LET'S GO BRANDON!!!

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
19,243
Reaction score
3,025
Points
113
You shouldn't have to wait 1, 2, sometimes 3 or more hours to go to the DMV for simple transactions and yet people do this EVERY SINGLE DAY, ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

Voting happens once every 2 years, or for many, every 4 years. FFS, is it too much to ask people to actually think about this ahead of time prior to election day and to make accommodations? Really? To be able to engage in one of the fundamental rights and privileges of being a citizen of this country?

Look, I've said before, I'm all for expanding voting to more than one day; make it several days, whatever.

This was almost a ZERO issue until 2016 when one side couldn't come to grips with the outcome and the ENTIRE focus became changing the way we do elections across the country and changing the rules in many states and locales.
Your analogy doesn't fit. Things done at the DMV are not fundamental rights that "we" (yes, maybe not you, but those of us on the side of access) want to - necessarily that is - streamline and make as easy as possible, while maintaining a reasonable level of security.

Your history isn't correct either. Covid is what prompted the rapid changes to our election system. It's convenient to forget that we were in the middle of it with no obvious pathway out at the time. Folks were dying and there was no consensus, nor enough data, to know what the proper way forward was.

I don't have any problem with examining those things that were changed to ensure integrity. It's obvious to me, though, that more than that is being attempted here.
 


scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
6,573
Reaction score
2,452
Points
113
This was almost a ZERO issue until 2016 when one side couldn't come to grips with the outcome and the ENTIRE focus became changing the way we do elections across the country and changing the rules in many states and locales.
The leftist lost their minds when they were convinced HRC was a guaranteed winner and it didn’t turn out that way.

The leftists had to change the election rules by using the virus as the excuse. Now the leftists want to grant the federal government control over state and local elections using the fake SAVE DEMOCRACY narrative.

The alleged voting legislation the leftists are trying to jam through by changing the Senate rules is nothing more than an attempt at perpetual power.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
It shouldn't take "work" to cast a ballot. You shouldn't need to earn your vote. It is a fundamental right.
Is voting a constitutional right?

Several constitutional amendments (the Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-sixth specifically) require that voting rights of U.S. citizens cannot be abridged on account of race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, or age (18 and older); the constitution as originally written did not establish any such rights ...


The requirement for ID in no way takes away the privilege to vote or the right to vote under the constitution. It simply requires effort. No effort= no vote in my view. Handing the country over to people who are willing to offer no effort is a good way for the country to lose its freedom.
 



GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
19,243
Reaction score
3,025
Points
113
Is voting a constitutional right?

Several constitutional amendments (the Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-sixth specifically) require that voting rights of U.S. citizens cannot be abridged on account of race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, or age (18 and older); the constitution as originally written did not establish any such rights ...


The requirement for ID in no way takes away the privilege to vote or the right to vote under the constitution. It simply requires effort. No effort= no vote in my view. Handing the country over to people who are willing to offer no effort is a good way for the country to lose its freedom.
Neither does a poll tax, reading test or property ownership requirement. Just fulfill the requirement and cast your ballot, right?

We disagree here. We aren't even that far apart. I am for a system where the voter must positively identify himself. We differ only on the logistics. Your expectations are way too strict. And your comments above about disengaged, drunk and folks with opposing ideologies, priorities and what not underscore your true motivation.

But you thinking someone should have to earn his vote is whack. Every citizen has that right. Every single one.
 


bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
Neither does a poll tax, reading test or property ownership requirement. Just fulfill the requirement and cast your ballot, right?

We disagree here. We aren't even that far apart. I am for a system where the voter must positively identify himself. We differ only on the logistics. Your expectations are way too strict. And your comments above about disengaged, drunk and folks with opposing ideologies, priorities and what not underscore your true motivation.

But you thinking someone should have to earn his vote is whack. Every citizen has that right. Every single one.
Not earn- validate.... otherwise how do you know who is a legitimate citizen? Who are you? I'm Jake the referee, look here's my picture ID. OK- here's your ballot. Not exactly a high bar.
 




KGF

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
22,522
Reaction score
4,294
Points
113
The truth isn't always in the middle. In fact it rarely is.
That could very well be true. I should’ve said somewhere in the middle.

And, it very much depends on HOW you define “stolen”. I assume that many who believe it was stolen is based on phony ballots.

I haven’t seen evidence of significant amounts of phony ballots, but certainly nothing that indicates that it could’ve flipped the election in a few states.

My beef is with the unconstitutional manner than some key state officials, governors, AGs, and Sec’s of State, changed election law and processes. Something that once done, is irreversible for that election.

But let’s make damn sure it doesn’t happen again.
 
Last edited:

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
19,243
Reaction score
3,025
Points
113
Not earn- validate.... otherwise how do you know who is a legitimate citizen? Who are you? I'm Jake the referee, look here's my picture ID. OK- here's your ballot. Not exactly a high bar.
It's pretty clear you just want to disagree. And to attempt to own a lib. But you suck at it. I am FOR an ID requirement. I think it's WEIRD that I don't need to show ID when I vote. I think you SHOULD have to show ID. I've been crystal clear on this both today and over my history of posting here. So, you are either stupid or a jackass. Which is it?
 


Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
2,635
Reaction score
1,035
Points
113
The leftist lost their minds when they were convinced HRC was a guaranteed winner and it didn’t turn out that way.

The leftists had to change the election rules by using the virus as the excuse. Now the leftists want to grant the federal government control over state and local elections using the fake SAVE DEMOCRACY narrative.

