The real reason republicans want voter ID

If it shrinks the number of Democrat voters, that's probably because those Democrat voters aren't real, aren't allowed to vote, or are dead.

The only reason Democrats oppose it is because they won't be able to commit voter fraud.

I remember how everybody was begging for evidence of voter fraud. The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence

 

Anti-Voter ID .... lol... we know who you are.

 

He handles himself with dignity. Trump is rude pig.

 

There is no evidence Democrats commit voter fraud. But there is tons of evidence Republicans cheat, purging voter rolls in ways that is not just, ( Interstate Crosscheck was halted by a federal judge ) voter caging, egregious gerrymandering, and so on.

 

And that's exactly why they opposed voter ID so there isn't ever any in the future.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

Those of us in the ole Dana Rohrabacher
district know. Ask @HB Surfer
Ballot Harvesters who can offer same day
registration and voting can swing an election.

How discriminatory can it be to require registration
a month or three before the election, minimally to give the
illusion the newly registered were qualified voters?

Meanwhile, the Democrat who defeated Rohrabacher lost
re election to another Republican, Asian Babe, Michelle Steele.



Moi
I Got Yellow Fever
Men: For longevity of "looks"
Consider the Asian babe Advantage

​

Don't Further ize
​

 

Not only voter ID, but the ballot should have the finger print of the voter on it. And---------------the law should be written that random finger prints would be checked.

Democrats of course will go nuts at this suggestion, because it would clamp down on their crookedness and cheating.

 

Dana Rohrabacher is a very fine legislator when in office. Michelle Steele is impressive and has the kind of background good for CA.

 

I agree. There is no reason why fingerprints can't be part of voting.
It was done when I got my CA real estate license.
When I got the higher Brokers license again new fingerprints.
For my Appraisers license and even when I was drafted into the Army.
I expect every person serving any role of Government has been fingerprinted.

 

I doubt you truly believe any of that.
I once was as you are, super loyal to the Democrats.
What woke me up in the late 1970s was an awesome book.

This book. I read a lot more books as well.

 

They don’t want to keep minorities on the plantation. It’s insulting to assume people can’t bring a ****ing ID

 

It’s racist white liberals who don’t want IDs. The idiots think that Blacks, Hispanics, Asians can’t get, don’t know who to get ID. Flipping libs!!! They all know where to get, how to get the needed information to drive, vote, SS,
Pay taxes, name it and they can get it. These people are not stupid like libs want us to believe.

 

As a democrat, I can say on good authority you are incorrect and your opinion ( which is all it is ) is rooted in paranoia.

But, there is considerable evidence that Republicans are trying to rig the electoral system to their advantage, unfairly.

Physician, heal thyself.

 

The subject is presidential elections, which require the cooperation of every state and every district, not just one district. You are giving and apples to oranges comparison.

 

As a perceptive person I can determine your just saying that. Maybe you even believe it but you are being used.

 

Whenever one must resort to announcing their so-called mental faculties of whatever kind, so as to gain posture in an argument, know that a perceptive person understands that posturing is the tactic of those with weak arguments, and thus you have given concrete evidence of your lack of perceptiveness. And, to worsen your position even more, you subsequently compound it with further evidence of that posturing in your second sentence, whereby your attempt to diminish me with that sentence, i.e., "Maybe you even believe it but you are being used", you attempt to puff yourself up, and self-puffery is another form of posturing. You incorrectly believe this pseudo debate tactic supports your argument, but, in point of fact, it diminishes you in the sense that it reveals your lack of prowess in the debate arena.

Feel free to provide evidence, as it is you who has made the vacuous allegation (that the only reason Democrats want to eliminate voter ID is so that they can commit fraud).

Until then, I will file that in the wishful thinking file. Good day, sir.

 

No. White progressives aren’t racist at all. Sounds strangely familiar to Biden’s own words. Weird why black leaders still continue to lie and talk down to their own people. Quite despicable really.

 

your evaluation is noted not interesting and not relevant.

Not interested. My goal here isn't too convince you of anything.

Seems by this response you have to tell yourself that and that's okay. Because again my presence here is not to convince you of anything.

Feel free, and if this is the case I don't expect to hear from you in regards to this topic anymore.

This would be a negative thing as your interaction is necessary for me to accomplish my goal.

 

I'm not trying to be a jerk here. But pointing out hypocrisy to people who openly engage in it and know they do, because I don't believe they are unintelligent enough not to be aware, is simply playing their game.

