Originally posted by BackFire
It doesn't take much effort to say "Show the evidence that it is a problem large enough to spend time and money to fix". And then laugh when the other side fails to provide even an iota of valid data.Much worse to lie and agree that it's a problem in the hopes that you can implement a pretend fix to a pretend problem so stupid people will shut up.
Originally posted by Silent Master
They don't have to agree it's a problem in order to pass their version, they could just say. "I think having an ID is a good idea and here is a plan to make it avalible to every citizen"Having an ID is a very helpful thing in gernal.
Then you should take that up with the states that make it hard for certain groups to get ID.
Originally posted by darthgoober
You don't have acknowledge there's a problem beyond people's fear of it though. It still makes sense in the long run to bolster faith in the system when there are a lot of people losing faith in it. A single riot can become a mass tragedy and we've already seen that people in this country ARE already to the point of rioting when they feel they were robbed in the election. Granted, those aren't the people such a policy would appease but do you really think the other side will behave any better if Trump loses next time? Especially now that Libs have already set the precedent that it's excusable to riot in such a situation...
You should not appeal to people's fear, especially if there is nothing to actually be afraid of. That leads to some very very bad things, historically.
What riots were allowed to happen because of Trump's election? There weren't any. If stupid people are going to be scared at nothing then they need to be educated, not lied to and validated.
People against Voter ID are manly democrats, the same people who think Russia stole the election. Ironically they dont want Voter ID, but at the same time complain Russia stole the election.
Literally you need an ID to do pretty much everything, but when it comes to our democracy, NO FCKING ID needed.
Originally posted by Blindside12
People against Voter ID are manly democrats, the same people who think Russia stole the election. Ironically they dont want Voter ID, but at the same time complain Russia stole the election.Literally you need an ID to do pretty much everything, but when it comes to our democracy, NO FCKING ID needed.
This is not ironic. It would only be ironic if they were arguing that voter ID would have prevented the Russia tampering or whatever they think happened.
Then take it up with the states that have implemented voter ID in such a slimy and unfair way. They make it very easy to argue against since they are actively using it to make it harder for certain groups to vote.
So ID is needed for way less important tasks, but when it comes to deciding our fate for ourselves and the country, no ID required?
How hard is it to get an ID anyways, not hard.
https://www.bringitwisconsin.com/how-do-i-get-free-state-id-card
Originally posted by Silent Master
I don't consider getting an ID that hard.
Its fcking easy, you do the steps, bring the stuff you need, thats it. Whats so fcking hard about following the rules and a few simple steps?
They claim its discrimination, when its actually discrimination telling people, its to hard to get one.
Originally posted by BackFire
You should not appeal to people's fear, especially if there is nothing to actually be afraid of. That leads to some very very bad things, historically.What riots were allowed to happen because of Trump's election? There weren't any. If stupid people are going to be scared at nothing then they need to be educated, not lied to and validated.
It's not appealing, it's appeasing. The fear is already there, this helps to alleviate a problem that already exists. And yes, there's been Trump protests that have turned riotous since Trump was elected.
Also, do you realize what's happened here? You started off saying that the problem with voter ID policies is there implementation and that you'd be ok with them as long as they were implemented correctly. I've pointed out a way to implement them correctly and now you're saying that you STILL won't support such a thing even if it saves lives in the long run(the lives in question being those at risk in the event of future riots). How are you any different from someone who opposes background checks? Isn't instituting background check simply appealing to people's fear by your reasoning? After all there's no actual proof that there will ever be another another mass shooting in this country. Of course it's not, it's simply a safety precaution against something bad that we know could easily happen again. By the same token, a national voter ID system is simply a preventative measure against riots that we know are likely to happen given the country's divided political climate.
Originally posted by BackFire
It needs to be equally difficult for every person and ethnic/economic group if it is going to function in a fair and effective way.
If you can show me some links where that is going on then it needs to be changed, but since you typically are one of those people that doesnt condemn the masses for a few bad apples. I dont believe this is a problem that affects the mass majority of people that could swing an election cause they could not get an ID to vote.
FBI tip line caller described Nikolas Cruz as 'about to explode'
FBI did nothing.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/23/politics/florida-school-shooting-fbi-tip-line-transcript/index.html
Originally posted by darthgoober
It's not appealing, it's appeasing. The fear is already there, this helps to alleviate a problem that already exists. And yes, there's been Trump protests that have turned riotous since Trump was elected.Also, do you realize what's happened here? You started off saying that the problem with voter ID policies is there implementation and that you'd be ok with them as long as they were implemented correctly. I've pointed out a way to implement them correctly and now you're saying that you STILL won't support such a thing even if it saves lives in the long run(the lives in question being those at risk in the event of future riots). How are you any different from someone who opposes background checks? Isn't instituting background simply appealing to people's fear by your reasoning? After all there's no actual proof that there will ever be another another mass shooting in this country. Of course not, it's simply a safety precaution against something bad that we know could easily happen again. By the same token, a national voter ID system is simply a preventative measure against riots that we know are likely to happen given the country's divided political climate.
You're creating a distinction without a difference. Appeasing stupid people scared of something that doesn't exist is no better than appealing to them, either way, you are validating people's baseless fear which no good can come from.
Yes there have been some protests that turned to riots, but they were not "allowed". The people who engaged in that behavior were arrested and punished.
And besides, do you really think that people who are so distrustful of the government that they would engage in violence as a result of an election outcome they disagree with would suddenly be placated by an ID issued from the very government they don't trust?
Also that was a cute little attempt at a gotcha moment, but nothing I've said is inconsistent. I'd have no problem with a nationwide ID if it could be done in a very cheap and fast way that was equally fair to every citizen. I don't believe that is possible in this climate, so I'm against the idea of a voter ID because I don't believe it is worth the cost and hassle that reality dictates would be required. And obviously I don't agree that any lives will be saved by implementing them. The riots that happen are independent of the rules of our elections, they're the product of a deeply divided population and an ID system won't change that.
And again I don't know why you keep trying to tie it back to the idea of gun control and background checks. This comparison is stupid as it completely ignores the severity of a mass shooting vs someone voting twice. Also it ignores the fact that we have tons of data on one, and pretty much none on the other.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Can you give me an example where the difficulty is unreasonable?
Yes.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/texas-voter-id-law-discriminate/index.html
Critics of the voter ID law say such requirements disenfranchise poor and minority voters, who face difficulties obtaining IDs. They also point out that while Texas accepts a license to carry a handgun as a permissible form of voter ID, it doesn't accept federal or state government IDs or a student ID.
https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
Underlying documents required to obtain ID cost money, a significant expense for lower-income Americans. The combined cost of document fees, travel expenses and waiting time are estimated to range from $75 to $175.
The travel required is often a major burden on people with disabilities, the elderly, or those in rural areas without access to a car or public transportation. In Texas, some people in rural areas must travel approximately 170 miles to reach the nearest ID office.
States exclude forms of ID in a discriminatory manner. Texas allows concealed weapons permits for voting, but does not accept student ID cards. Until its voter ID law was struck down, North Carolina prohibited public assistance IDs and state employee ID cards, which are disproportionately held by Black voters. And until recently, Wisconsin permitted active duty military ID cards, but prohibited Veterans Affairs ID cards for voting.
Originally posted by BackFireWhat riots were allowed to happen because of Trump's election? There weren't any. If stupid people are going to be scared at nothing then they need to be educated, not lied to and validated.
You’re either
a) joking
B) being living under a rock for the last year
C) just straight up lying