The alleged voting legislation the leftists are trying to jam through by changing the Senate rules is nothing more than an attempt at perpetual power.
Rigged by Mollie Hemingway: How the Media, Big Tech and the Democrats Seized Our Elections.
Does a good job of laying out all the troubling things that were done to the election system.
 



kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
4,131
Reaction score
2,106
Points
113
It's pretty clear you just want to disagree. And to attempt to own a lib. But you suck at it. I am FOR an ID requirement. I think it's WEIRD that I don't need to show ID when I vote. I think you SHOULD have to show ID. I've been crystal clear on this both today and over my history of posting here. So, you are either stupid or a jackass. Which is it?
Is there any way you could reach out to your party and let them know it's not racist to show an ID.

That's their saying.........it's racist to show an ID.

And you vote for that party. That's embarrassing.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
It's pretty clear you just want to disagree. And to attempt to own a lib. But you suck at it. I am FOR an ID requirement. I think it's WEIRD that I don't need to show ID when I vote. I think you SHOULD have to show ID. I've been crystal clear on this both today and over my history of posting here. So, you are either stupid or a jackass. Which is it?
We agree on voter ID. Good for you!
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
That could very well be true. I should’ve said somewhere in the middle.

And, it very much depends on HOW you define “stolen”. I assume that many who believe it was stolen is based on phony ballots.

I haven’t seen evidence of significant amounts of phony ballots, but certainly nothing that indicates that it could’ve flipped the election in a few states.

My beef is with the unconstitutional manner than some key state officials, governors, AGs, and Sec’s of State, changed election law and processes. Something that once done, is irreversible for that election.

But let’s make damn sure it doesn’t happen again.
If you give the Fulton County Georgia election supervisor a target to win the state and machines that prints new ballots and replaces huge numbers of mailed in "adjudicated ballots" creating a clean record- the Dems will win every close election there. Same goes in the other big swing states. Mail in ballots were the only way they could do that (make the machine adjudication "feature" work) and also the only way they could go out and harvest votes.
 

KGF

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
22,522
Reaction score
4,294
Points
113
If you give the Fulton County Georgia election supervisor a target to win the state and machines that prints new ballots and replaces huge numbers of mailed in "adjudicated ballots" creating a clean record- the Dems will win every close election there. Same goes in the other big swing states. Mail in ballots were the only way they could do that (make the machine adjudication "feature" work) and also the only way they could go out and harvest votes.
I agree that local election officials were trusted when they shouldn’t have been and processes were rigged to make forensic evaluations of ballots impossible to prove invalid without asking voters if these were their votes (which is not going to happen).

I would like to see systems provide voters with integrity checks of their own votes. In other words, a voter could verify how their vote was recorded. I assume an issue with that would be a risk that leaves open the possibility of hacking into the system. But if it were disconnected from the voting system itself and only a record of info, it might be workable. If every vote is tied to an actual voter, it would provide a integrity check that would be outside of the control of local officials to manipulate and would be a check on unethically elections officials.

But proving that the last election was stolen is nearly impossible with the allowances given local elections officials.
 


bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
I agree that local election officials were trusted when they shouldn’t have been and processes were rigged to make forensic evaluations of ballots impossible to prove invalid without asking voters if these were their votes (which is not going to happen).

I would like to see systems provide voters with integrity checks of their own votes. In other words, a voter could verify how their vote was recorded. I assume an issue with that would be a risk that leaves open the possibility of hacking into the system. But if it were disconnected from the voting system itself and only a record of info, it might be workable. If every vote is tied to an actual voter, it would provide a integrity check that would be outside of the control of local officials to manipulate and would be a check on unethically elections officials.

But proving that the last election was stolen is nearly impossible with the allowances given local elections officials.
Bingo. As I have said, the strategy of mass mail in ballots and adjudicating machines, paired with online calculated targets to win, was both brilliant and evil.

They were able to have the ability to steal the election. While people with common sense can see exactly what happened, it can't be overturned. The evidence is destroyed. That should not deter people from wanting to reveal as much truth about the circumstances and actions in those areas as possible.

Understanding this and never allowing this to happen again is not "voter suppression", it's not conspiracy stuff, it's not being a sore loser....it is restoration of fair and transparent elections that is desired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KGF

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
No we don’t. And you didn’t answer my question.
You said:
I am FOR an ID requirement. I think it's WEIRD that I don't need to show ID when I vote. I think you SHOULD have to show ID.

I agree.
 

saintpaulguy

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
11,380
Reaction score
5,720
Points
113
I'm glad we've come a long way from algorithms and Hugo Chavez's German server seized by Delta Force.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
46,197
Reaction score
6,921
Points
113
I'm glad we've come a long way from algorithms and Hugo Chavez's German server seized by Delta Force.
I haven't moved an inch. What I have been interested in this whole time is in getting at the truth and making sure the ability to steal the election never happens again. Some people want to bury their heads in the sand because they got the result they wanted.

Nice hyperbole though. Hugo Chavez did indeed use this same type of manipulatable machinery to win, in conjunction with corrupt officials. There is no other connection. The election machinery was connected on line- the idea that it wasn't was a lie. "The most secure election ever!" :)
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
3,727
Reaction score
2,237
Points
113
According to stacey abrams, democrats have always been for voter id.
 

scools12

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
6,573
Reaction score
2,452
Points
113
According to stacey abrams, democrats have always been for voter id.
Curious on how Abrams came to this conclusion? I am absolutely certain it had nothing do with the polling numbers showing Americans are in favor of voter id. 🙄
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
3,727
Reaction score
2,237
Points
113
Curious on how Abrams came to this conclusion? I am absolutely certain it had nothing do with the polling numbers showing Americans are in favor of voter id. 🙄

Dem governor can send china virus patients into care facilities and that is ok, so not surprising that this lie is a nothing burger as well.

Yet if desantis would so much as construct a sentence incorrectly . . .
 









Top Bottom