It's not racist they don't believe it's racist they are lying. When you call something racist it is essentially poisoning of the well. Being racist is considered a really socially unacceptable thing so kind of like calling someone a witch and Salem Massachusetts in the 17th century they call things and people racist that they don't like and can't argue against.

The anti voter ID is for nothing else but two give them the ability to cheat in elections without being caught.

Anybody that's legally allowed to vote can get an ID. Maybe in the 1940s courthouses and the DPS would deny state issued identification to people on the basis of their race. That's not a thing today and if it happened everyone on the planet in every alien life form within broadcast range would know all of the intricate details about it.

So what I'm saying here is don't take the bait. And I've observed when people say something is it racist that isn't obviously so it's because they don't want people asking questions about it. Not people like you who would ask questions about it anyway, but the average Joe that doesn't care enough to ask.

 

There are flaws in conservative thinking, and there are accuracies. ( I suspect the argument is more to 'neoliberalism' vs 'Keynesian' thinking than it is to conservative vs liberal ) But, I eschew conservatives propensity to reduce their policy ideas to simplisticism.

There is a big difference between the words, 'simple' and 'simplistic'. To make something simple, is to reduce something to its essential state, and remove all things superfluous that don't contribute to understanding something. To make, for example, a simplified argument, is the argument is reduced to its' basic components for the purpose of clarity. But, to make a simplistic argument, is to reduce something beyond the point at which it can be reduced, such that, what remains no longer is viable. It means to oversimplify something to a point it's unworkable. And yes, Democrats can and do make similar mistakes, but, there is a difference. Democrats often feel it's better to do something about something than to do nothing, even if the money spent isn't spent well.

Republicans often cling to the do-nothing approach, erroneously believing the 'invisible hand' of the free market will lead them to that brighter shore, which it rarely does, but at least they will keep their money or so the theory goes. So, 'imho' greed is one of their motives and their 'philosophy' is used to justify it However, in my view there is that ever elusive sweet spot, somewhere in the center, which is the better place to exist, philosophically speaking, more on that in a bit.

I started out life as a leftist hippie in the 60s, by the time 1980 came, I was libertarian, voted for Ed Clark ( and the veep was one of the Koch Bros )
by 1986 or some time in the late 80s, I got tired of arguing with democrats, as I believed all of the thought-terminating clichés republicans and libertarians had filled my brain with, I decided, knowing that I was easily going to find hard statistics proving republicans' and libertarians had the better philosophy of governance, I would research the hard stats, comparing republicans administrations versus democratic administrations, and clearly, republicans will naturally be the better, I mean, given that democrats are into big government, higher taxes, more regulation ( I swallowed republican's simplisticism regarding democrats and the left, to the max, as most righties do ) surely the stats would favor republicans. I wanted to do this because I thought that, with the hard stats in front of me, instead of my tiring of arguing with dems, I'll just throw down the data and that would be the end of the argument. However, a funny thing happened on the way to the library, to my utter surprise an amazement, the statistics, overall ( not in every area, but overall ) proved precisely the opposite, that Democratic Administrations, since the turn of the century, America did better, clearly better. And those stats are neatly organized ( which were pretty much what I came up with, but not as updated ) at www.presidentialdata.org

Since I believe in facts, though I couldn't understand why it was so, I gradually rejoined the democrats. It took me time to wrap my head around it, but I began to understand, and it has to do a lot with the simple notion that you can't run a nation like a business, that a nation, on many levels and dimensions, it the opposite of running a business, and I've been a democrat ever since. For example, in a business, you reward productivity and penalize non-productivity. You do that or you go out of business. A nation isn't subject to the constraints of a business, and the politic dynamics are far more complex and diametrically the opposite of a business, noting that a nation has nowhere to go -- things improve or they get worse, but you can't 'quit' or get 'fired' you have to live which your choices of governance good or bad. So, if you think like a business trying to run a nation that way, for example, if you penalize the poor too hard, and for too long, you'll wind up with a revolution, and the outcomes of revolutions are rarely good. But, the entirety of the argument doesn't rise or fall just on that one point, books can be written on the subject.

