Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If you instituted very stick id checking you should expect turnout to drop if you had very significant voter fraud because all those fraudulent voters will be blocked by the new strick id checking. Otherwise you either don't have illegal voting or your id system isn't working.The better correlation to draw is the fact that the left has claimed the GOP pushed for more voter suppression last election than they ever have and suppressed millions of voters - all while the nation had the largest turnout ever for those supposed 'suppressed' individuals.If strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout then it seems obvious that the widespread voter fraud at the polls claimed by conservatives is so much bull shit. So why do we need strict id laws if people are following the law?When you demand a photo ID knowing that10-12% of eligible voters do not have one, you are suppressing the vote."Republicans do cheat . . . because I want to believe it! Beating Democrats is cheating!"
Photo ID laws don't suppress voting. Gerrymandering is legal, AND practiced by both sides. Russian collusion is a fairy tale you made up to protect yourself from having to admit that your candidate was warmed-over shit. QUIT YOUR FUCKING LYING.
Study: Voter ID Laws Don’t Stop People Voting
There are no statistics that show significant voter fraud that a photo ID would prevent.
That & your party cheaters.
Gerrymandering is legal so legalized cheating is OK? Wow, what a piece of shit you are.
Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?
"Never mind your evidence. THIS is true because I say it is!"
When you say 10-12% of eligible voters don't have ID and won't vote because they don't have ID, you're saying that your voters are helpless, ignorant dumbasses. So I'm sure they appreciate you "helping" them like that.
Now, since I know you didn't even look at the link because you're going to believe what you believe and fuck any facts, I'll help you out.
"To determine this, the professors took advantage of different timing of the implementation of voter ID laws in different states to construct a "difference-in-differences" analysis, looking at how voters behave in states that do and do not have strict voter ID laws, before and after those laws were implemented. They used data from the progressive data service Catalist, "a U.S. company that provides data and data-related services to progressive organizations and has a long history of collaborating with academics."
The data from Catalist contained both demographic information—age, sex, race, and party affiliation—as well as information on whether or not a surveyed person was actually registered. This means that the paper’s authors could test whether or not voter ID not only stopped registered voters from voting, but discouraged unregistered voters from registering.
"Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation," the paper's authors found.
"Most importantly," they write, strict ID laws "do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites. The laws' overall effects remain close to zero and non-significant whether the election is a midterm or presidential election, and whether the laws are the more restrictive type that stipulate photo IDs.""
As for your claim that voters are helpless naifs who don't have and can't get ID, I dare you to prove to me that 10-12% of legally eligible voters are walking around the streets with absolutely no ID and no way to easily acquire it.
Furthermore, by definition, something that is legal cannot be cheating. The two are mutually exclusive. The fact that you can keep shouting, "Cheating! Cheating!!" over and over does not make it fact. Wow, what a delusional piece of shit you are.
"Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?" Like I said, you define "cheating" as "anything other than Dems winning." I feel absolutely no need to answer for, and certainly not to defend, the fact that you didn't get what you want.
I've always been rather dubious of claims of voter fraud. It's really not that much fun standing in line at a poll waiting to vote. I never heard of anybody selling their vote. I don't think I have ever know anyone who ever thought there vote would make a difference. Even thou the chances are being caught illegally voting are small, I can't image a significant number of people taking the chance. There is nothing to be gained.
Sorry, I'm not really seeing the connection between "If ID laws don't suppress voting" and "that means there's no voter fraud."
If anything, registration and voting records show that those laws are not suppressing anything.
I agree.If strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout then it seems obvious that the widespread voter fraud at the polls claimed by conservatives is so much bull shit. So why do we need strict id laws if people are following the law?When you demand a photo ID knowing that10-12% of eligible voters do not have one, you are suppressing the vote.Republicans do cheat. Photo ID laws. Voter suppression. Gerrymandering. Russian collusion. If you assfucks don;t want to be accused of cheating, QUIT YOUR FUCKING CHEATING.
"Republicans do cheat . . . because I want to believe it! Beating Democrats is cheating!"
Photo ID laws don't suppress voting. Gerrymandering is legal, AND practiced by both sides. Russian collusion is a fairy tale you made up to protect yourself from having to admit that your candidate was warmed-over shit. QUIT YOUR FUCKING LYING.
Study: Voter ID Laws Don’t Stop People Voting
There are no statistics that show significant voter fraud that a photo ID would prevent.
That & your party cheaters.
Gerrymandering is legal so legalized cheating is OK? Wow, what a piece of shit you are.
Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?
"Never mind your evidence. THIS is true because I say it is!"
When you say 10-12% of eligible voters don't have ID and won't vote because they don't have ID, you're saying that your voters are helpless, ignorant dumbasses. So I'm sure they appreciate you "helping" them like that.
