How does your feeble liberal brain feel about the message now?
Syskatine don’t take my word for it
- Thread starter HighStickHarry
- Start date
Talk blacks in places like IL to stop voting Democrat.
Get them jobs. Lowest black unemployment in history.
So you can’t...got it lol.
“Most pro-black President in history”...I guess the pastor just decided to gloss over that Justice Department lawsuit back in the day huh haha
Actually, no. Obama was terrible with black unemployment rate.
You should join us in not enabling him to spread his retardinoma to every thread.
Nice background music. Is that me or is there real subtle background music?
Is that one of NZ's 2blacks4Trumpgod.com guys?
Wanna debate racism in the parties? Can't go ad hominem, gotta stay on the issues.
Sure let’s debate the hearts and minds of 200 million people.
I think black people can get id’s.
You?
I think it's just another attempt to disenfranchise them. You? Is there a problem with black voter fraud?
I’m not sure about the demographics of voter fraud.
How does it disenfranchise them? Is it a skin color thing or an economic thing?
I missed the word “another.” Is there a list?
I have noticed gerrymandering has become bad all of the sudden after decades of its practice. I hope you aren’t jumping in that media narrative.
I have noticed gerrymandering has become bad all of the sudden after decades of its practice. I hope you aren’t jumping in that media narrative.
Well what problem are we trying to solve if not disenfranchisement?
If it keeps a small % from voting it can have a big cumulative effect.
Is it their skin color, culture or is it just lower economic people in general?
The thing that keeps them from getting id’s. What specifically makes them less likely to be able to acquire legal identification?
I guess we will get to this question tomorrow. I’m really interested in the answer. No one on the news ever answers me back when I ask them.
Because they're inferior to white people? Is that what you're getting at?
Your turn. What's the objective if there's no problem with voter fraud?
Answer the question seriously. What is it that keeps them from the dmv. We can’t move on until you do.
I’ve already stated I think they are just as capable of getting an Id as anyone else. I have to get to this nuance of your argument.
I do not know whether they are or are not. You are assuming facts of which I am unaware. If your assumptions are true, I do not know. I have heard that fewer black people have driver's licenses because they do not own Vehicles, so that is an additional hurdle. Or, perhaps they are just lazy, as you are suggesting.
I have tried my best to answer your question. Now my question is what voter fraud are we worried about? If there is not voter fraud, what is the motivation here? I want to find out the objective of this.
Look if you want to continue our low brow back and forths i can play that game obviously. If you want to have a conversation then stop this shit.
Democrats used gerrymandering for decades to entrench themselves. Now that it's being used by someone else, they cry.
The premise of this debate is that requiring an Id (not necessarily a drivers license) suppresses the black vote. It keeps them from voting disproportionately to their racial counter parts. I just want to know why you think that is.
My argument is all sewn up nice and neat. I think all people are the same and each individual, if it meant enough to them could get an Id.
I think there is an extremely small sample of people who don’t have the means to get one. Extremely small. I also think the majority of that group is white. There are twice as many white people living in poverty than there are blacks. The thought of racism being a factor in this law is not consistent with those constrained by reality.
Now I do believe it is racist to pinpoint minorities as being less likely to figure this process out. It’s patronizing and embarrassing.
As for your question having an Id is a tool to combat fraud in millions of circumstances. You and I could list task after task where id’s are required. You can’t dispute that. They would be more serious than voting and more trivial than voting. But for some reason a political party wants there to be no proof of person when casting their vote in this country. Why aren’t you afraid all of the conservatives you hate with such white hot passion aren’t going to try and cheat to get the trump’s elected for the next 30 years? You trust their morals after everything else you’ve condemned them for? It makes no sense. Lets make it as fair as we can for both sides by requiring something that is very easy to get.
I’ve worked with adults with developmental disabilities. I’ve seen the resources in action.
My argument is all sewn up nice and neat. I think all people are the same and each individual, if it meant enough to them could get an Id.
I think there is an extremely small sample of people who don’t have the means to get one. Extremely small. I also think the majority of that group is white. There are twice as many white people living in poverty than there are blacks. The thought of racism being a factor in this law is not consistent with those constrained by reality.
Now I do believe it is racist to pinpoint minorities as being less likely to figure this process out. It’s patronizing and embarrassing.
As for your question having an Id is a tool to combat fraud in millions of circumstances. You and I could list task after task where id’s are required. You can’t dispute that. They would be more serious than voting and more trivial than voting. But for some reason a political party wants there to be no proof of person when casting their vote in this country. Why aren’t you afraid all of the conservatives you hate with such white hot passion aren’t going to try and cheat to get the trump’s elected for the next 30 years? You trust their morals after everything else you’ve condemned them for? It makes no sense. Lets make it as fair as we can for both sides by requiring something that is very easy to get.
I’ve worked with adults with developmental disabilities. I’ve seen the resources in action.
Last edited:
And with zero self awareness. Npr just cries and cries and says “it’s different this time.”
Nope, as usual. He even posted that HSH is suggesting that blacks are lazy.
Alright Wharry, here we go.
Ok. See, I don't know whether that's true, or whether you're being objective. So I don't know where you guys are coming from. So I looked.
