fascinating read....

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:22 am

...and timely, as the rest of the business report is far more pessimistic than conditions dictate.
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik ... tml#page=1

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:52 am

You know slick, I could almost come down on about the same side as the liberals on this, but do you know why I wouldn't? "undocumented citizens", or "minority citizens" (page 6 in the PDF the article links to at the outset) who "may not have readily available documentary proof of citizenship." Your side has unfortunately contributed to making the bed we're in right now, and it would be irresponsible to use these illegal aliens as an argument against a law which would prevent them from voting. Would love to be justified in not contributing to further bureaucracy in this case, but the liberals are clearly motivated by political gain here, not the best good of the American citizens.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 11:26 am

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 1:30 pm

The article claims things that were documented to have happened...as in - the people involved in the bus rides were interviewed on camera describing their encounter with the volunteers who rounded them up and offered them cigarettes and snacks to get on board and took them to a polling place that allowed same day registration and voting...never happened.

And you call it a "fascinating read".

Why? Because someone else beside you proclaims real events never happened in order to buttress their argument?

I'd like to know, if it is wrong to make a citizen prove they are citizens or registered before they can vote, is there any time we are allowed to verify a voter is legally voting? And how would that be done with out checking their identity?

And conversely, if there is no reliable method allowed to verify their identity how can we believe you when you say there is no voter fraud? At best you can only honestly say there is no proof of voter fraud.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 6:58 am

what is fascinating is that one of the foremost(if not THE foremost) conservative legal scholar of my adult life shreds any legitimacy from ID laws, and notes that they make the long-illegal Poll Tax laws look tame, and that the predictable few here will react to his well-thought position with the usual lame pictures, attacks upon me, etc. Yup, human nature is fascinating.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:22 am

The hypocrisy here is…the side that claims to believe in fair voting laws can’t seem to see the ones that give Democrats an advantage.

And the exact logic that applied to the poll taxes and ID laws apply.*

*De Facto not actual discrimination, the courts ruled that any law that hits one group disproportionally can be considered discriminatory, even if it’s not aimed at any one group.

But I don’t hear the “fair” voting laws crowd fussing about those.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:32 am

"Well thought" position based on lies is better described as deceitfully concocted.

Your inability to address that or the questions I raised only undermines the value of what you find 'fascinating'.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 9:07 am

and that the predictable few here will react to his well-thought position with the usual lame pictures, attacks upon me, etc. Yup, human nature is fascinating.

So Wait!!!!

you bring up the same old tired, retread, beat to death subject, and your disappointed because you get the same response

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein

Yup, human nature IS facinating

Z.. · Post by **Z..** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 1:06 pm

Spidey wrote:The hypocrisy here is…the side that claims to believe in fair voting laws can’t seem to see the ones that give Democrats an advantage..

Yeah dude, making it easier for citizens of this country to vote because that helps Democrats is certainly a bad thing. Doesn't the fact that you have to make it extremely hard to vote to help your party show just how fucked up you and your side are? We should be making it easier than anything else for citizens to take part in their civic duty, not taking away early voting and same day registration. The tactics that you and others on this board defend are deplorable--and you're lesser Americans than the rest of us.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 1:30 pm

and you're lesser Americans than the rest of us.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:10 pm

the 'lesser Americans' thing is exemplary of the over-the-top place we've all put ourselves. Hell, such tactics were once part and parcel of the American(Dem) South. America has survived, and eventually improved electoral access. It will continue to do so, and if one party gets identified by the mass of voters as the group that wishes people NOT to vote, then that party will pay. And the price will be steep and paid over decades.

vision · Post by **vision** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 3:12 pm

CUDA wrote:
and you're lesser Americans than the rest of us.

He's got a point. Rolling your eyes is not the appropriate response.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:23 pm

WAIT!!!!!!!

I see what you did there, you disagree with some ones opinion so you dismiss them as a person instead of being an Adult and debating the principles of the argument.

isn't that what the South did to the Blacks before the Civil War?? and what was done to the Japanese during WW2???

Nice try.... FAIL.... but nice try

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:19 pm

If pointing out hypocrisy makes me a lesser American…then so be it.

Jeff250 · Post by **Jeff250** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:51 pm

Spidey, just to be clear, is your argument that any change to voting laws that indirectly benefits either party in elections is voter discrimination?

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:57 pm

Kinda….but it’s more about how the logic is applied.

If it’s wrong that a law disproportionately hurts a group…then a law that disproportionately helps a group should also be wrong.

vision · Post by **vision** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:05 pm

Spidey wrote:If it’s wrong that a law disproportionately hurts a group…then a law that disproportionately helps a group should also be wrong.

It's not a zero-sum game though

Z.. · Post by **Z..** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:16 pm

Making it easier for American citizens to vote should be the goal of everyone. You guys are against it because those people that your party actively seeks to DENY that right to might vote for the other party. It's hilarious that you guys don't mind blocking votes because that's the only way you can win in politics now. Suppress the rights of others, yeah that's real American right there.

