Tyranny Of Another Democrat Appointed Judge!

[Hagar]

2 hours ago, UT alum said:

You have to prove who you are when you register. You keep confusing registration and voting. Laws exist for ID to be presented when registering. 

I notice no one has commented about the story that launched this thread. The Republican Secretary of State had to apologize to the Republican legislature for providing faulty data. I’ll bet not one of you read the judge’s order.

Sorry, but whoever uses that registration should be required to show ID.  Simply requiring possession of a voter registration in no way proves you’re the same person.  Hmmm, that’s probably the same reason Security at Airports require one, or 7-11’s if you want to buy tobacco.  Btw, I’ve been voting. 50 years, and been ask for my ID every time.  Guess what?  I’ve always had it.  Imo, you should either have it, or not vote, and that’s for Repubs or Dems.  Mail in ballots are for another discussion.

[UT alum]

1 hour ago, Englebert said:

So it is an undue hardship to have a person obtain an ID but not an undue hardship to actually make a person come down to a polling station to cast a vote? Is it an undue hardship to require an ID to obtain government benefits?

I'm curious, should the government force a person to show ID to vote? Should a person be subjected to a background check in order to qualify to vote? Should a person be required to attend a mandatory education class on how to vote (and pay for privilege of taking the class)? Should a person be required to carry around documentation of this government sanctioned education course to exercise their right to vote? Should a person be stripped of their right to vote if found guilty of particular crimes? Should a person with mental disabilities be allowed to vote? If all/any of these things were to come to fruition, would you complain that the people's right to vote would be infringed?

That is all up to the several states.

[UT alum]

22 minutes ago, Hagar said:

Sorry, but whoever uses that registration should be required to show ID.  Simply requiring possession of a voter registration in no way proves you’re the same person.  Hmmm, that’s probably the same reason Security at Airports require one, or 7-11’s if you want to buy tobacco.  Btw, I’ve been voting. 50 years, and been ask for my ID every time.  Guess what?  I’ve always had it.  Imo, you should either have it, or not vote, and that’s for Repubs or Dems.  Mail in ballots are for another discussion.

You must not have been carrying your registration card. 

[UT alum]

52 minutes ago, stevenash said:

If the Russians tried to destabilize our democracy, did they only do it in this past presidential election?  How about the two elections before the last one?

How about them?

[Englebert]

11 minutes ago, UT alum said:

That is all up to the several states.

Would this be considered voter suppression in your eyes?

[UT alum]

8 minutes ago, Englebert said:

Would this be considered voter suppression in your eyes?

I think the education issue is settled. Literacy is not a prerequisite to vote. People convicted of certain crimes (felonies) are prohibited from voting. I have personally assisted people with Downs Syndrome to vote. I don’t really get your point.

[Englebert]

4 minutes ago, UT alum said:

I think the education issue is settled. Literacy is not a prerequisite to vote. People convicted of certain crimes (felonies) are prohibited from voting. I have personally assisted people with Downs Syndrome to vote. I don’t really get your point.

My point is...why is one considered oppression but not the other? Why are so many "undue burdens" perfectly acceptable for exercising one's second amendment right of self protection, but just the mention of identifying yourself at a voting booth is tantamount to extreme suppression of rights (according to the Liberal position)? Is having the ability to protect yourself not as important as the ability to select your representative?

[UT alum]

20 minutes ago, Englebert said:

My point is...why is one considered oppression but not the other? Why are so many "undue burdens" perfectly acceptable for exercising one's second amendment right of self protection, but just the mention of identifying yourself at a voting booth is tantamount to extreme suppression of rights (according to the Liberal position)? Is having the ability to protect yourself not as important as the ability to select your representative?

Well, I’d say 25,000+ gun deaths per year as opposed to virtually zero in person voter fraud charges among millions and millions of votes cast is a pretty good reason.

[Englebert]

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

Well, I’d say 25,000+ gun deaths per year as opposed to virtually zero in person voter fraud charges among millions and millions of votes cast is a pretty good reason.

How many people are saved per year because they exercised their right of self protection?

Of those 25,000+ gun deaths, how many are suicides?

How many people are unnecessarily put in difficult, life altering situations because incompetent people are allowed to choose incompetent people to govern? 

How many people speed on the highways versus how many speeding tickets are issued? If you don't see a high rate of recorded violations, does that mean the crime is not happening?

And again, why is the infringement of one's ability of self protection not considered oppression, but simple identifying oneself is considered an undue burden for someone's ability to choose our representatives...people who govern over not just themselves?

[stevenash]

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

How about them?

Avoiding the question by asking one.  Did, in your opinion, the Russians interfere only in the past election or have they been doing so for some time? I am assuming that , if you "know" there was interference recently, you would also "know" about the prior two elections.
See if you can give a direct answer rather than a diversionary response.

[UT alum]

10 minutes ago, stevenash said:

Avoiding the question by asking one.  Did, in your opinion, the Russians interfere only in the past election or have they been doing so for some time? I am assuming that , if you "know" there was interference recently, you would also "know" about the prior two elections.
See if you can give a direct answer rather than a diversionary response.

I figure they’ve been trying since the Cold War began. The hyper-use of social media  in the 2016 election gave them an ease of access  to the process they hadn’t known before. Facebook use has more than doubled since 2012 and Twitter almost fivefold.

