Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Give Me Your Best Argument Against Voter ID
Comments
-
It's required where I vote. I'm not saying your're wrong, but would like to hear from some people that didn't require some kind of ID to vote.thechatch said:
You cannot legally function as an adult in the US without some form of identification. I have never met someone that doesn’t have a government ID. It’s almost impossible to be a legal citizen and not have.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Circa 2013: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id
There is no good argument, FYI.
Yet, it isn’t required to vote in national elections.
Someone needs to explain to me why that is acceptable. -
Me.HustlinOwl said:
It's required where I vote. I'm not saying your're wrong, but would like to hear from some people that didn't require some kind of ID to vote.thechatch said:
You cannot legally function as an adult in the US without some form of identification. I have never met someone that doesn’t have a government ID. It’s almost impossible to be a legal citizen and not have.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Circa 2013: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id
There is no good argument, FYI.
Yet, it isn’t required to vote in national elections.
Someone needs to explain to me why that is acceptable. -
You mean all those who tacitly endorse cheating?HustlinOwl said:
It's required where I vote. I'm not saying your're wrong, but would like to hear from some people that didn't require some kind of ID to vote.thechatch said:
You cannot legally function as an adult in the US without some form of identification. I have never met someone that doesn’t have a government ID. It’s almost impossible to be a legal citizen and not have.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Circa 2013: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id
There is no good argument, FYI.
Yet, it isn’t required to vote in national elections.
Someone needs to explain to me why that is acceptable.
-
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
How about a Mueller investigation of fake collusion?HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
Not enough evidence to prove criminality beyond a reasonable doubt is the new “exoneration”.RaceBannon said:
How about a Mueller investigation of fake collusion?HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
I think most people acknowledge that having a valid ID to vote is a common sense requirement on the face of it.thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response.
The argument you're looking for that's against it is that it's a solution in search of a problem. The argument continues that there is no material threat of voter fraud given the inherent obstacles to orchestrating it at a meaningful level. So in practice a lot of people who are otherwise eligible voters but live in states/regions that have poor access to obtaining valid IDs (unreasonable distances to DOL offices in some counties, lack of transportation for low income prospective voters, lack of available free time to make the journey, minimal open hours of DOL offices, etc) end up not getting the IDs. All of this ultimately creates a disincentive for voting that disproportionately impacts lower income folks. Philosophically, these people believe that encouraging more people voting is something that strengthens a democracy.
There are plenty of other considerations that round out the argument, such as some states' very arbitrary enforcement of what constitutes "valid ID" for voting purposes, but that's the jist of it. If you don't believe any of the above assumptions, especially around voter fraud not being a material risk, then you probably won't find this argument very persuasive. Unsurprisingly, about 95% of the Tug is going to be in that camp. -
How about ID to fly? Just another solution in search of a problem?GreenRiverGatorz said:
I think most people acknowledge that having a valid ID to vote is a common sense requirement on the face of it.thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response.
The argument you're looking for that's against it is that it's a solution in search of a problem. The argument continues that there is no material threat of voter fraud given the inherent obstacles to orchestrating it at a meaningful level. So in practice a lot of people who are otherwise eligible voters but live in states/regions that have poor access to obtaining valid IDs (unreasonable distances to DOL offices in some counties, lack of transportation for low income prospective voters, lack of available free time to make the journey, minimal open hours of DOL offices, etc) end up not getting the IDs. All of this ultimately creates a disincentive for voting that disproportionately impacts lower income folks. Philosophically, these people believe that encouraging more people voting is something that strengthens a democracy.
There are plenty of other considerations that round out the argument, such as some states' very arbitrary enforcement of what constitutes "valid ID" for voting purposes, but that's the jist of it. If you don't believe any of the above assumptions, especially around voter fraud not being a material risk, then you probably won't find this argument very persuasive. Unsurprisingly, about 95% of the Tug is going to be in that camp. -
So "Whatabout flying?!" instead of engaging with the post.WestlinnDuck said:
How about ID to fly? Just another solution in search of a problem?GreenRiverGatorz said:
I think most people acknowledge that having a valid ID to vote is a common sense requirement on the face of it.thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response.
The argument you're looking for that's against it is that it's a solution in search of a problem. The argument continues that there is no material threat of voter fraud given the inherent obstacles to orchestrating it at a meaningful level. So in practice a lot of people who are otherwise eligible voters but live in states/regions that have poor access to obtaining valid IDs (unreasonable distances to DOL offices in some counties, lack of transportation for low income prospective voters, lack of available free time to make the journey, minimal open hours of DOL offices, etc) end up not getting the IDs. All of this ultimately creates a disincentive for voting that disproportionately impacts lower income folks. Philosophically, these people believe that encouraging more people voting is something that strengthens a democracy.
There are plenty of other considerations that round out the argument, such as some states' very arbitrary enforcement of what constitutes "valid ID" for voting purposes, but that's the jist of it. If you don't believe any of the above assumptions, especially around voter fraud not being a material risk, then you probably won't find this argument very persuasive. Unsurprisingly, about 95% of the Tug is going to be in that camp. -
HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response.
Fucktard7 -
Why make people show ID when they enter a Federal building Dazzler? There no evidence that it prevents any crime so why do it?HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies! -
Hands Up Don't shoot? White Supremacists are attacking Asians? George Floyd was killed because he was black? Pick one.HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
So you walked into vote and said I'm dumbass and no issues?WestlinnDuck said:
Me.HustlinOwl said:
It's required where I vote. I'm not saying your're wrong, but would like to hear from some people that didn't require some kind of ID to vote.thechatch said:
You cannot legally function as an adult in the US without some form of identification. I have never met someone that doesn’t have a government ID. It’s almost impossible to be a legal citizen and not have.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Circa 2013: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id
There is no good argument, FYI.