In 2007, the Justice Department was upended by scandal because it had pursued a partisan agenda on voting, under the guise of rooting out suspected “voter fraud.” Its actions during the George W. Bush administration were well outside the bounds of rules and accepted norms of neutral law enforcement. In pursuing this agenda, DOJ political leadership fired seven well-respected U.S. Attorneys, dismissing some top Republican prosecutors because they had refused to prosecute nonexistent voter fraud. Top officials hired career staff members using a political loyalty test, perverted the work of the nonpartisan Voting Section toward partisan ends, and exerted pressure on states and an independent government agency to fall in line with an anti-voting rights agenda.
Ultimately, the effort backfired badly. The U.S. Attorney firings touched off a wave of investigations that exposed just how partisan the Justice Department had become and how far it had strayed from its mission of neutral law enforcement. The result was the worst scandal to hit the Department since Watergate. The Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, was forced to resign, as were other top DOJ officials. It also helped drive Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief White House strategist, from his job. Moreover, the Justice Department not only lost credibility with Congress, but it also lost in the courts, where judges repeatedly rejected the untenable anti-voter legal theories it had urged.
://www.brennancenter.org/publication/justice-departments-voter-fraud-scandal-lessons
That's something that gives me pause. Look what Rove, et al were doing with the issue. We know now how much you distrust the neocons and politicization of the DOJ, don't you think this kind of corruption deserves a second look whenever the same side of the aisle brings it up?
So Biff claimed there were millions of fraudulent votes in the last election, and they set up a commission to get to the bottom of it. It was an intellectually dishonest exercise to validate Biff's claims and thy could not, and clumsily tried to keep people from seeing the results.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...er-says/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9bdba9b0c741 I think it's safe to assume there's no pattern of voter fraud going on.
Yes, I hear your talking point that you have to use an ID to do various things (Biff recently claimed you must have an ID to buy groceries) but that begs the point -- why?
Here's a court order regarding the North Carolina attempts to get voter ID (flip ahead to pg. 9 for the subtantive part). I didn't read it all in, but a few pages it it looks like the NC legislature ordered up all the voting and racial breakdowns and passed the voter ID laws specifically to disenfranchise blacks. They wanted exactly what you advocate. Why?
http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf
Then in the 5th Circuit (conservative AF) let Tx' law go,
look at the states that enact these laws. The South is harder than the rest of the country. Why do you think it's disproportionately the South where the laws are the hardest? http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx
I'm still unaware of a problem with voter fraud. It seems to me if there's no current voter fraud, we're enabling a new layer of fraud by giving government more control over who does and doesn't get to supervise goverment in the voting booth.
i haven't even gotten into the historical perspective.
Ok. See, I don't know whether that's true, or whether you're being objective. So I don't know where you guys are coming from. So I looked.
In 2007, the Justice Department was upended by scandal because it had pursued a partisan agenda on voting, under the guise of rooting out suspected “voter fraud.” Its actions during the George W. Bush administration were well outside the bounds of rules and accepted norms of neutral law enforcement. In pursuing this agenda, DOJ political leadership fired seven well-respected U.S. Attorneys, dismissing some top Republican prosecutors because they had refused to prosecute nonexistent voter fraud. Top officials hired career staff members using a political loyalty test, perverted the work of the nonpartisan Voting Section toward partisan ends, and exerted pressure on states and an independent government agency to fall in line with an anti-voting rights agenda.
Ultimately, the effort backfired badly. The U.S. Attorney firings touched off a wave of investigations that exposed just how partisan the Justice Department had become and how far it had strayed from its mission of neutral law enforcement. The result was the worst scandal to hit the Department since Watergate. The Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, was forced to resign, as were other top DOJ officials. It also helped drive Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief White House strategist, from his job. Moreover, the Justice Department not only lost credibility with Congress, but it also lost in the courts, where judges repeatedly rejected the untenable anti-voter legal theories it had urged.
://www.brennancenter.org/publication/justice-departments-voter-fraud-scandal-lessons
That's something that gives me pause. Look what Rove, et al were doing with the issue. We know now how much you distrust the neocons and politicization of the DOJ, don't you think this kind of corruption deserves a second look whenever the same side of the aisle brings it up?
So Biff claimed there were millions of fraudulent votes in the last election, and they set up a commission to get to the bottom of it. It was an intellectually dishonest exercise to validate Biff's claims and thy could not, and clumsily tried to keep people from seeing the results.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...er-says/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9bdba9b0c741 I think it's safe to assume there's no pattern of voter fraud going on.
Yes, I hear your talking point that you have to use an ID to do various things (Biff recently claimed you must have an ID to buy groceries) but that begs the point -- why?
Here's a court order regarding the North Carolina attempts to get voter ID (flip ahead to pg. 9 for the subtantive part). I didn't read it all in, but a few pages it it looks like the NC legislature ordered up all the voting and racial breakdowns and passed the voter ID laws specifically to disenfranchise blacks. They wanted exactly what you advocate. Why?
http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf
Then in the 5th Circuit (conservative AF) let Tx' law go,
look at the states that enact these laws. The South is harder than the rest of the country. Why do you think it's disproportionately the South where the laws are the hardest? http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id.aspx
I'm still unaware of a problem with voter fraud. It seems to me if there's no current voter fraud, we're enabling a new layer of fraud by giving government more control over who does and doesn't get to supervise goverment in the voting booth.
i haven't even gotten into the historical perspective.
