Alflives Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 20 minutes ago, mpt said: I never said it applies to voting for the president. Its still ridiculous and the trend is continuing across America. It does apply for municipal elections, like in Portland. It is also true that the left’s push for DACA and dreamers to become automatic citizens would make them eligible to vote in all elections Clearly non-citizens (those who are considered illegally in a country) should not have the right to vote. However, governments (obviously) do attempt to stay in control of power, by changing voting rules, standards, and boundaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 On 2018-09-23 at 9:51 PM, Kragar said: Snore. Regardless of how deliberate this is, let's ask this important question: how much does it really matter? I read somewhere over 3 million Americans don't have government photo ID. Assuming they are all voting age, that is about 1.5% of eligible voters. Not a large margin here. The latest report I read stated the numbers to be a bit higher. But the funny thing was it showed that this affected more white votes overall than black votes, by about 2 million people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said: I guess it comes down to whether you believe that a political party actively attempting to keep certain demographics from voting is a "big deal". IMO, it is. As far as your last sentence goes, I don't think the 2nd amendment calls requires the government "make it easier" to get guns. It's my opinion that gun ownership has "evolved" since the original text was written and that the current state of affairs could not have been foreseen by the FF. I also believe they'd be appalled if they could see what the 2nd amendment has engendered. It is therefore left to the courts to interpret and that means that (once again) the politics of the SCOTUS justices comes into play. DC vs Heller was a 5-4 decision and was made pretty much along party lines. There is even mention of "The Scalia majority" in texts on the case. Even so,that decision affirmed that the right to bear arms is not unlimited: This is and has always been my position on gun ownership: The laws quoted in article (2) need to be expanded/strengthened in certain areas. I've already stated in multiple threads what areas I believe they should be. I won't reopen that debate ITT. It is a big deal to the individual, and some of the actions of some people to infringe upon that is wrong. However, the impact of that pales in regard to the larger and ongoing efforts by the other side to import voters. That 3 million number you toss around is about the impact of the failed Simpson Mazzoli act (aka Reagan amnesty). I wonder what it takes to confirm that those people applying to get a gun to prove they qualify. Perhaps some form of valid photo ID? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 38 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: The latest report I read stated the numbers to be a bit higher. But the funny thing was it showed that this affected more white votes overall than black votes, by about 2 million people. Probably, but those complaining about this will focus on how it adversely affects minorities. If the ratio is more than 5:1 white to black, then that blows a big hole in their argument, but I suspect the ratio is lower. But, those white people who are too far away from the DMV, and can't afford it, I wonder how many of those rural people would be Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 we need to stop the billions of dead people voting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckster19 Posted September 25, 2018 Author Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Alflives said: Clearly non-citizens (those who are considered illegally in a country) should not have the right to vote. However, governments (obviously) do attempt to stay in control of power, by changing voting rules, standards, and boundaries. In Sweden non citizens are allowed to vote in municipal and district elections, but not federal. We can also vote in referendums. Municipal elections here are actually quite important, they wield a lot of power. I do sort of agree though that you should be a citizen to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Kragar said: It is a big deal to the individual, and some of the actions of some people to infringe upon that is wrong. However, the impact of that pales in regard to the larger and ongoing efforts by the other side to import voters. That 3 million number you toss around is about the impact of the failed Simpson Mazzoli act (aka Reagan amnesty). I wonder what it takes to confirm that those people applying to get a gun to prove they qualify. Perhaps some form of valid photo ID? I think it's more a case of disqualifying certain people. (and certain weapons/ammo) As I've stated before a history of violent crime, (including domestic abuse) should be a red flag. As should be mental illness, with any demonstration of psychotic breaks. It would take some doing to set up a system/database to make this happen, but I believe the effort would be worthwhile. And yes, I agree that photo ID should be required. That being said, I don't believe that ownership of deadly weapons and the ability to cast a vote are analogous. It also seems to me that the current administration (and many Americans) have it backwards. They think that one of these things is a major problem, when it's really the other.