Crime Project Veritas admits no voter fraud in PA for 2020 Presidential election.

[spamking]

How about this? Before putting any new law regarding election security into play, it's verified to not be driven by partisan motives that target one specific party.

Updated my previous post to address just this . . . but I will here anyway.

One more time, I'm not concerned about election security. I don't think we need new laws to deal with it. I think the identity verification requirements in place to register are sufficient. Unless a law specifies that it only applies to republicans or democrats complaining about it targeting one group or another is just that . . . complaining.

 

[Loiosh]

Updated my previous post to address just this . . . but I will here anyway.

One more time, I'm not concerned about election security. I don't think we need new laws to deal with it. I think the identity verification requirements in place to register are sufficient. Unless a law specifies that it only applies to republicans or democrats complaining about it targeting one group or another is just that . . . complaining.

So no, then? Despite the fact multiple modern laws were proven discriminatory and struck down in court after the fact, you still feel these laws should be put into play immediately and not scrutinized?

No matter how you paint your motives, you're arguing in favor of vote suppression.

HOW SHELBY COUNTY V. HOLDER BROKE DEMOCRACY

About Section 5 Of The Voting Rights Act

States Have Added Nearly 100 Restrictive Laws Since SCOTUS Gutted the Voting Rights Act 10 Years Ago

N.C. Judges Strike Down A Voter ID Law They Say Discriminates Against Black Voters

Federal Court Strikes Down Wisconsin Voter ID Law

Federal Judge Strikes Down Provisions of Georgia Voter Suppression Law S.B. 202

Supreme Court backs landmark voting rights law, strikes down Alabama congressional map

New Hampshire Supreme Court strikes down GOP-backed voter registration law

Kris Kobach’s Voter Suppression Law Was Just Struck Down in Kansas

Pennsylvania's Voter ID Law Found Unconstitutional

 

[James Eagle]

least amount of counties won, most votes EVER

 

[Andy Capp]

least amount of counties won, most votes EVER

I would respond to this but I see you're @Poon Goon's bitch now, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[James Eagle]

I would respond to this but I see you're @Poon Goon's bitch now, so I'll leave it at that.

do you even know who chip chipperson is? sock cucker

 

[Andy Capp]

do you even know who chip chipperson is? sock cucker

Got anything to say on the thread topic, bitch? Where's that proof of fraud they claimed to have in the 66 trials they lost? Oh yeah, nearly every time fraud was uncovered it was intended to benefit Trump.

LOL silly bitch

 

[James Eagle]

Got anything to say on the thread topic, bitch? Where's that proof of fraud they claimed to have in the 66 trials they lost? Oh yeah, nearly every time fraud was uncovered it was intended to benefit Trump.

LOL silly bitch

do you think you sound tough? bitch

PV was James, they kicked him out, it's no longer the same thing, old man

 

[spamking]

So no, then? Despite the fact multiple modern laws were proven discriminatory and struck down in court after the fact, you still feel these laws should be put into play immediately and not scrutinized?

No matter how you paint your motives, you're arguing in favor of vote suppression.

HOW SHELBY COUNTY V. HOLDER BROKE DEMOCRACY

About Section 5 Of The Voting Rights Act

States Have Added Nearly 100 Restrictive Laws Since SCOTUS Gutted the Voting Rights Act 10 Years Ago

N.C. Judges Strike Down A Voter ID Law They Say Discriminates Against Black Voters

Federal Court Strikes Down Wisconsin Voter ID Law

Federal Judge Strikes Down Provisions of Georgia Voter Suppression Law S.B. 202

Supreme Court backs landmark voting rights law, strikes down Alabama congressional map

New Hampshire Supreme Court strikes down GOP-backed voter registration law

Kris Kobach’s Voter Suppression Law Was Just Struck Down in Kansas

Pennsylvania's Voter ID Law Found Unconstitutional

When a Republican suggests a new law isn't it just assumed to be something in favor of Republicans? When a Democrat does the same do those assumptions suddenly change? We both know specific groups will have their opinion (like here). I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to possess certain documents to get through life. You obviously don't think they're necessary because various members of our society can't seem to figure out (it seems harder for them) how to obtain those documents and have lobbied that because of where you lived various forms of identification aren't needed. Therefore we need to cater to them and keep requirements loose to non-existent.