It's a shame that I have to call you Americans as well because you certainly don't act like it. Yeah, roll your eyes at me old man, it matters not to me. Your opinion is a sham. But it's your life, one that when it ends will only serve as a betterment to those around you, not a negative. Enjoy your legacy.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:20 pm

Was that an attempt at an insult? Cmon you can do better. Dont be afraid.

and how exactly does an American act?

this should be good...

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:12 pm

Z wrote:Making it easier for American citizens to vote should be the goal of everyone.

And if American citizens aren't the only ones voting? Is it equally hilarious when Democrats are willing to turn a blind eye to this?

Z.. · Post by **Z..** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:30 pm

I'm not Thorne. Did I ever say anything other than American citizens in my posts? Restricting early voting in Ohio, why? Taking away same day voter registration, why? Closing voting stations, why? Not being able to use student I.D.s but firearm cards for identification, why? Why is one party intent on making it so much harder for AMERICAN CITIZENS to vote?

Cuda, it's not an insult. It's a fact, the sooner the generation of yours dies off the better the rest of the population will be. You probably think that you're the perfect image of what an American should be, but you're not. You're an old man that forgot to pull out around twenty times and is filled with nothing but disgust for your fellow countrymen. And you probably think you're like Clint Eastwood at the end of Gran Torino, when in fact you're exactly like his character in the beginning. Being a vile, bitter old man is nothing to be proud of.

CUDA · Post by **CUDA** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:39 pm

Not perfect, just a better man then you, *SHRUG*

vision · Post by **vision** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 1:10 am

Z.. wrote:Why is one party intent on making it so much harder for AMERICAN CITIZENS to vote?

REKT.

Sergeant Thorne · Post by **Sergeant Thorne** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:23 am

Z wrote:I'm not Thorne. Did I ever say anything other than American citizens in my posts? Restricting early voting in Ohio, why? Taking away same day voter registration, why? Closing voting stations, why? Not being able to use student I.D.s but firearm cards for identification, why? Why is one party intent on making it so much harder for AMERICAN CITIZENS to vote?

It doesn't make a difference whether you ever said anything other than American citizens in your post. To be honest I don't know what the Republican party's motives are at the poles (I don't have any faith in the Republican party), but I can guess at why they would garner support. Conservatives believe they are losing at the poles in part due to an illegitimate body of votes which is known to favor the Democratic party. What I am personally looking for in weighing these positions is not just someone who is not actively supporting this illegitimate vote, but someone who is taking action to do something about it. Unfortunately the position of your team seems to be that this vote is inconsequential, before they shift the focus always back over to American's who might be disenfranchised by proposed solutions. I just have to wonder, why, in our country, is it reportedly so difficult for so many to produce proof of citizenship? Isn't that kind of important/basic?

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:58 am

The problem, as I see it, is that neither side is *really* interested in improving the voting system... they are just interested in figuring a way to get a few more votes than the opposition. We're so stuck fighting over who will be hurt by one form of broken system or another and don't particularly bother to try to improve the system in general. That being said, part of the judge's point is that the system really isn't all that broken to begin with (without voter ID laws), which I think I'm willing to give him.

Specifically on ID laws: I'm not completely opposed to them, but they should be done in such a way that they don't exclude people - in other words, they need to be coupled with ID reform that guarantees that an ID is reasonably accessible to anyone who can legally vote.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:06 am

All the other issues aside, same day registration must go…I don’t care which party it favors or if it favored my grandmothers ass.

I know exactly why that is being put in place, it’s used to get people to the polls on election day using bribery and coercion, unfortunately many people don’t really give a ★■◆● about voting and have never studied the issues, and can be told who to vote for.

The people who don’t care about voting, are the ones who don’t bother to register. If someone is telling you how to vote…it isn’t really your vote…is it.

If I were in charge…

1 No photo ID requirements.
2 No same day registration.
3 No more than 3 days early voting.

I can’t comment on the polling place closings, because I haven’t looked into that issue, but I have to walk past 2 other polling places to get to mine…one of them is right at the corner.

If early voting is used more by Democrats, then so be it, I think Republicans should also take advantage of it. But that being said…if it were eliminated…it wouldn’t prevent anyone from voting, like the ID laws.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 9:05 am

If you can have same day registration and can not verify the person that walks in is a legal voter then their vote is counted no matter who they really are or how many times they walked in to a polling place and voted already.

If those conditions exist, which they do in some places already, then the defense that there is no "proof" of "widespread" fraud is a ridiculous position.