Now, since I know you didn't even look at the link because you're going to believe what you believe and fuck any facts, I'll help you out.
"To determine this, the professors took advantage of different timing of the implementation of voter ID laws in different states to construct a "difference-in-differences" analysis, looking at how voters behave in states that do and do not have strict voter ID laws, before and after those laws were implemented. They used data from the progressive data service Catalist, "a U.S. company that provides data and data-related services to progressive organizations and has a long history of collaborating with academics."
The data from Catalist contained both demographic information—age, sex, race, and party affiliation—as well as information on whether or not a surveyed person was actually registered. This means that the paper’s authors could test whether or not voter ID not only stopped registered voters from voting, but discouraged unregistered voters from registering.
"Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation," the paper's authors found.
"Most importantly," they write, strict ID laws "do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites. The laws' overall effects remain close to zero and non-significant whether the election is a midterm or presidential election, and whether the laws are the more restrictive type that stipulate photo IDs.""
As for your claim that voters are helpless naifs who don't have and can't get ID, I dare you to prove to me that 10-12% of legally eligible voters are walking around the streets with absolutely no ID and no way to easily acquire it.
Furthermore, by definition, something that is legal cannot be cheating. The two are mutually exclusive. The fact that you can keep shouting, "Cheating! Cheating!!" over and over does not make it fact. Wow, what a delusional piece of shit you are.
"Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?" Like I said, you define "cheating" as "anything other than Dems winning." I feel absolutely no need to answer for, and certainly not to defend, the fact that you didn't get what you want.
I've always been rather dubious of claims of voter fraud. It's really not that much fun standing in line at a poll waiting to vote. I never heard of anybody selling their vote. I don't think I have ever know anyone who ever thought there vote would make a difference. Even thou the chances are being caught illegally voting are small, I can't image a significant number of people taking the chance. There is nothing to be gained.
Voter fraud is difficult to detect on an individual basis, however there have been elections where more votes were cast than those registered to vote in particular areas of our country.
Let's say there is a highway where people are driving like maniacs, so the police go there to set up speed control. Upon seeing the price car, people slow down. Does that mean there were no speeders?
You can't say we don't have a voter problem based on how many we catch.
I don't want to get into a debate about the science because I don't have the knowledge. However, reflection of heat back to the earth by greenhouse gases seems reasonable and the temperature of earth is rising and the ppm of greenhouse gases have made a significant increase.I think you pretty well summed it up. Most people are not particular concern about what happens after they are dead and gone, at least not concerned enough to pay more taxes or suffer any real inconveniences. I think this is the real problem in getting support for stopping climate change. If people today saw rising waters on our coasts, having to leave their home in the southwest because they can't stand the heat, shortages of seafood because the fish are dying, etc. support for stopping climate change would be huge, but a bit late.It is happening now. We are experiencing effects from rising temperatures & it will only get worse,.If it was really happening, most of them would vote to take action. But its not happening, its a hoax, and you have been duped like the mindless sheep that you are.
How did the acts of man change the climate millions of years ago? It was changing big time in the previous ice ages and then warming periods.
If you leftists are so worried about man made pollution why aren't you attacking China, the worst polluter on the planet?
Its lunacy and you fools are being led by lunatics like algore and AOC. the party of Truman and Kennedy has become the party of idiots and frauds.
If you think it isn't, then you are one very stupid person.
There is a decades delay in taking action to alleviating the effects.
The only idiots are you & your horde of Truimpettes.
No id say the realidiots are those who think cortez is right the earth is going to end in 12 years but by giving her power and trillions of american dollars she can save it .
Knock off a few billion people might have a slight effect but nature is nature moron
You assfucks are dumber than shit. We need to act quickly to prevent a disaster down the road.
I understand your point of view. You haste your children & grandchildren & don't give a rat's ass what their future will be like.
some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
You've post this a couple times so I decided to research it. It certainly appears it could effect climate change. However, future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases far outweigh any solar effects. There is another problem with the idea that this solar trend is responsible for climate change. We have limited correlation between temperature rises and the solar trend. Since 2003 there doesn't seem to be much interest.I think you pretty well summed it up. Most people are not particular concern about what happens after they are dead and gone, at least not concerned enough to pay more taxes or suffer any real inconveniences. I think this is the real problem in getting support for stopping climate change. If people today saw rising waters on our coasts, having to leave their home in the southwest because they can't stand the heat, shortages of seafood because the fish are dying, etc. support for stopping climate change would be huge, but a bit late.It is happening now. We are experiencing effects from rising temperatures & it will only get worse,.
If you think it isn't, then you are one very stupid person.
There is a decades delay in taking action to alleviating the effects.
The only idiots are you & your horde of Truimpettes.
No id say the realidiots are those who think cortez is right the earth is going to end in 12 years but by giving her power and trillions of american dollars she can save it .