The last thing I'll say about this is that identity verification requirements should be the same across the US. The documentation required to register as a voter should be the same. If that means providing adults with a free birth certificate and some other verification document in order to obtain a free picture ID that's fine. At least when it's implemented folks will stop whining about how some people can't get the documentation needed to make through life as an adult, register to vote, and ultimately vote. If the birth certificate/ID aren't free, I think we should offer tax credits to people who pay for IDs and vote which would allow that money to be returned to all who vote. Maybe that would encourage more people to vote.

Voter requirements should exist and should apply to ALL voters equally. That's not a partisan take. That's something that should be common sense.

 

[Loiosh]

When a Republican suggests a new law isn't it just assumed to be something in favor of Republicans? When a Democrat does the same do those assumptions suddenly change? We both know specific groups will have their opinion (like here). I don't think it's unreasonable to expect people to possess certain documents to get through life. You obviously don't think they're necessary because various members of our society can't seem to figure out (it seems harder for them) how to obtain those documents and have lobbied that because of where you lived various forms of identification aren't needed. Therefore we need to cater to them and keep requirements loose to non-existent.

The last thing I'll say about this is that identity verification requirements should be the same across the US. The documentation required to register as a voter should be the same. If that means providing adults with a free birth certificate and some other verification document in order to obtain a free picture ID that's fine. At least when it's implemented folks will stop whining about how some people can't get the documentation needed to make through life as an adult, register to vote, and ultimately vote. If the birth certificate/ID aren't free, I think we should offer tax credits to people who pay for IDs and vote which would allow that money to be returned to all who vote. Maybe that would encourage more people to vote.

Voter requirements should exist and should apply to ALL voters equally. That's not a partisan take. That's something that should be common sense.

Go ahead and name the liberal election laws that were struck down by the courts as unconstitutional. Assuming you find any, I would have had no problem with those being screened also.

Despite a mountain of evidence against you, you support vote suppression. That's why this conversation was over a few posts back, when you refused to recommend new laws being screened it was obvious you knew what was going on and support it.

A hundred years ago you would have supported (certain people) having to guess the number of beans in a jar to vote, and you probably would have felt just as righteous.

 

[Andy Capp]

do you think you sound tough? bitch

PV was James, they kicked him out, it's no longer the same thing, old man

Well, I'm certainly old enough to remember when people used to respect their elders, @Poon Goon's bitch.

I don't give a fuck about nor know anything about your fantasy father figure; don't care. Same or different it's still 10 pounds of shit in a 5 pound bag. Seems to me like Veritas needed to come clean now or go under from the same lawsuits hitting ONN, Newsmax and the rest of those solid waste processors.

Perhaps if Faux News and done the same thing and told the truth a long time ago they wouldn't have had to pay nearly $800 million in damages.

But then, perhaps if Tucker Carlson had told his viewers that he thinks they're stupid instead of just texting his co-workers, the damage to their credibility would have limited the reputational harm they could do to Dominion Voting Systems and it wouldn't have cost them so much money. Ah well, too bad, so sad.

 

[spamking]

Go ahead and name the liberal election laws that were struck down by the courts as unconstitutional. Assuming you find any, I would have had no problem with those being screened also.

Despite a mountain of evidence against you, you support vote suppression. That's why this conversation was over a few posts back, when you refused to recommend new laws being screened it was obvious you knew what was going on and support it.

A hundred years ago you would have supported (certain people) having to guess the number of beans in a jar to vote, and you probably would have felt just as righteous.

Oh for cryin' out loud. That was a broad statement made about suggested laws in general.

Requiring eligible citizens to verify their identity when registering to vote is NOT voter suppression. The conversation was over when you ignored parts of what I've asked.

Do you NOT support identity verification (of any kind) when people register to vote? You've never bothered to touch that question.

 

[Loiosh]

Oh for cryin' out loud. That was a broad statement made about suggested laws in general.

Requiring eligible citizens to verify their identity when registering to vote is NOT voter suppression. The conversation was over when you ignored parts of what I've asked.