[stevenash]

6 minutes ago, UT alum said:

I figure they’ve been trying since the Cold War began. The hyper-use of social media  in the 2016 election gave them an ease of access  to the process they hadn’t known before. Facebook use has more than doubled since 2012 and Twitter almost fivefold.

so, if they have been involved for many many years, this election was as legitimate as any other, right?

[UT alum]

1 hour ago, stevenash said:

so, if they have been involved for many many years, this election was as legitimate as any other, right?

You didn’t read my answer. This election is as legitimate as any, unless Mueller’s report has evidence of collusion. Maybe not Trump, but his campaign operatives. To ignore the fact that Russians are getting closer to having undue influence on our politics is to do so at our own peril. 

As an aside, ad hominem attacks on critics is oftentimes a sign of a weak defense, if not outright guilt.

[UT alum]

1 hour ago, stevenash said:

so, if they have been involved for many many years, this election was as legitimate as any other, right?

You have to understand, from my point of view Clinton ran a crap campaign. Arrogant overconfidence proved her undoing.

Same with Al Gore in 2000. Had he won his home state, hanging chads would have been irrelevant. Democrats spent too much time crying over that one instead of getting on with business.

Will Republicans cry like Democrats if Trump is defeated in 2020? My guess is yes.

[Englebert]

23 minutes ago, UT alum said:

You have to understand, from my point of view Clinton ran a crap campaign. Arrogant overconfidence proved her undoing.

Same with Al Gore in 2000. Had he won his home state, hanging chads would have been irrelevant. Democrats spent too much time crying over that one instead of getting on with business.

Will Republicans cry like Democrats if Trump is defeated in 2020? My guess is yes.

Republicans did not cry like Democrats....well, ever...even when Obama shockingly won re-election in 2012.

[UT alum]

4 minutes ago, Englebert said:

Republicans did not cry like Democrats....well, ever...even when Obama shockingly won re-election in 2012.

It may have been shocking, but it wasn’t close. If he had lost the popular vote and won on the strength of 70000 votes spread over 3 states, I shudder to think of the outcry.

[Englebert]

4 minutes ago, UT alum said:

It may have been shocking, but it wasn’t close. If he had lost the popular vote and won on the strength of 70000 votes spread over 3 states, I shudder to think of the outcry.

Not suggesting it was that close, but the point was that Republicans didn't cry and retreat to safe spaces, or scream at the sky, or even devise a backup plan to unseat Obama. Your suggestion that Republicans will cry like Democrats when they don't get their way seems to have no merit.

[UT alum]

1 hour ago, Englebert said:

Not suggesting it was that close, but the point was that Republicans didn't cry and retreat to safe spaces, or scream at the sky, or even devise a backup plan to unseat Obama. Your suggestion that Republicans will cry like Democrats when they don't get their way seems to have no merit.

Wait and see if he loses. He’ll blame everyone else, and from what I’ve seen you all will be right along with him.

[LumRaiderFan]

8 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Wait and see if he loses. He’ll blame everyone else, and from what I’ve seen you all will be right along with him.

Doubtful, your side is the one that simply can’t accept defeat.

And he will win again, we’re not so far gone as to vote in any of the loons on your side.

[Englebert]

35 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Wait and see if he loses. He’ll blame everyone else, and from what I’ve seen you all will be right along with him.

Your analytical skills are severely lacking to the point of non-existent. What makes you think I will cry like a Liberal? Please, show me some evidence. I will no doubt go in the gutter with any Liberal that drags me there in a so-called "debate", but I do not cry or scream at the sky about a political defeat...unlike your side...as well-documented. So again, please show some evidence that leads you to the comical conclusion that I will act in that childish fashion if Trump loses. I guess grasping at straws and trying to see what sticks is your only evidence of trying to twist things to fit your delusional reality. And you made the comment on another thread that you were a realist...how funny.

[baddog]

4 hours ago, UT alum said:

Well, I’d say 25,000+ gun deaths per year as opposed to virtually zero in person voter fraud charges among millions and millions of votes cast is a pretty good reason.

Would it make you feel any better if they were pushed out of windows?

[UT alum]

37 minutes ago, Englebert said:

Your analytical skills are severely lacking to the point of non-existent. What makes you think I will cry like a Liberal? Please, show me some evidence. I will no doubt go in the gutter with any Liberal that drags me there in a so-called "debate", but I do not cry or scream at the sky about a political defeat...unlike your side...as well-documented. So again, please show some evidence that leads you to the comical conclusion that I will act in that childish fashion if Trump loses. I guess grasping at straws and trying to see what sticks is your only evidence of trying to twist things to fit your delusional reality. And you made the comment on another thread that you were a realist...how funny.

If you don’t think Trump will declare th election rigged if he loses, then it’s you who are delusional. Trump is head of Republican Party, so if he cries foul the party cries foul. I said nothing about you specifically.

[UT alum]

29 minutes ago, baddog said:

Would it make you feel any better if they were pushed out of windows?

No. I’d say window safety would need to be re-evaluated.

[LumRaiderFan]

7 minutes ago, UT alum said:

No. I’d say window safety would need to be re-evaluated.

Hmmm, wouldn’t we want to look at the pusher before blaming the window?

Same old gun argument.

[UT alum]

22 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Hmmm, wouldn’t we want to look at the pusher before blaming the window?

Same old gun argument.

Both, but if window shoving was that pervasive, window safety would have to be improved in addition to vigorous prosecution of the shovers.