Knock off a few billion people might have a slight effect but nature is nature moron
You assfucks are dumber than shit. We need to act quickly to prevent a disaster down the road.
I understand your point of view. You haste your children & grandchildren & don't give a rat's ass what their future will be like.
some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
NASA - Top Story - NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE - March 20, 2003
I agree.If strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout then it seems obvious that the widespread voter fraud at the polls claimed by conservatives is so much bull shit. So why do we need strict id laws if people are following the law?When you demand a photo ID knowing that10-12% of eligible voters do not have one, you are suppressing the vote."Republicans do cheat . . . because I want to believe it! Beating Democrats is cheating!"
Photo ID laws don't suppress voting. Gerrymandering is legal, AND practiced by both sides. Russian collusion is a fairy tale you made up to protect yourself from having to admit that your candidate was warmed-over shit. QUIT YOUR FUCKING LYING.
Study: Voter ID Laws Don’t Stop People Voting
There are no statistics that show significant voter fraud that a photo ID would prevent.
That & your party cheaters.
Gerrymandering is legal so legalized cheating is OK? Wow, what a piece of shit you are.
Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?
"Never mind your evidence. THIS is true because I say it is!"
When you say 10-12% of eligible voters don't have ID and won't vote because they don't have ID, you're saying that your voters are helpless, ignorant dumbasses. So I'm sure they appreciate you "helping" them like that.
Now, since I know you didn't even look at the link because you're going to believe what you believe and fuck any facts, I'll help you out.
"To determine this, the professors took advantage of different timing of the implementation of voter ID laws in different states to construct a "difference-in-differences" analysis, looking at how voters behave in states that do and do not have strict voter ID laws, before and after those laws were implemented. They used data from the progressive data service Catalist, "a U.S. company that provides data and data-related services to progressive organizations and has a long history of collaborating with academics."
The data from Catalist contained both demographic information—age, sex, race, and party affiliation—as well as information on whether or not a surveyed person was actually registered. This means that the paper’s authors could test whether or not voter ID not only stopped registered voters from voting, but discouraged unregistered voters from registering.
"Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation," the paper's authors found.
"Most importantly," they write, strict ID laws "do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites. The laws' overall effects remain close to zero and non-significant whether the election is a midterm or presidential election, and whether the laws are the more restrictive type that stipulate photo IDs.""
As for your claim that voters are helpless naifs who don't have and can't get ID, I dare you to prove to me that 10-12% of legally eligible voters are walking around the streets with absolutely no ID and no way to easily acquire it.
Furthermore, by definition, something that is legal cannot be cheating. The two are mutually exclusive. The fact that you can keep shouting, "Cheating! Cheating!!" over and over does not make it fact. Wow, what a delusional piece of shit you are.
"Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?" Like I said, you define "cheating" as "anything other than Dems winning." I feel absolutely no need to answer for, and certainly not to defend, the fact that you didn't get what you want.
I've always been rather dubious of claims of voter fraud. It's really not that much fun standing in line at a poll waiting to vote. I never heard of anybody selling their vote. I don't think I have ever know anyone who ever thought there vote would make a difference. Even thou the chances are being caught illegally voting are small, I can't image a significant number of people taking the chance. There is nothing to be gained.
Voter fraud is difficult to detect on an individual basis, however there have been elections where more votes were cast than those registered to vote in particular areas of our country.
Let's say there is a highway where people are driving like maniacs, so the police go there to set up speed control. Upon seeing the price car, people slow down. Does that mean there were no speeders?
You can't say we don't have a voter problem based on how many we catch.
But if say you have little or no voter id checking. Then you implement an excellent id checking system. Where you previously had 10,000 voters you have 9,000 now. Why? Democrats will claim the id system is suppressing the vote and 1,000 valid voters didn't vote. Republicans will claim the id system blocked 1,000 invalid voters. And there is really no way to prove who is right.
You've post this a couple times so I decided to research it. It certainly appears it could effect climate change. However, future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases far outweigh any solar effects. There is another problem with the idea that this solar trend is responsible for climate change. We have limited correlation between temperature rises and the solar trend. Since 2003 there doesn't seem to be much interest.I think you pretty well summed it up. Most people are not particular concern about what happens after they are dead and gone, at least not concerned enough to pay more taxes or suffer any real inconveniences. I think this is the real problem in getting support for stopping climate change. If people today saw rising waters on our coasts, having to leave their home in the southwest because they can't stand the heat, shortages of seafood because the fish are dying, etc. support for stopping climate change would be huge, but a bit late.No id say the realidiots are those who think cortez is right the earth is going to end in 12 years but by giving her power and trillions of american dollars she can save it .