Do you NOT support identity verification (of any kind) when people register to vote? You've never bothered to touch that question.

It's almost as if you aren't paying attention and ignored the articles I linked and the raw tonnage of discriminatory measures the GOP implemented as soon as the VRA was gutted.

You said you didn't think there was fraud but you want measures because... Reasons?

You didn't even take the easy win by saying you'd be OK with screening new laws before implementing them. I'd be OK with that too. The only reason to not be immediately OK with that is you want them to disenfranchise people. Like that's the whole point.

I'm Canadian and I need ID to vote. When I didn't have any, I provided a couple of bills.

ID isn't a big deal and doesn't make much of a difference. You need to have your name registered and the penalties are so severe the risk to reward ratio is prohibitive. Nobody's rigging elections this way any more.

 

[spamking]

It's almost as if you aren't paying attention and ignored the articles I linked and the raw tonnage of discriminatory measures the GOP implemented as soon as the VRA was gutted.

What exactly should I be paying attention to? I did completely ignore them . . . I think we all should verify our identity in order to vote. All of us.

You said you didn't think there was fraud but you want measures because... Reasons?

I said I expect every eligible voter to provide a means to verify their identity when they register . . . for their FREE voter ID.

You didn't even take the easy win by saying you'd be OK with screening new laws before implementing them. I'd be OK with that too. The only reason to not be immediately OK with that is you want them to disenfranchise people. Like that's the whole point.

We don't need to new laws. But if they get proposed unless they specifically state that they don't apply to everyone the I don't give them a second thought. But screen away if it makes you feel better. What we need is for people to verify their identity when they register to vote to prove they are an eligible voter. If a person can't figure out a way to verify their identity when they register to vote they've got bigger issues in life.

I'm Canadian and I need ID to vote. When I didn't have any, I provided a couple of bills.

And? You weren't issued a voter ID card that reflected your name, party affiliation and voting location? I know identity verification differs among the states, but providing various forms of identification is also and option to prove your identity when you register to vote . . . for that free voter ID.

ID isn't a big deal and doesn't make much of a difference.

So why fight against it? Getting one is a pretty common thing for most adults.

You need to have your name registered and the penalties are so severe the risk to reward ratio is prohibitive. Nobody's rigging elections this way any more.

And I want "you" to be able to prove your identity when you get registered.

 

[Loiosh]

What exactly should I be paying attention to? I did completely ignore them . . . I think we all should verify our identity in order to vote. All of us.



I said I expect every eligible voter to provide a means to verify their identity when they register . . . for their FREE voter ID.



We don't need to new laws. But if they get proposed unless they specifically state that they don't apply to everyone the I don't give them a second thought. But screen away if it makes you feel better. What we need is for people to verify their identity when they register to vote to prove they are an eligible voter. If a person can't figure out a way to verify their identity when they register to vote they've got bigger issues in life.



And? You weren't issued a voter ID card that reflected your name, party affiliation and voting location? I know identity verification differs among the states, but providing various forms of identification is also and option to prove your identity when you register to vote . . . for that free voter ID.



So why fight against it? Getting one is a pretty common thing for most adults.



And I want "you" to be able to prove your identity when you get registered.

The only reason I keep talking about this is the avalanche of crooked GOP laws that are eventually thrown out after they've already altered multiple elections.

And of course the new laws don't say "fuck you, black people" but when they're examined it's determined they do in fact target black people. They're only implemented in places the GOP has determined they'll have that effect.

Look, I know you're a smart guy, I've seen you navigate the labyrinthian maze of firearms legislation. I've never commented on your contributions there because I don't have the expertise to add anything and it's clear you know what you're talking about. I read and hopefully learn.

I know you understand what I'm saying and why I'm saying it. Like I said, I have no problem with them securing elections with new laws but the last decade has shown us they MUST be screened first.

 

[UFCUCF]

It's too bad that this is what our country has become. Democrats would do the same if Trump or whoever was in office too.

That’s some lame whataboutism. You didn’t even bring up a time the other side did this. It is wrong for both sides to do this, if correct. Here the Rs and Trump are doing it. This is worthy of criticism, no?

