'Tell Me Again, Why is showing Voter I.D. Considered Voter Suppression'!

At this point Kranes has clearly demonstrated just how easily they can be had! Hell even a baptism certificate works!

 

What I'm saying, AND you are saying is, it's pretty damn easy to obtain ID.. You have successfully countered your own argument in just the last few posts..

 

Because we have similar experiences. If you say you can get an ID, I can say that I got lucky and was able to be documented. Likewise I can the same for her. It's not rocket science, we had very similar circumstances. The names on our IDs didn't match our names.

Yeah, because that's how it is engineered. Make it so it's not at all easy to engage with the system to deter people from voting. Set up high standards for a population that's easy for everyone to get. It's kafkaesque for a reason. This isn't new, it's a very common tactic used by the state to discriminate against people.

Oh I'm trans. So when I needed new ID I was in the middle of transitioning.

How was a person reasonably to know that her baptism certificate which she used as proof wasn't going to work anymore? It's sometimes more reasonable to know who's going to the final four during March Madness than to know what you need to vote. People don't engage with the state the same way.

 

Nope.... just because someone does not have an ID does not mean they cant get one... That is a logical fallacy.

 

What?

ID doesn't mean it's Photo ID, or sufficient ID to vote. How is this a hard point to make?

 

Huh?

Lucky? You think it was luck that landed you your first ID? You said you changed your name that would be up to You to obtain a new ID not the Government...

High Standards? To get an ID???

Ah that explains the woe is me and victimhood card..

Did that lady never have a SS card? State ID? Did she never open up a bank account under her name? At 84 years old? Not buying the horror story..

You had ID.. YOU made the choice to transition.. YOU had the ability to get your name changed and a new Id to document it.... No barriers.. No "racism" simply bad choices and woe on me on your part.

 

I don't know, your whole point is how hard it and why some % of people can't obtain and ID, now you're posting even a baptism certificate will get you some sort of legal and usable ID..

From my viewpoint, you have made me even more concern with how easy it is to obtain accurate ID legal or illegally..

 

My argument:
P1. If the standards for getting photo ID are too high, then people won't get one.
P2. The standards are too high.
SC1: Then people won't get photo ID. (MP)
P3: If they don't have photo ID, they can't vote.
Conclusion: They can't vote. (MP)

Your strawman argument:
P1: If people can't get ID, then they won't vote.
P2: People can get ID.
C:They can vote. (DA)

You can phrase it as a logical fallacy, but that's it. It's not a logical fallacy, it's a valid argument form.

 

No.. as P1 does not stand

The "standards" are not high.

Even your claim of racism was debunked by your own study showing 87% of Blacks have ID and that does not show the remaining 13% dont have "access" or "barriers" at all.

You are still stuck in your high school debate class....

 

Yeah, I think it was luck. I was really lucky that no one found me out, and that I had my documentation with me. I know lots of people who didn't and had to go through the horror that is bureaucracy. I am the exception to the rule. Just because you can't see the barriers doesn't mean they don't exist. We have proof the barriers exist because there are discrepancies between the rates of those who don't have IDs. You owe me an explanation for why there are discrepancies, and if there are no barriers then there is something wrong with a population. Is that the route you're going down?

I'm going to let you in on a little secret.... the government changes what are acceptable standards of ID. Now add in how often voter fraud occurs and you can start to see why it's a non-issue.

 

Clearly you have proved that P1 is hardly the case...

 

Compared to 5% of whites who have ID, expired or otherwise. Which has nothing to do with having ID for voting. Even then: If there are no barriers, there are no discrepancies. There are discrepancies, therefore there are barriers (MT).

The standards are 1/4 African Americans don't have photo ID for voting. Having photo ID is a pretty high standard for that population then. If that's not a high standard what is? 30%? 40%? 50%? 100%?

P1. has been defended multiple times. I have the proof both quantitatively and qualitatively. I have met the burden of proving P1 true.

 

Found you out?

Oh now i cant "see them".. You cant document them either.. Its just your feelings and not factual information at all...

I dont know you tell me when they are a few % points off.... Way off of your politicalfact 25% claim btw..