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, Kragar said: Probably, but those complaining about this will focus on how it adversely affects minorities. If the ratio is more than 5:1 white to black, then that blows a big hole in their argument, but I suspect the ratio is lower. Yeah that’s exactly what will be said. But unfortunately for them ratios don’t mean a lot in voting. A vote from a white person has the exact same 1 to 1 value as a black/brown/purple person. Quote But, those white people who are too far away from the DMV, and can't afford it, I wonder how many of those rural people would be Republican. Agreed. In the overall scheme of things, this change likely hurts the Republicans votes more than it does the Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 16 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: Yeah that’s exactly what will be said. But unfortunately for them ratios don’t mean a lot in voting. A vote from a white person has the exact same 1 to 1 value as a black/brown/purple person. Agreed. In the overall scheme of things, this change likely hurts the Republicans votes more than it does the Democrats. I won't go that far. I can believe the insinuation that this would hard Dems more, but not as much as some might think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Here's a more scientific way of looking at it: https://www.wired.com/story/voter-id-law-algorithm/ As the article states, Kragar's point of the problem not being a severe as some might make it out to be is accurate, but it still is a problem and it disproportionally affects minorities. Quote Once Hersh and Ansolabehere were confident they had properly matched registered voters to their ID records, they used a commercial tool called Catalist to predict each voter's race. That tool analyzes names to determine how likely a given name is to be associated with one race or another. It also accounts for the demographics of the Census block where a given voter lives. Using this tool, the researchers confirmed what voting rights advocates already know to be true—that black voters are more likely to lack adequate identification under voter ID laws. According to the study, 3.6 percent of registered white voters had no match in any state or federal ID database. By contrast, 7.5 percent of black registered voters were missing from those databases. The algorithm shows a clear and disturbing racial disparity on voting rights. But Hersh says that it also shows that voter ID laws affect a relatively small percentage of the population. Across all registered voters in Texas, the researchers found 4.5 percent lack proper identification. For registered voters who actually showed up at the polls in 2012, it's 1.5 percent. "You're down to a small percentage of the population that doesn't have an ID," says Hersh. That's one reason why, despite Alabama's restrictive voter ID law, black turnout in the recent Senate election still exceeded expectations. Still, while the percentages may sound small, that 4.5 percent still represents 608,470 Texas citizens who could potentially be disenfranchised. Hersh says he agrees the public ought to be outraged by racially motivated attempts to suppress the vote, and that courts ought to crack down on the practice. But he cautions against Democrats artificially inflating the impact of voter ID laws in their messaging. Shortly after the 2016 election, Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin attributed the entire dropoff in voter turnout in Wisconsin to the state's new voter ID law. Hersh points to plenty of other reasons why voter turnout may have been down in Wisconsin in 2016, including the simple fact that Hillary Clinton didn't campaign in Wisconsin. "It ... can be dangerous to sow doubt in the integrity of the election system with these big claims," Hersh says. Besides, the raw data is bad enough. And Hersh's findings are limited to Texas. In other states with less of a car culture and more densely populated cities, the number of people who lack ID may be as high as 10 percent, MIT's Stewart explains. And because this study only looks at voters who are currently registered, Stewart says, it doesn't take into account the discouraging effects that voter ID laws may have on people attempting to register in the first place. "Whether it’s intended to harm 600,000 African American and Latino voters or 2 million, our concern is people are passing these laws with the intent to discriminate or the effect of discriminating," says Deuel Ross, a civil rights attorney for the Legal Defense Fund. Now, science is bringing people like Ross that much closer to proving it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 59 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said: I think it's more a case of disqualifying certain people. (and certain weapons/ammo) As I've stated before a history of violent crime, (including domestic abuse) should be a red flag. As should be mental illness, with any demonstration of psychotic breaks. It would take some doing to set up a system/database to make this happen, but I believe the effort would be worthwhile. And yes, I agree that photo ID should be required. That being said, I don't believe that ownership of deadly weapons and the ability to cast a vote are analogous. It also seems to me that the current