Knock off a few billion people might have a slight effect but nature is nature moron
You assfucks are dumber than shit. We need to act quickly to prevent a disaster down the road.
I understand your point of view. You haste your children & grandchildren & don't give a rat's ass what their future will be like.
some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
NASA - Top Story - NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE - March 20, 2003
Changing Sun, Changing Climate
Let’s see? The first New Deal was a horrendous failure. One would have to be uninformed to think using such terminology today, to describe their new government program, is an effective marketing strategy.It is happening now. We are experiencing effects from rising temperatures & it will only get worse,.How many Republicans will vote to condemn future generations to the effects of unfettered global warming.
If it was really happening, most of them would vote to take action. But its not happening, its a hoax, and you have been duped like the mindless sheep that you are.
How did the acts of man change the climate millions of years ago? It was changing big time in the previous ice ages and then warming periods.
If you leftists are so worried about man made pollution why aren't you attacking China, the worst polluter on the planet?
Its lunacy and you fools are being led by lunatics like algore and AOC. the party of Truman and Kennedy has become the party of idiots and frauds.
If you think it isn't, then you are one very stupid person.
There is a decades delay in taking action to alleviating the effects.
The only idiots are you & your horde of Truimpettes.
No id say the realidiots are those who think cortez is right the earth is going to end in 12 years but by giving her power and trillions of american dollars she can save it .
Knock off a few billion people might have a slight effect but nature is nature moron
You assfucks are dumber than shit. We need to act quickly to prevent a disaster down the road.
I understand your point of view. You haste your children & grandchildren & don't give a rat's ass what their future will be like.
I
What specifically do you want humanity to do? Give us a list or STFU about it.
How specifically will the items on your list stop or reverse climate change? Give us details or STFU.
How do you plan to make China and India comply? Be specific on how that will be done.
Next, tell us why solar activity, the earths slight wobble on its axis, and ocean currents have no affect on climate.
Final questions: all of your "fixes" are going to relate to reducing pollution, so why isn't that enough? Why cant you libs concentrate on pollution? Why do you need the unproven link between pollution and climate?
Possible answer: because that's the only way we can control the activity of human beings, by mandating every aspect of their lives.
The only dummies are you assfucks who deny AGW & hate your children.Let’s see? The first New Deal was a horrendous failure. One would have to be uninformed to think using such terminology today, to describe their new government program, is an effective marketing strategy.It is happening now. We are experiencing effects from rising temperatures & it will only get worse,.If it was really happening, most of them would vote to take action. But its not happening, its a hoax, and you have been duped like the mindless sheep that you are.
How did the acts of man change the climate millions of years ago? It was changing big time in the previous ice ages and then warming periods.
If you leftists are so worried about man made pollution why aren't you attacking China, the worst polluter on the planet?
Its lunacy and you fools are being led by lunatics like algore and AOC. the party of Truman and Kennedy has become the party of idiots and frauds.
If you think it isn't, then you are one very stupid person.
There is a decades delay in taking action to alleviating the effects.
The only idiots are you & your horde of Truimpettes.
No id say the realidiots are those who think cortez is right the earth is going to end in 12 years but by giving her power and trillions of american dollars she can save it .
Knock off a few billion people might have a slight effect but nature is nature moron
You assfucks are dumber than shit. We need to act quickly to prevent a disaster down the road.
I understand your point of view. You haste your children & grandchildren & don't give a rat's ass what their future will be like.
I
What specifically do you want humanity to do? Give us a list or STFU about it.
How specifically will the items on your list stop or reverse climate change? Give us details or STFU.
How do you plan to make China and India comply? Be specific on how that will be done.
Next, tell us why solar activity, the earths slight wobble on its axis, and ocean currents have no affect on climate.
Final questions: all of your "fixes" are going to relate to reducing pollution, so why isn't that enough? Why cant you libs concentrate on pollution? Why do you need the unproven link between pollution and climate?
Possible answer: because that's the only way we can control the activity of human beings, by mandating every aspect of their lives.
I guess you could describe it as marketing to dummies.
You've post this a couple times so I decided to research it. It certainly appears it could effect climate change. However, future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases far outweigh any solar effects. There is another problem with the idea that this solar trend is responsible for climate change. We have limited correlation between temperature rises and the solar trend. Since 2003 there doesn't seem to be much interest.I think you pretty well summed it up. Most people are not particular concern about what happens after they are dead and gone, at least not concerned enough to pay more taxes or suffer any real inconveniences. I think this is the real problem in getting support for stopping climate change. If people today saw rising waters on our coasts, having to leave their home in the southwest because they can't stand the heat, shortages of seafood because the fish are dying, etc. support for stopping climate change would be huge, but a bit late.You assfucks are dumber than shit. We need to act quickly to prevent a disaster down the road.