Here is a life lesson kid.. I nor does anyone else owe you anything... Lose the attitude before your 30 perhaps and you might have more success in life.

 

Yeah. because what were expected standards changed so they no longer counted. She had a baptism certificate proving who she was. She didn't get to vote because of it.

 

You went from a survey suggesting 25% to an actual study saying 13%... Which would you like to discuss it simply can not be both.

 

How did the reqs to get a BC or SS card issued change?

 

And who fact checked it? The left is now the party where one liar lies and four other liars swear to it and we're supposed to accept the lie as Gospel, sorry not happening.

 

Politifact which i broke down the issues with....

 

As in when I was in the closet... and when my biological parents had control over my documentation like my SS number.

You can't read the data, that's not what the table said. Table 1 talks about all forms of identification, expired or otherwise. Table 4 talks about photo ID. Not at all the same thing.

Here's a life lesson, if you don't know what you're talking about, then stop talking. I've made a great life for myself telling adults to shut up because they don't know what they're talking about. In fact, the first lesson I learned was to tell people who tell me I'm wrong, to say they don't know what they're talking about. In my field? That's actually a respectable answer. You think 1000 people is too small a survey size? If I asked you to tell me what n is, could you have done that? I am convinced you don't know what you're talking about.

 

Might have been mentioned to start with, I guess.. I don't know... I believe most babies born on and after 1987 are assigned a SSN.. So as long as you were born in a hospital or clinic or whatever you get that and Birth certificate for taking your first breath.. But I doubt any real percentages of children born in the U.S. are home and midwife born..

With that said, I'm willing to "Haven't looked in to it yet" bet that with a birth certificate and a SSN/card that any one with a smart phone can get a legal Photo ID or help one another get one easy enough!!

 

So no one is 'supressing' these people from voting but themselves. They have at least one document if they work, receive assistance, social security, attend school, etc. If they were truly concerned with their ability to vote in Presidential elections, they have 4 years to to obtain the necessary ID.

 

Politifact, I'm not responsible if you don't like the source. You are some random stranger on the internet. Politifact is a well established fact checking agency that cited their sources. Who am I going to trust? Go to the library and they'll tell you to trust politifact over the random stranger. Your conspiracy theories are not valid arguments.

 

Once you turned 18 you could have easily requested a SS card to be issued to you at your new address... Your parents did not "control" your SS #.

Oh i read the data just fine... For ID to have expired you first have had to had it.. Which means you had access.

Ah yes the young kid who knows better then all the adults and then never grows out of that stage... Depressing but hey...

I told you multiple reasons why that survey had issues not just the sample size... As you yourself said "Here's a life lesson, if you don't know what you're talking about, then stop talking"

A main focus of my career is collecting data so take your little snarky comments and... I wont say it as i know how important feelings are to you.

 

That's fair. I shouldn't have assumed you would remember some random article from days ago. My bad.

Yeah it's not most people. Most people are documentable. The problem is those that are not. As we change our definition of citizenship to who has documentation, then we need to take into account not everyone is documentable equally. And if there are political stakes in it? It needs to be scrutinized to a higher level.

And? What is this supposed to mean? Not everyone engages in politics the same way. For some people it's more important to have an opinion on the final four than to know how to vote. Why is that an acceptable barrier to voting?

 

Could I have if I feared being homeless at any moment? That any day I could have been homeless? Can't wait for the mail to arrive in a week, if you're going to be gone tomorrow.

So you can't tell me what n is. For the record, n is 987. Honestly if I have to explain that having access to id in the past doesn't mean you have access now, you really don't get the argument I'm posting. Let's say in the past you could use a baptism certificate as proof to get a driver's license. But now that standard has changed so you can't. That's what happened and that's what's happening.

Of course collecting feelings matters to me, I collect data too. My data is how people feel, because I know those feelings are manifestations of the facts on the ground. A person says something like they don't trust the government because they take welfare away is important to me. That's my data. I can track that feeling to a government policy. That's my job. You don't have to like the data, but it's what is factual. People aren't rational, they're emotional.