Telling that you didn’t have an example of the Dems reversing themselves this badly just to deny Trump a victory, off the top of your head, right?

 

[spamking]

That’s some lame whataboutism. You didn’t even bring up a time the other side did this. It is wrong for both sides to do this, if correct. Here the Rs and Trump are doing it. This is worthy of criticism, no?

Telling that you didn’t have an example of the Dems reversing themselves this badly just to deny Trump a victory, off the top of your head, right?

Oh boo hoo . . . you want an example of when the Democrats refused to work with Republicans to pass major legislation? That's what I was referring to. You can Google it just like I can.

Has there ever been a specific situation exactly like the border issue? Heck if I know.

Criticize all you want.

 

[MicroBrew]

I'm going to have to disagree. I don't know that I've seen anyone claim that no ID verification is required to register. It obviously is something required. Which leads to the registrant being issued a FREE voter ID which should be required to be presented when voting.

"Voter ID laws can stop multiple types of fraud, such as impersonating another registered voter, preventing noncitizens from voting, and stopping out-of-state residents or someone registered in multiple jurisdictions. ... That’s one reason why voters across all demographics support voter ID laws in virtually every poll by almost 80%. This typically includes more than 60% of Democrats ... according to a poll conducted by the Honest Elections Project."[3]

- Fred Lucas, The Heritage Foundation (2023)​

Arguments for and against voter identification laws

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

--
It's been a common meme from the Republican side that without voter ID laws people who are not legally eligible to vote - like illegal immigrants and non permanent residents - can vote. The argument is that massive fraud will take place without voter ID laws.

 

[spamking]

"Voter ID laws can stop multiple types of fraud, such as impersonating another registered voter, preventing noncitizens from voting, and stopping out-of-state residents or someone registered in multiple jurisdictions. ... That’s one reason why voters across all demographics support voter ID laws in virtually every poll by almost 80%. This typically includes more than 60% of Democrats ... according to a poll conducted by the Honest Elections Project."[3]

- Fred Lucas, The Heritage Foundation (2023)​

Arguments for and against voter identification laws

Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics

ballotpedia.org

--
It's been a common meme from the Republican side that without voter ID laws people who are not legally eligible to vote - like illegal immigrants and non permanent residents - can vote. The argument is that massive fraud will take place without voter ID laws.

I've already moved on from this thread . . . but I think I've already addressed this several times. It all runs together at this point.

Do you support NOT requiring identity verification of eligible voters for them to register? The argument is that only those folks who are eligible should be able to register. I've already said I'm not concerned with fraud. What I am concerned with is anyone who thinks voter registration should basically be a free-for-all. People who prove their identity and eligibility upon registration should be given a FREE voter ID that would then be required to be presented when voting in-person.

 

[MicroBrew]

I've already moved on from this thread . . . but I think I've already addressed this several times. It all runs together at this point.

Do you support NOT requiring identity verification of eligible voters for them to register? The argument is that only those folks who are eligible should be able to register. I've already said I'm not concerned with fraud. What I am concerned with is anyone who thinks voter registration should basically be a free-for-all. People who prove their identity and eligibility upon registration should be given a FREE voter ID that would then be required to be presented when voting in-person.

I don't have an issue with requiring a peson prove who they are - i.e. they are eligible to vote - in order to receive a ballot. My earlier posts were about how the GOP meme made it sound like voting doesn't already require identification, as if it was soo lax that non eligible voters could easily vote.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Got anything to say on the thread topic, bitch? Where's that proof of fraud they claimed to have in the 66 trials they lost? Oh yeah, nearly every time fraud was uncovered it was intended to benefit Trump.

LOL silly bitch

relax young grasshopper. one must crawl before they learn to hop. the proof is coming any day now. just not today. you see, the evidence has been coming in so fast that we can hardly keep up.

and they lost 65 lawsuits. out of the 66 post-election litigation lawsuits that were filed, they managed to win 1 of them and get a little over a hundred late ballots in pennsylvania thrown out. suck on that libtards. sure it might have been a microscopic fraction out of the millions of votes that they tried to throw out in the name of democracy of course, but it was still a win. all we do is win win win no matter what.