This is not to say democrats have their problems, that they are correct on everything, that their methods are God's gift to governance, no one is making such a claim and it's not about being way better, it's just about being better, overall, on the whole. If you want to get into arguments of corruption, that's a red herring. Conservatives make some good points. Democrats would do well to inject some conservativism in their ranks, and Republicans would do well to inject some liberalism in their ranks, extremes on either side aren't the answer, nor am I, or anyone I know on the left ( personally, though I do have one radical friend with whom I argue a lot ) arguing for extremes. I started a thread on what is, essentially, my political philosophy, though I'm updating it and going to write a book on it, because there is much more to it than just posted in this thread, but this is it, in a nutshell

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/politics-of-the-center-what-is-it.585857/

The above is complemented by Bill Maher's excellent "Capitalism Plus" argument:



Now, notwithstanding that notion Democrats have been infected with neoliberalism since Reagan ( not as much as the republicans, though ) I'm not all rose colored glasses about my own party, and I share many of Bill Maher's grievances with the left, he is a sensible leftist/centrist, but republicans have shifted so far to the right from the center that I should think Attila the Hun would be proud, ( https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/05/just-how-right-wing-was-attila-the-hun/238526/ ) so there is no way in hell I can be a republican anymore ( though I could have back in the 50s ).

Life is complex, and it's not all that simple, but the GOP, today, no way, José. If one wants to argue 'a new party' I don't think so because America is basically structured around a two party system, you have to pick one or you will be on the sidelines, or that is what history tells us. So I pick the DNC and strive to make it better and the way I would like it to be, and that's about the best that I can do.

 

It's crazy. The real racists are the Leftists. They think so little of Black Americans it's terrible.

 

I am very well acquainted with Bill Maher and once was a huge fan until he pulled a stunt on ABC TV causing him to be fired.
I do not base my brand of politics on Bill Maher. Nor should you nor anybody.
Don't you think Maher has banged thousands of young women? He is a hedonist.
He used to brag all the time about him being part of the Playboy Mansion crowd.

What you owe yourself and those around you is take a chance and read William Simons awesome book. This book is recommended for all college students.

Take Trump for instance. Trump was not typical for a republican and the public felt that in him. His loss to Biden is highly suspicious. Perhaps Biden did round up millions more fools. But we see some of them posting on this forum.

Say, you did a marvelous job laying out your doctrine approach. I truly fully understand it since I once was a clone of you.

Maher has had plenty of opportunity to engage in politics. But his gig produces millions vs making thousands of dollars. He is the epitome of being a good capitalist.

A famous woman who has per the Democrats, two strikes on her, Oprah Winfrey is a billionaire. We have a number of female billionaires and I do not think Bill Maher is their cup of tea either. Oprah is stung by super high taxes. Why should one person be taxed so heavily? This paints in my mind a robber called the US Government.

I will trade your Bill Maher video for this Bill Maher Video. Oh note this was when it was Obama as the president.



Here is a profound book all owe themselves the opportunity to read. Since you have you say Libertarian bent beliefs.



One more issue. You are citing a hard core Democrat approving site as your authority. My books are more to the core issues which are not that Republicans are too Generous with your money, but that Democrats are too generous with your money.

 

? I didn't.

Per the US constitution, the government has a legitimate claim on a portion of your income, and, as such, it is theirs, not yours.

The debate is not on that point, that point is beyond debate because it's enshrined in the constitution. The debate, therefore, is on how much, and what for, which is the more accurate way of stating your misguided sentiment.

I do not find fault with the Maher Video, which is harmonious with the video I linked to and my own credo, which I gave reference to.
I do not 'cite' any book, or website as my authority, though I cite others to complement, or support my view.

'No government' is chaos, so I don't know what the point of the meme was, if that is what it was.

Libertarianism is half right, and in that half rightness, it's wacko. I have retained, however, the remaining portions that are correct.

 

We all must believe in the Constitution. But we all know for a fact that on issues, it has proven to be a hell of a lousy way to Govern.
The Constitution was wrong on slavery.
Right to not levy taxes based on incomes but on other sources.
We once taxed the other nations to support our nation.
Maher is a hedonist. To ally yourself with him took guts.
You did cite a source where you used that source to try to prove Democrats are better presidents.
I copied and pasted the title. It was from a progressive site. Naturally it promotes Democrats.

The no Government book is summarized far too simply like this.
Do you prefer the Mafia seize your goods and incomes or a Government?

Surprisingly the Mafia owns no aircraft carriers and no nuclear bombs. So think before you trust Government.

Biden is like that rattlesnake in the container. Biden will bite and his bite is painful and leads to death.
Take the death of the Keystone Pipeline as one example.
Take the death of a closed border protecting all Americans as another.

Why not listen to our border agents? Biden does not care to listen to them.

 

Maricopa Audit Liaison Says They Need to Investigate Anomalies — Like 52 Ballots Submitted From a Two-Bedroom Home...