The election deniers won't suddenly stop being morons. 😉Do you like Indiana's voter ID laws and would you support them being used as a model federally? Id bet you'd be shocked to hear that most Democrats do as well. However, the "Save" act isn't anything like the common sense ID laws that Indiana has in place. Why?@goat it has everything to do with it. If all states were like Indiana, it wouldn't be issue. However, there are 14 states and DC that don't even require a photo ID, so it is an issue. Of course all those states are blue or lean left.
Every state could have passed Indiana's laws years go and still can today. Why haven't they then?
You don't haven't answer. The Save Act isn't passing and Democrats don't want stricter laws because their main objective isn't ensuring the most trust in election outcomes. There main objective is making it as easy possible to vote because they think it gives them the best chance to win.
And Republicans know that making voting more of a challenge benefits them. It's a simple numbers game, neither team has any noble intentions here.
The GOP knows their voting base is older and more established, as far as their voting registration and voting consistency. While Dem voters trend younger and are more transient, and have more fickle turnout. Good luck registering to vote if you're a college student, for example... Not many college students carry their birth certificate off to campus with them, for example....
If that's a good or bad thing is most surely based upon your political persuasion.
I don't think it's difficult to vote in Indiana and think their main objective is voter integrity, not voter suppression. What part of it is hard? I also don't consider bringing a birth certificate to vote difficult either.
I'd be willing to bet within an election or two the numbers would be the exact same on voter turnout as they are now. People who want to vote would figure it out. The 40- 45% who don't vote now would continue to bot vote. And you would get the added benefit of responding to all election deniers that we added measures to make sure elections were not rigged.
The election deniers won't suddenly stop being morons. 😉Do you like Indiana's voter ID laws and would you support them being used as a model federally? Id bet you'd be shocked to hear that most Democrats do as well. However, the "Save" act isn't anything like the common sense ID laws that Indiana has in place. Why?@goat it has everything to do with it. If all states were like Indiana, it wouldn't be issue. However, there are 14 states and DC that don't even require a photo ID, so it is an issue. Of course all those states are blue or lean left.
Every state could have passed Indiana's laws years go and still can today. Why haven't they then?
You don't haven't answer. The Save Act isn't passing and Democrats don't want stricter laws because their main objective isn't ensuring the most trust in election outcomes. There main objective is making it as easy possible to vote because they think it gives them the best chance to win.
And Republicans know that making voting more of a challenge benefits them. It's a simple numbers game, neither team has any noble intentions here.
The GOP knows their voting base is older and more established, as far as their voting registration and voting consistency. While Dem voters trend younger and are more transient, and have more fickle turnout. Good luck registering to vote if you're a college student, for example... Not many college students carry their birth certificate off to campus with them, for example....
If that's a good or bad thing is most surely based upon your political persuasion.
I don't think it's difficult to vote in Indiana and think their main objective is voter integrity, not voter suppression. What part of it is hard? I also don't consider bringing a birth certificate to vote difficult either.
I'd be willing to bet within an election or two the numbers would be the exact same on voter turnout as they are now. People who want to vote would figure it out. The 40- 45% who don't vote now would continue to bot vote. And you would get the added benefit of responding to all election deniers that we added measures to make sure elections were not rigged.
Not all, but some would change their minds. One of the logical conclusions to come to for Democrats not wanting IDs to vote is it makes it easier to cheat or rig elections. Only an idiot can't process how someone would come to the conclusion 😉
I guess I'd be interested in knowing what percentage of people even have their birth certificate.... I see that about 45-50% of the population has an active passport.
I've seen that number cited numerous times, and it's shocking to me that it's that high.
Shocking to me to since about anyone I ask has never been out of the country and have no intention of going out of the country.I guess I'd be interested in knowing what percentage of people even have their birth certificate.... I see that about 45-50% of the population has an active passport.
I've seen that number cited numerous times, and it's shocking to me that it's that high.
There are 10 types of people in this world, those who know binary and those who don't.
Shocking to me to since about anyone I ask has never been out of the country and have no intention of going out of the country.I guess I'd be interested in knowing what percentage of people even have their birth certificate.... I see that about 45-50% of the population has an active passport.
I've seen that number cited numerous times, and it's shocking to me that it's that high.
Exactly. I got mine just a few years ago. Prior to 9-11 (and even for a couple years after) it wasn't needed for travel to Canada.
One thing that should be better known is that you can get a passport card -- it's like a drivers license -- to keep in your wallet. It's only good for ground crossings, not for air travel, but I can't imagine it still wouldn't be good for proof of citizenship.
Shocking to me to since about anyone I ask has never been out of the country and have no intention of going out of the country.I guess I'd be interested in knowing what percentage of people even have their birth certificate.... I see that about 45-50% of the population has an active passport.
I've seen that number cited numerous times, and it's shocking to me that it's that high.
Exactly. I got mine just a few years ago. Prior to 9-11 (and even for a couple years after) it wasn't needed for travel to Canada.
One thing that should be better known is that you can get a passport card -- it's like a drivers license -- to keep in your wallet. It's only good for ground crossings, not for air travel, but I can't imagine it still wouldn't be good for proof of citizenship.
You guys hang out with real fun people
And Republicans know that making voting more of a challenge benefits them. I
Let’s assume that’s true. Why is that a reason not to enact reasonable identity safeguards as a condition to vote?
If this is a problem, the Democrats could easily establish a ground game to get their voters qualified.
The biggest difference between the Indiana law and the save act, that I see from a very casual review, is that the save act deals with registration while the Indiana law imposes requirements to cast a ballot. I think it makes more sense to clean up the registration process. The Real I D legislation answers questions about suitable documents. Is there something else that is a problem with the save act?
The biggest difference between the Indiana law and the save act, that I see from a very casual review, is that the save act deals with registration while the Indiana law imposes requirements to cast a ballot. I think it makes more sense to clean up the registration process. The Real I D legislation answers questions about suitable documents. Is there something else that is a problem with the save act?
That's not remotely close. The biggest difference is the SAVE Act requires a much stricter set of documents and purports to restrict voting to citizens only on a nationwide scale. Registration vs. voting is not the story, and for you to claim it is, that's just rank misdirection.
Doesn’t the Save Act incorporate Real ID law? That federal law has been around for 20 years or so. Why is that a problem for you now?
Doesn’t the Save Act incorporate Real ID law? That federal law has been around for 20 years or so. Why is that a problem for you now?
I can't even with this right now. I'm done responding to dishonest questions. I'm not even going to justify them with a "Of course that's not a problem." You know how to read. You want a discussion, ask a legit question about what I legit said.
Doesn’t the Save Act incorporate Real ID law? That federal law has been around for 20 years or so. Why is that a problem for you now?
Why do we need stricter requirements to vote when there has been no issue with voter fraud to a level that would have changed any election?
We have secure elections so what problem are you trying to fix? Or is the real purpose voter suppression through unnecessary hoops and costs.
And Republicans know that making voting more of a challenge benefits them. I
Let’s assume that’s true. Why is that a reason not to enact reasonable identity safeguards as a condition to vote?
If this is a problem, the Democrats could easily establish a ground game to get their voters qualified.
There is nothing reasonable about the voter suppression law
And Republicans know that making voting more of a challenge benefits them. I
Let’s assume that’s true. Why is that a reason not to enact reasonable identity safeguards as a condition to vote?
If this is a problem, the Democrats could easily establish a ground game to get their voters qualified.
There is nothing reasonable about the voter suppression law
What’s not reasonable is your soft bigotry. Why do you think women & minorities are too dumb, lazy, or poor to prove their citizenship?