I understand your point of view. You haste your children & grandchildren & don't give a rat's ass what their future will be like.
some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
NASA - Top Story - NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE - March 20, 2003
Changing Sun, Changing Climate
I'm getting ready to go to bed so perhaps I'll look at your link tomorrow. But I think if we are all honest about this climate change thing, it's to admit none of know enough about it to make a determination one way or another. I personally believe the earth has a cleansing system we are totally unaware of. After all, how did the earth cleanse itself from volcanic eruptions, forest fires, cow farts?
Are we causing the climate to change? I don't know because we don't have enough evidence to prove it. I do find it doubtful. But if we are, how much are you willing to sacrifice to stop it? Are you willing to go without heat in your home? Give up personal transportation? Do without advanced communications like this internet, cable television, cell phones?
I agree.If strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout then it seems obvious that the widespread voter fraud at the polls claimed by conservatives is so much bull shit. So why do we need strict id laws if people are following the law?When you demand a photo ID knowing that10-12% of eligible voters do not have one, you are suppressing the vote.
There are no statistics that show significant voter fraud that a photo ID would prevent.
That & your party cheaters.
Gerrymandering is legal so legalized cheating is OK? Wow, what a piece of shit you are.
Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?
"Never mind your evidence. THIS is true because I say it is!"
When you say 10-12% of eligible voters don't have ID and won't vote because they don't have ID, you're saying that your voters are helpless, ignorant dumbasses. So I'm sure they appreciate you "helping" them like that.
Now, since I know you didn't even look at the link because you're going to believe what you believe and fuck any facts, I'll help you out.
"To determine this, the professors took advantage of different timing of the implementation of voter ID laws in different states to construct a "difference-in-differences" analysis, looking at how voters behave in states that do and do not have strict voter ID laws, before and after those laws were implemented. They used data from the progressive data service Catalist, "a U.S. company that provides data and data-related services to progressive organizations and has a long history of collaborating with academics."
The data from Catalist contained both demographic information—age, sex, race, and party affiliation—as well as information on whether or not a surveyed person was actually registered. This means that the paper’s authors could test whether or not voter ID not only stopped registered voters from voting, but discouraged unregistered voters from registering.
"Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation," the paper's authors found.
"Most importantly," they write, strict ID laws "do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites. The laws' overall effects remain close to zero and non-significant whether the election is a midterm or presidential election, and whether the laws are the more restrictive type that stipulate photo IDs.""
As for your claim that voters are helpless naifs who don't have and can't get ID, I dare you to prove to me that 10-12% of legally eligible voters are walking around the streets with absolutely no ID and no way to easily acquire it.
Furthermore, by definition, something that is legal cannot be cheating. The two are mutually exclusive. The fact that you can keep shouting, "Cheating! Cheating!!" over and over does not make it fact. Wow, what a delusional piece of shit you are.
"Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?" Like I said, you define "cheating" as "anything other than Dems winning." I feel absolutely no need to answer for, and certainly not to defend, the fact that you didn't get what you want.
I've always been rather dubious of claims of voter fraud. It's really not that much fun standing in line at a poll waiting to vote. I never heard of anybody selling their vote. I don't think I have ever know anyone who ever thought there vote would make a difference. Even thou the chances are being caught illegally voting are small, I can't image a significant number of people taking the chance. There is nothing to be gained.
Voter fraud is difficult to detect on an individual basis, however there have been elections where more votes were cast than those registered to vote in particular areas of our country.
Let's say there is a highway where people are driving like maniacs, so the police go there to set up speed control. Upon seeing the price car, people slow down. Does that mean there were no speeders?
You can't say we don't have a voter problem based on how many we catch.
But if say you have little or no voter id checking. Then you implement an excellent id checking system. Where you previously had 10,000 voters you have 9,000 now. Why? Democrats will claim the id system is suppressing the vote and 1,000 valid voters didn't vote. Republicans will claim the id system blocked 1,000 invalid voters. And there is really no way to prove who is right.
Truth be known: Democrats attract some of our lowest forms of life when it comes to voting. We have the homeless, welfare people, just about most of the government dependents.
You see, Republicans take voting extremely seriously. Democrats? Yeah, we will vote if it's convenient enough, if the hours are late enough, if you mail me a ballot, if somebody drives me to the polls, if you can pay me with a pack of cigarettes. But to put some effort into voting? Forget about it.
While getting an ID may take a little work, it's not much different than obtaining a drivers license. However, because voting is not a serious responsibility for many Democrats, it's not worth their time to get the ID.
While I've never done any research on the subject, I have seen articles posted that claim ID had no influence one way or the other. However if there are places that have lower turnout as you claim, it's not because of racism, disenfranchisement, or discrimination. It's because of the lack of enthusiasm that most Republicans do have.