administration (and many Americans) have it backwards. They think that one of these things is a major problem, when it's really the other.... I've agreed, more or less, on the disqualifying factors you tend to support, so no need for us to go further there, or rehash our differences. Regarding the analogy, well, you're entitled to your opinion. Those who would still be able get around any ID requirements to vote, based on the details I provided earlier, would not in similar instances be able to legally buy a gun, because those other methods to allow voting would not (and in most/all cases should not) be acceptable for gun purchases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ilunga Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 5 hours ago, mpt said: I think its crazy that you don’t even have to be a citizen to vote in the USA. This is the main reason the left wants open borders and are fighting for DACA and the dreamers. Unlimited election wins by non citizens. Do you honestly believe this statement ? Since 1996 there has been a federal law prohibiting non citisens from voting in federal elections. This law does have a couple of exemptions however your statement is ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 To not indulge too deep into this conversation.... In an age where identity theft seems to run rampant, I think a photo ID should be required for just about anything. I think there should be a small fee for ID's as long as those fees are actually being used for the improving or maintaining of civil services. I've seen people with no shoelaces nor an ID proceed to buy $24 worth of scratch off lottery tickets....it kinda makes me wonder how many people don't have an ID, not because of financial constraints, but rather just a lack of effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBH1926 Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 If you do not have an ID, let’s speculate what you would not be able to do. To be fair, it is possible for others to do some of these things for you, or if you are old enough they won’t card you Lot of states require photo ID for welfare and Medicare. Can not get a gun without photo ID? Can not buy tobacco, liquor or visit a casino Travel on a plane Drive a car or rent one Fill out I-9 to get a job Get married Buy certain meds Stay at a hotel Get a fishing/hunting license Open a bank account Most schools require photo ID’s Police asks for an ID Go to doctors office Establish utility account Pawn stuff Travel with metra Visit federal buildings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skolozsy2 Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 4 hours ago, CBH1926 said: If you do not have an ID, let’s speculate what you would not be able to do. To be fair, it is possible for others to do some of these things for you, or if you are old enough they won’t card you Lot of states require photo ID for welfare and Medicare. Can not get a gun without photo ID? Can not buy tobacco, liquor or visit a casino Travel on a plane Drive a car or rent one Fill out I-9 to get a job Get married Buy certain meds Stay at a hotel Get a fishing/hunting license Open a bank account Most schools require photo ID’s Police asks for an ID Go to doctors office Establish utility account Pawn stuff Travel with metra Visit federal buildings So does that mean ALL these industries are systematically suppressing black people by asking for an ID.... .....or is it only when the government requires one to vote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 On 9/25/2018 at 8:36 AM, ForsbergTheGreat said: The latest report I read stated the numbers to be a bit higher. But the funny thing was it showed that this affected more white votes overall than black votes, by about 2 million people. don't go pulling up fact or you might hurt some snowflake feelings. This whole article is left wing crap news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 8 minutes ago, 5Fivehole0 said: don't go pulling up fact or you might hurt some snowflake feelings. This whole article is left wing crap news. Strange that the vast majority of the time anyone mentions feelings it is a person with a "right wing" view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 On 9/25/2018 at 8:19 AM, Alflives said: Clearly non-citizens (those who are considered illegally in a country) should not have the right to vote. However, governments (obviously) do attempt to stay in control of power, by changing voting rules, standards, and boundaries. I'm not so sure that it's all that clear....my main criterion would be, "Do they pay taxes?" There's an old saying that goes "No taxation without representation".....pretty sure the Yanks fought a war about that one.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldoescobar Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 36 minutes ago, gurn said: Strange that the vast majority of the time anyone mentions feelings it is a person with a "right wing" view. Pretty much... Just so much projection its hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5Fivehole0 Posted September 26, 2018 Share Posted September 26, 2018 45 minutes ago, gurn said: Strange that the vast majority of the time anyone mentions feelings it is a person with a "right wing" view. Strange that I'm not conservative, I am neutral with a slight right lean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.