If you are willing to accept those conditions then you aren't in favor of a fair voting process...and you should be more careful of what you wish for.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 7:43 am

a little background and perspective, folks: First off, election day registration isn't some 'new' idea. New Hampshire and Maine have had such in some variation for years. Second, when the pace of our economy and the nature of our nation were such that essentially taking a day off (in terms of business activity), one-day voting works ok, especially if absentee ballots are available for those out of town. It DOES periodically disenfranchise those with election day emergencies or other unforseen circumstances. Extending voting hours addresses that issue by allow people to better manage time, and in our modern society(hell, stores are open on Thanksgiving Day and New Years) you are merely allowing everyone who wishes to vote the opportunity to do so. What on Earth can be BAD about that? That is the freaking goal of an elective government. Finally, the same tired old 'what if' crap comes up for the above as well as voter ID. It's worth pointing out that we do have laws, and strict ones, on the books for PROVEN voter frauds. It's equally worth pointing out that NONE of the fear-mongered ideas has EVER been shown to have occurred.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 7:51 am

Slick it has never been proven that I have inhaled through my nose to breath.
However, knowing human behavior it is ridiculous to suggest that because it has never been proven that I have is the same as 'proof that it never happens'.

All your comments provided was a fluffy little sidestep around the point.

If same day registration is allowed and no reasonable means of making a potential voter prove he is legally qualified, based on human behavior characteristics, it is highly likely that there will be undetected fraudulent voting taking place. Add in the efforts the Party's go to to rustle up a needed vote in hotly contested precincts and you can guess where it will become most likely.

Combine that easily understood fact of life with knowing you support the party that gloats about the electoral advantage of letting illegal voters across the border and your assurances are laid out pretty plainly as extremely suspect!

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:06 am

ID laws don’t meet the “need” test and neither does same day registration…and it also fails the “easier voting” test as well.

Extended hours are a reasonable feature, but should be limited for practical reasons, such as…just how long should a school remain closed, or a house be open to the public. (the poll workers aren’t paid) And there are other logistical issues with extended voting as well, the absentee issue has already been addressed. Three days with one on the weekend is plenty.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:11 am

Will Robinson wrote:Slick it has never been proven that I have inhaled through my nose to breath.

simple observation on a cold day would prove it, as could I, easily, with simple tools. Likewise, anyone could easily prove you to be shallow, repetitive and flat-out ignorant of facts by reading your posts, such as the above.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:12 am

The whole argument that ID requirements are discriminatory is ridiculous unless you are also an advocate for removing ID requirements for all other goods and services that poor and wealthy people alike do provide ID for every day without a squeek of 'that's racist!'.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:15 am

Will Robinson wrote:The whole argument that ID requirements are discriminatory is ridiculous unless you are also an advocate for removing ID requirements for all other goods and services that poor and wealthy people alike do provide ID for every day without a squeek of 'that's racist!'.

those are private decisions, in most cases. Voting is different.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:15 am

callmeslick wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:Slick it has never been proven that I have inhaled through my nose to breath.
simple observation on a cold day would prove it, as could I, easily, with simple tools. Likewise, anyone could easily prove you to be shallow, repetitive and flat-out ignorant of facts by reading your posts, such as the above.

Ok, so using your amazing logic, if we have other means of proving the voters ID (the cold breath analogy) then we can accept your assertion that fraud hasn't taken place. So, where is this other means available to poll watchers that they use to catch fraudulent votes that makes the ID unnecessary?

Lol

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:17 am

you are claiming something happens, Will. PROVE IT! Otherwise, please stop already with the 'maybe','what if', 'it's possible' nonsense, because that is exactly what you are peddling: NONSENSE.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:18 am

callmeslick wrote:
Will Robinson wrote:The whole argument that ID requirements are discriminatory is ridiculous unless you are also an advocate for removing ID requirements for all other goods and services that poor and wealthy people alike do provide ID for every day without a squeek of 'that's racist!'.
those are private decisions, in most cases. Voting is different.

Since when is cashing a check or proving you have a license or showing the school you really are the child's parent, or many many more activities a 'private choice'?

Weak excuses getting weaker....

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 8:19 am

callmeslick wrote:you are claiming something happens, Will. PROVE IT! Otherwise, please stop already with the 'maybe','what if', 'it's possible' nonsense, because that is exactly what you are peddling: NONSENSE.

Voter fraud HAS BEEN proven, so based on our understanding of that phenomenon and human behavior we use ID just like we use safety belts or locks on doors or security guards at certain locations.

callmeslick · Post by **callmeslick** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:03 am

the incidence of proven voter fraud, with NO ID laws, is less than 1/10 of 1%, AT BEST. What problem are you REALLY trying to fix? Those pesky, violent, poor black folks voting? I think that seems to be it.

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:34 am

callmeslick wrote:the incidence of proven voter fraud, with NO ID laws, is less than 1/10 of 1%, AT BEST. What problem are you REALLY trying to fix? Those pesky, violent, poor black folks voting? I think that seems to be it.

Are you that desperate that you will try to play the race card to deflect the obvious hole in your position? If you aren't allowed to ID the people voting you can't claim they were legally voting... therefore your tally of fraudulent votes is a worthless tally!

Considering fraud DOES take place...that in tight races a every vote you can get counted can be the one that matters...that humans will cheat out of greed...etc. etc. we would be smart to ID our voters. It is exactly why we have voter laws.

In light of those realities your arguments, and tactics of playing the race card, are pathetically weak.

vision · Post by **vision** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 11:02 am

Will Robinson wrote:Considering fraud DOES take place...

^ Not a qualified source.