Democrats cannot insult their voters by saying they are lazy. Instead, make up these other excuses like racism to get people behind defeating Voter-ID.
So you want the government to have your fingerprints & eyescans?Eye scans or fingerprints might work to secure the voter..
Your post is a little off-topic, but do you want the illegal voters to vote or not, RealDave? I don't think they should be voting in our country. They're going to vote Democrat until further notice. But we digress. This thread is about the Green New Deal, and I think it's a very bad idea because not only is it based on pseudo science, it is impractical and will bankrupt the Medicare sentence just as noticed in this speaker's view:So you want the government to have your fingerprints & eyescans?Eye scans or fingerprints might work to secure the voter..
I thought you hated big government?
Your post is a little off-topic, but do you want the illegal voters to vote or not, RealDave? I don't think they should be voting in our country. They're going to vote Democrat until further notice. But we digress. This thread is about the Green New Deal, and I think it's a very bad idea because not only is it based on pseudo science, it is impractical and will bankrupt the Medicare sentence just as noticed in this speaker's view:So you want the government to have your fingerprints & eyescans?Eye scans or fingerprints might work to secure the voter..
I thought you hated big government?
So mocking smart aggressive women. Do they threaten any manhood you might have.
Furthermore, the NGD does not make all college tuition free. Read it again, assfuck, and quit being so uninformed.
I agree.If strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout then it seems obvious that the widespread voter fraud at the polls claimed by conservatives is so much bull shit. So why do we need strict id laws if people are following the law?"Never mind your evidence. THIS is true because I say it is!"
When you say 10-12% of eligible voters don't have ID and won't vote because they don't have ID, you're saying that your voters are helpless, ignorant dumbasses. So I'm sure they appreciate you "helping" them like that.
Now, since I know you didn't even look at the link because you're going to believe what you believe and fuck any facts, I'll help you out.
"To determine this, the professors took advantage of different timing of the implementation of voter ID laws in different states to construct a "difference-in-differences" analysis, looking at how voters behave in states that do and do not have strict voter ID laws, before and after those laws were implemented. They used data from the progressive data service Catalist, "a U.S. company that provides data and data-related services to progressive organizations and has a long history of collaborating with academics."
The data from Catalist contained both demographic information—age, sex, race, and party affiliation—as well as information on whether or not a surveyed person was actually registered. This means that the paper’s authors could test whether or not voter ID not only stopped registered voters from voting, but discouraged unregistered voters from registering.
"Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation," the paper's authors found.
"Most importantly," they write, strict ID laws "do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites. The laws' overall effects remain close to zero and non-significant whether the election is a midterm or presidential election, and whether the laws are the more restrictive type that stipulate photo IDs.""
As for your claim that voters are helpless naifs who don't have and can't get ID, I dare you to prove to me that 10-12% of legally eligible voters are walking around the streets with absolutely no ID and no way to easily acquire it.
Furthermore, by definition, something that is legal cannot be cheating. The two are mutually exclusive. The fact that you can keep shouting, "Cheating! Cheating!!" over and over does not make it fact. Wow, what a delusional piece of shit you are.
"Explain how a State like PA that has basic equal R vs D divide has twice as many R's as D's in the House?" Like I said, you define "cheating" as "anything other than Dems winning." I feel absolutely no need to answer for, and certainly not to defend, the fact that you didn't get what you want.
I've always been rather dubious of claims of voter fraud. It's really not that much fun standing in line at a poll waiting to vote. I never heard of anybody selling their vote. I don't think I have ever know anyone who ever thought there vote would make a difference. Even thou the chances are being caught illegally voting are small, I can't image a significant number of people taking the chance. There is nothing to be gained.
Voter fraud is difficult to detect on an individual basis, however there have been elections where more votes were cast than those registered to vote in particular areas of our country.
Let's say there is a highway where people are driving like maniacs, so the police go there to set up speed control. Upon seeing the price car, people slow down. Does that mean there were no speeders?
You can't say we don't have a voter problem based on how many we catch.
But if say you have little or no voter id checking. Then you implement an excellent id checking system. Where you previously had 10,000 voters you have 9,000 now. Why? Democrats will claim the id system is suppressing the vote and 1,000 valid voters didn't vote. Republicans will claim the id system blocked 1,000 invalid voters. And there is really no way to prove who is right.
Truth be known: Democrats attract some of our lowest forms of life when it comes to voting. We have the homeless, welfare people, just about most of the government dependents.
You see, Republicans take voting extremely seriously. Democrats? Yeah, we will vote if it's convenient enough, if the hours are late enough, if you mail me a ballot, if somebody drives me to the polls, if you can pay me with a pack of cigarettes. But to put some effort into voting? Forget about it.
While getting an ID may take a little work, it's not much different than obtaining a drivers license. However, because voting is not a serious responsibility for many Democrats, it's not worth their time to get the ID.
