To dilute and frustrate the momentary, ignorant whims of the majority.
If she has to ask, it's more proof she doesn't understand the system in any way.
To dilute and frustrate the momentary, ignorant whims of the majority.
I always find that argument to be pretty lame. I have actually heard righties say "take away CA and NY, and the coasts, and Hillary wouldn't have even come close!"
Having a popular vote winner wouldn't change things that much; just where the candidates campaign. There is still House & Senate representation, as well as all of the local & state gov't influence. It's not like middle America would be forgotten.
People vote; dirt doesn't.
It is quite simple. There is no merit to the voter suppression argument concerning voter ID. When people want to vote they are able to vote. Simple as that.
That's another RW lie that you bought hook, line and sinker.
It is quite simple. There is no merit to the voter suppression argument concerning voter ID. When people want to vote they are able to vote. Simple as that.
Your argument is lame. It's the United States of America, not the People's Republic of America.
so you can explain how minority voter participation increased or remained in line with whites in states with voter ID laws in 06, 08, and 12.
thanks!
I already did, moron, but it escaped you. Your mistake, and the mistake that the moron you cited, is a logical fallacy. Pretty common among RW retards. You assume causality when it may well not exist.
I haven’t looked into the numbers, so I won’t even go there. Much of what you hacks post are outright fabrications.
Given that, increased numbers DON’T necessarily mean votes were NOT suppressed. Nor does it mean that the intention to suppress votes was absent. That’s why the courts routinely slap these laws down those laws.
Piss off a segment of the population enough, they will compensate by coming out in droves that didn’t occur before. Other votes can still be suppressed. And are.
If Thingy actually knew how the system operated and why it was put in place, he'd understand what you said.
Loinfo, I suggest you get into the numbers before posting further and making a bigger ass of yourself. I also suggest you study state laws so you will understand things like provisional ballets and how long after the election you have to prove who you say you are.
your mistake is thinking that since in this argument I used a specific source I have no others. Bring on you rebuttal or STFU with your talking points. I have found most you have nothing but loinfo dem talking points on the issue.
Thing has no desire to learn about reality. He's got his belief system, and damn if you or I are going to change that.
lol
I know your type, simpleton. When a black cat walks in front of you and you stub your ignorant little toe later that day, the cat was the causative factor.
I'm not sure you can call what he has a belief system. Belief systems have to be based in fact.
I already did, moron, but it escaped you. Your mistake, and the mistake that the moron you cited, is a logical fallacy. Pretty common among RW retards. You assume causality when it may well not exist.
I haven’t looked into the numbers, so I won’t even go there. Much of what you hacks post are outright fabrications.
Given that, increased numbers DON’T necessarily mean votes were NOT suppressed. Nor does it mean that the intention to suppress votes was absent. That’s why the courts routinely slap these laws down those laws.
Piss off a segment of the population enough, they will compensate by coming out in droves that didn’t occur before. Other votes can still be suppressed. And are.
No they don't. For example, some people believe in astrology.
lol
I know your type, simpleton. When a black cat walks in front of you and you stub your ignorant little toe later that day, the cat was the causative factor.
Yawn! Come on loinfo. You can do better. You have a number of elections where it was shown VOTER ID laws did not effect voter turnout in numerous states. I have evidence that shows the contrary. All you can do is repeat the same tired talking point. The fact of the matter is when ANYBODY wants to vote they seem to be able to find a way to cast their vote. Additionally, you make this a race issue. Well guess what skippy. This affects white people as well. Poor whites living in appalachia or the south have the same issues as minorities. States are bending over backwards to ensure that people can vote. Some areas have mobile vans for free IDs. Simple fact of the matter is it is becoming really difficult to function in this country without a photo ID. And you loons know it.
I hate to assume but since you are trying have this discussion with me I am sure you are aware that there are various ways one can vote without an ID. You can show up at the polls, get a provisional ballot, cast your vote and then you have time before the vote count is official to prove who you are using various methods. You can also vote absentee. That's is just two.
I am also sure you are aware that there must be a method to receive a free ID so cost is not a factor. But you know that. You also know that many of the court cases you guys blindly cite were struck down not because of the ID provision but because of other factors like early voting, or how long you have after the election to prove who you are.
You know this because you are oh so smart. So please, show us something.
My state offered a free ID and a ride to get it to the 170,000 or so it identified as not having one compliant with the new laws. 25 statewide accepted. That, in itself, is a problem. How many of them that refused the offer cried about being disenfranchised because they didn't have a valid ID? Apparently the lazy POS thought that the State should have made them one and brought it to them.
While the rest of us understand that sometimes a little bit of work is required to exercise our right to do something.