor is disingenuous.

You must have photo ID to use SNAP, both food stamps and cash grants. You must have photo ID to cash or deposit a Social Security check, or to obtain direct deposit. You must have photo ID to use Medicare benefits.

The truth is that there is only one reason to oppose voter ID, because the democrats support election fraud.

That is the simple truth of this whole thing.

And we ALL know it. democrats believe it is their god given right to cheat in elections.