While I've never done any research on the subject, I have seen articles posted that claim ID had no influence one way or the other. However if there are places that have lower turnout as you claim, it's not because of racism, disenfranchisement, or discrimination. It's because of the lack of enthusiasm that most Republicans do have.
Democrats cannot insult their voters by saying they are lazy. Instead, make up these other excuses like racism to get people behind defeating Voter-ID.
Republicans create a hurdle for some people to vote.
10-12% of eligible voters don't have an acceptable photo ID. These are disproportionately Democrat voters.
To get a photo ID here in PA you have to go to a driver license photo center. The is one in the vast majority of counties. I live in one of the larger counties. We have no public transportation outside the largest town. No cab service. These peiole do not drive. So how are they supposed to get 20 miles to get their photo ID?
They can't, some won't & that is the idea. Reduce Democrat votes.
If you God damn America hating assfucks really wanted a photo ID, you would be able to get one all over the place.
When the Republicans passed photo ID here in PA, the lead Republican made the statement that they just won PA for Romney. Why would he say that?
There are NO statistics that say there is significant voter fraud that a photo IS woukld prevent.
And finally, what can you get without a photo IDS? A photo ID>
Quit cheating to win elections.
Gert a fucking brain.
You've post this a couple times so I decided to research it. It certainly appears it could effect climate change. However, future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases far outweigh any solar effects. There is another problem with the idea that this solar trend is responsible for climate change. We have limited correlation between temperature rises and the solar trend. Since 2003 there doesn't seem to be much interest.I think you pretty well summed it up. Most people are not particular concern about what happens after they are dead and gone, at least not concerned enough to pay more taxes or suffer any real inconveniences. I think this is the real problem in getting support for stopping climate change. If people today saw rising waters on our coasts, having to leave their home in the southwest because they can't stand the heat, shortages of seafood because the fish are dying, etc. support for stopping climate change would be huge, but a bit late.
some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
NASA - Top Story - NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE - March 20, 2003
Changing Sun, Changing Climate
I'm getting ready to go to bed so perhaps I'll look at your link tomorrow. But I think if we are all honest about this climate change thing, it's to admit none of know enough about it to make a determination one way or another. I personally believe the earth has a cleansing system we are totally unaware of. After all, how did the earth cleanse itself from volcanic eruptions, forest fires, cow farts?
Are we causing the climate to change? I don't know because we don't have enough evidence to prove it. I do find it doubtful. But if we are, how much are you willing to sacrifice to stop it? Are you willing to go without heat in your home? Give up personal transportation? Do without advanced communications like this internet, cable television, cell phones?
Your problem is that you think you know more than the scientists.
1) We know temperatures are rising ad rising faster than what we know about natural warming.
2) We know the heightened carbon content is the major factor.
3) We know heightened CO2 increases the greenhouse effect & that raises temperature.
4) The increase in CO2 in our atmosphere stems from emissions.
5) Therefore, anyone with a fucking brain knows the solution is to reduce emissions.
6) It takes the Earth decades to natural remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere. This is why we need to act now to prevent higher temp increases in 50-70 years.
7) Our current climate includes things like volcanic eruptions, fires, etc.
We can heat our homes without creating emissions
We can drive electric/hybrid vehicles
What does communications have to do with anything?
The solution is is reduce emissions to the point where the carbon levels are reduced & maintained at lower levels.
The longer we wait, the worse the temperature rise will be.
Instead of working towards this, a bunch of really ignorant people elect a President & Congress that is bought by the fossil fuel industry to fight efforts because the burning of fossil fuels is the biggest contributor to high CO2 levels. These people have duped the right into condemning their own offspring to a more difficult life. How stupid is that?
I cut my carbon footprint in half. My just as warm in winter, cooler than yours in the summer, and I drive just as far as I always did.
You are lying & ignorant when you claim you actually might have to sacrifice something for your Children.
You've post this a couple times so I decided to research it. It certainly appears it could effect climate change. However, future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases far outweigh any solar effects. There is another problem with the idea that this solar trend is responsible for climate change. We have limited correlation between temperature rises and the solar trend. Since 2003 there doesn't seem to be much interest.some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
NASA - Top Story - NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE - March 20, 2003
Changing Sun, Changing Climate
I'm getting ready to go to bed so perhaps I'll look at your link tomorrow. But I think if we are all honest about this climate change thing, it's to admit none of know enough about it to make a determination one way or another. I personally believe the earth has a cleansing system we are totally unaware of. After all, how did the earth cleanse itself from volcanic eruptions, forest fires, cow farts?
Are we causing the climate to change? I don't know because we don't have enough evidence to prove it. I do find it doubtful. But if we are, how much are you willing to sacrifice to stop it? Are you willing to go without heat in your home? Give up personal transportation? Do without advanced communications like this internet, cable television, cell phones?
