ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Posts: 8416
Oct 27 14 8:13 AM
Interact
Posts: 2949
Nov 1 14 10:38 PM
Owner
Posts: 555
Nov 4 14 4:53 PM
Shadowmane2000 wrote:That was a bigoted statement. I guess there are bigots that come here often.
Posts: 895
Nov 14 14 9:51 AM
An intellectually honest liberal
Posts: 16876
Nov 14 14 3:37 PM
BostonDave wrote:Or the people who've tried to suppress their vote forever.
Nov 15 14 7:47 PM
VXerick wrote:BostonDave wrote:Or the people who've tried to suppress their vote forever.Oh, I don't know. I kinda think that keeping some people from voting is better for the country than encouraging some people to vote more than once.
Nov 16 14 2:59 AM
BostonDave wrote:VXerick wrote:BostonDave wrote:Or the people who've tried to suppress their vote forever.Oh, I don't know. I kinda think that keeping some people from voting is better for the country than encouraging some people to vote more than once. Well there you have it it seems. Conservatives would rather disenfranchise someone who wants to vote than risk the rare instance of someone voting more than once. I would sincerely want the person who has a will to vote to excersize that most important franchise in our country, even if it means some will exploit it.
Nov 16 14 10:55 AM
Nov 17 14 7:40 AM
VXerick wrote:BostonDave wrote:VXerick wrote:BostonDave wrote:Or the people who've tried to suppress their vote forever.Oh, I don't know. I kinda think that keeping some people from voting is better for the country than encouraging some people to vote more than once. Well there you have it it seems. Conservatives would rather disenfranchise someone who wants to vote than risk the rare instance of someone voting more than once. I would sincerely want the person who has a will to vote to excersize that most important franchise in our country, even if it means some will exploit it.Actually what I really think is that there should be a test before people are handed a ballot. Something with teeth in it that expects people to know something about their country. I don't believe Civics is any longer a subject taught in public schools. Why not? Not that it would help much now that the curriculum has been saturated with political correctness. As far as that rare instance of double, triple or more votes by one person, I believe it happens quite often, especially with the advent of absentee and early voting. People can move about from one area to another and cast votes multiple times in various locations. Even with voter ID, as far as I know there is no database of voters that covers the entire country and no precinct workers checking each voter against it. I can understand why Dems don't want Voter ID. It would ruin their vote cheating practices. It isn't enough that they have voting machines calibrated to turn Republican votes to Democrats. They want to ensure their dead voters don't lose out on their chance to vote.
Nov 17 14 1:15 PM
BostonDave wrote:VXerick wrote:BostonDave wrote:VXerick wrote:BostonDave wrote:Or the people who've tried to suppress their vote forever.Oh, I don't know. I kinda think that keeping some people from voting is better for the country than encouraging some people to vote more than once. Well there you have it it seems. Conservatives would rather disenfranchise someone who wants to vote than risk the rare instance of someone voting more than once. I would sincerely want the person who has a will to vote to excersize that most important franchise in our country, even if it means some will exploit it.Actually what I really think is that there should be a test before people are handed a ballot. Something with teeth in it that expects people to know something about their country. I don't believe Civics is any longer a subject taught in public schools. Why not? Not that it would help much now that the curriculum has been saturated with political correctness. As far as that rare instance of double, triple or more votes by one person, I believe it happens quite often, especially with the advent of absentee and early voting. People can move about from one area to another and cast votes multiple times in various locations. Even with voter ID, as far as I know there is no database of voters that covers the entire country and no precinct workers checking each voter against it. I can understand why Dems don't want Voter ID. It would ruin their vote cheating practices. It isn't enough that they have voting machines calibrated to turn Republican votes to Democrats. They want to ensure their dead voters don't lose out on their chance to vote.Yes bring back the good old days of literacy tests to vote. Conservatives have always sought means to suppress the vote. VoterId is just their latest ploy, but trying to stop certain groups from voting is something they've been consistent about for hundreds of years.
What can people do by themselves if they can't obtain a free photo ID? Isn't it one degree more difficult than getting your clothes on in the morning.
Nov 17 14 2:56 PM
Nov 17 14 3:49 PM
Nov 20 14 6:34 PM
Posts: 38
Dec 30 14 7:08 PM
Posts: 2686
Jan 1 15 12:17 AM
Jan 2 15 2:27 PM
Jan 4 15 10:30 AM
Jan 4 15 11:59 AM
Shadowmane2000 wrote:As far as voting goes, I think voting should take place over the course of a weekend. That weekend should be declared a national holiday. The polls should open at 7am Friday morning and close at 7pm Sunday evening. Voting should be compulsory. If you don't vote, you get fined. Positive identification should be made to ensure "one person, one vote". That positive identification should be in the form of a state issued driver's license or ID. Something the bulk of the population already have (except in California, where they give anyone, no matter whether they are native born or not, a license). One additional requirement I would add. You cannot vote in unless you own land. A condo in the city would qualify, provided the potential voter owns it. Of course, that would disqualify quite a few of the useful idiots who vote based on media sensationalism, but that would be a loss to no one. As far as felons. They get their voting rights back when their sentence is done anyway. If you want to make them suffer the rest of their life, then you can make a law that disqualifies them from voting. They already have their 2nd Amendment rights taken from them until they apply for them back after 7 years.
Jan 4 15 12:42 PM
Jan 4 15 2:12 PM
suburban refugee wrote:Scalise has already admitted he spoke in front of the group, but the latest excuse is that he didn't know they were a white supremacist group formed by David Duke. As excuses go, it's a pretty weak one. And VX, felons are disenfranchised long after their release. Some states have offices that are supposedly there to assist them in getting their voting rights back, but they're dysfunctional, underfunded, and few actually do get to become voters again. It's something that should concern people, perhaps even more than complaining about the inconvenience of getting a gun.