Your problem is that you think you know more than the scientists.
1) We know temperatures are rising ad rising faster than what we know about natural warming.
2) We know the heightened carbon content is the major factor.
3) We know heightened CO2 increases the greenhouse effect & that raises temperature.
4) The increase in CO2 in our atmosphere stems from emissions.
5) Therefore, anyone with a fucking brain knows the solution is to reduce emissions.
6) It takes the Earth decades to natural remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere. This is why we need to act now to prevent higher temp increases in 50-70 years.
7) Our current climate includes things like volcanic eruptions, fires, etc.
We can heat our homes without creating emissions
We can drive electric/hybrid vehicles
What does communications have to do with anything?
The solution is is reduce emissions to the point where the carbon levels are reduced & maintained at lower levels.
The longer we wait, the worse the temperature rise will be.
Instead of working towards this, a bunch of really ignorant people elect a President & Congress that is bought by the fossil fuel industry to fight efforts because the burning of fossil fuels is the biggest contributor to high CO2 levels. These people have duped the right into condemning their own offspring to a more difficult life. How stupid is that?
I cut my carbon footprint in half. My just as warm in winter, cooler than yours in the summer, and I drive just as far as I always did.
You are lying & ignorant when you claim you actually might have to sacrifice something for your Children.
No matter what figures you find, there is no way to prove man is responsible. Every single human being emits CO2. There is just no way around it. We have over 7 billion people on this planet and growing. 7 billion little C02 producers. What do we do about those? What happens when it goes to 8 or 9 billion?
You've post this a couple times so I decided to research it. It certainly appears it could effect climate change. However, future warming from the rise in greenhouse gases far outweigh any solar effects. There is another problem with the idea that this solar trend is responsible for climate change. We have limited correlation between temperature rises and the solar trend. Since 2003 there doesn't seem to be much interest.I think you pretty well summed it up. Most people are not particular concern about what happens after they are dead and gone, at least not concerned enough to pay more taxes or suffer any real inconveniences. I think this is the real problem in getting support for stopping climate change. If people today saw rising waters on our coasts, having to leave their home in the southwest because they can't stand the heat, shortages of seafood because the fish are dying, etc. support for stopping climate change would be huge, but a bit late.
some truth in your post, but the bottom line is that man made climate change is NOT happening, man is polluting in many places, but that pollution is not changing the climate.
the climate of planet earth is controlled by solar activity, the earth's tilt on its axis (which wobbles a few degrees annually) and ocean currents. We are not causing it, cannot stop it, cannot reverse it, and need to learn to adapt to it as in happens.
NASA - Top Story - NASA STUDY FINDS INCREASING SOLAR TREND THAT CAN CHANGE CLIMATE - March 20, 2003
Changing Sun, Changing Climate
I'm getting ready to go to bed so perhaps I'll look at your link tomorrow. But I think if we are all honest about this climate change thing, it's to admit none of know enough about it to make a determination one way or another. I personally believe the earth has a cleansing system we are totally unaware of. After all, how did the earth cleanse itself from volcanic eruptions, forest fires, cow farts?
Are we causing the climate to change? I don't know because we don't have enough evidence to prove it. I do find it doubtful. But if we are, how much are you willing to sacrifice to stop it? Are you willing to go without heat in your home? Give up personal transportation? Do without advanced communications like this internet, cable television, cell phones?
Your problem is that you think you know more than the scientists.
1) We know temperatures are rising ad rising faster than what we know about natural warming.
2) We know the heightened carbon content is the major factor.
3) We know heightened CO2 increases the greenhouse effect & that raises temperature.
4) The increase in CO2 in our atmosphere stems from emissions.
5) Therefore, anyone with a fucking brain knows the solution is to reduce emissions.
6) It takes the Earth decades to natural remove excess CO2 from the atmosphere. This is why we need to act now to prevent higher temp increases in 50-70 years.
7) Our current climate includes things like volcanic eruptions, fires, etc.
We can heat our homes without creating emissions
We can drive electric/hybrid vehicles
What does communications have to do with anything?
The solution is is reduce emissions to the point where the carbon levels are reduced & maintained at lower levels.
The longer we wait, the worse the temperature rise will be.
Instead of working towards this, a bunch of really ignorant people elect a President & Congress that is bought by the fossil fuel industry to fight efforts because the burning of fossil fuels is the biggest contributor to high CO2 levels. These people have duped the right into condemning their own offspring to a more difficult life. How stupid is that?
I cut my carbon footprint in half. My just as warm in winter, cooler than yours in the summer, and I drive just as far as I always did.
You are lying & ignorant when you claim you actually might have to sacrifice something for your Children.