Yet, it isn’t required to vote in national elections.
Someone needs to explain to me why that is acceptable. -
Nope. Just mailed in my ballot and didn't vote for any dumbasses like you did. You suck at this.HustlinOwl said:
So you walked into vote and said I'm dumbass and no issues?WestlinnDuck said:
Me.HustlinOwl said:
It's required where I vote. I'm not saying your're wrong, but would like to hear from some people that didn't require some kind of ID to vote.thechatch said:
You cannot legally function as an adult in the US without some form of identification. I have never met someone that doesn’t have a government ID. It’s almost impossible to be a legal citizen and not have.DoogieMcDoogerson said:Circa 2013: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id
There is no good argument, FYI.
Yet, it isn’t required to vote in national elections.
Someone needs to explain to me why that is acceptable. -
H stands here before us and declares that all U.S. elections are air-tight with no instances of fraud anywhere.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
None. Not one.
Congrats, H. You're as honest as Ferdinand Marcos. -
What a fucking retard. Seriously, you're giving Sled and DJ a run for their money.TurdBomber said:
H stands here before us and declares that all U.S. elections are air-tight with no instances of fraud anywhere.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
Try reading for comprehension sometime, TurdBrain. -
Try answering a fucking question for once in your pathetic life Dazzler. Or you could just continue to fluff Flea.HHusky said:
What a fucking retard. Seriously, you're giving Sled and DJ a run for their money.TurdBomber said:
H stands here before us and declares that all U.S. elections are air-tight with no instances of fraud anywhere.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
Try reading for comprehension sometime, TurdBrain. -
Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
-
Madam, voter impersonation isn't happening. Your refusal to engage with that basic truth is telling.thechatch said:Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
-
Not having enough evidence to charge someone or to even make a case is the new "guilty" when you prosecute them in the press. Remember now, this Kunt holds himself out to be a HUGE defender of our norms and traditions. No need to make your case in a court of law, just prosecute them in the press.HHusky said:
Not enough evidence to prove criminality beyond a reasonable doubt is the new “exoneration”.RaceBannon said:
How about a Mueller investigation of fake collusion?HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer071417.php3SFGbob said:
Not having enough evidence to charge someone or to even make a case is the new "guilty" when you prosecute them in the press. Remember now, this Kunt holds himself out to be a HUGE defender of our norms and traditions. No need to make your case in a court of law, just prosecute them in the press.HHusky said:
Not enough evidence to prove criminality beyond a reasonable doubt is the new “exoneration”.RaceBannon said:
How about a Mueller investigation of fake collusion?HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
Should we get rid of the requirement to show ID when you enter a Federal building Dazzler? Your refusal to answer any questions that are put to you is telling.HHusky said:
Madam, voter impersonation isn't happening. Your refusal to engage with that basic truth is telling.thechatch said:Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
-
Shocking, the Kunt dodges the question. Of course Krauthammer wrote that column well before we knew about the abuses of the FISA court and prosecutorial misconduct of the Mueller team but Dazzler keeps fucking his chicken.HHusky said:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/krauthammer071417.php3SFGbob said:
Not having enough evidence to charge someone or to even make a case is the new "guilty" when you prosecute them in the press. Remember now, this Kunt holds himself out to be a HUGE defender of our norms and traditions. No need to make your case in a court of law, just prosecute them in the press.HHusky said:
Not enough evidence to prove criminality beyond a reasonable doubt is the new “exoneration”.RaceBannon said:
How about a Mueller investigation of fake collusion?HHusky said:
What other conspiracy theories should we cater to ‘cuz the nuts need to have their “faith” restored?thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response. -
Mueller's case was so strong that he didn't bring it, and didn't think he could even get a conviction with a DC jury. But hey Krauthammer wrote a column in July of 2017!!!!
And it's not as if Mueller would never file an indictment against people he knew he could never prosecute. He filed charges against Russians that he knew were never going to see the inside of US court room, purely for its PR value.
But in this case we're to believe that Mueller had a rock solid case of "collusion" but he just was too ethical to pull the trigger.
Tell me again about Krauthammer's OpEd lightweight.
-
Repeatedly Disproven Myth.GreenRiverGatorz said:
I think most people acknowledge that having a valid ID to vote is a common sense requirement on the face of it.thechatch said:
This is patently dishonest.HHusky said:Apparently the best argument FOR voter ID is that most people can get ID pretty easily.
And that prevents the commission of a felony that no one ever commits anyway.
Strong work, ladies!
The argument for government ID is to restore the public’s faith in our electoral process.
The argument against it is......what, exactly?
We are nearly 4 pages in and you have offered fuck all as a response.
The argument you're looking for that's against it is that it's a solution in search of a problem. The argument continues that there is no material threat of voter fraud given the inherent obstacles to orchestrating it at a meaningful level. So in practice a lot of people who are otherwise eligible voters but live in states/regions that have poor access to obtaining valid IDs (unreasonable distances to DOL offices in some counties, lack of transportation for low income prospective voters, lack of available free time to make the journey, minimal open hours of DOL offices, etc) end up not getting the IDs. All of this ultimately creates a disincentive for voting that disproportionately impacts lower income folks. Philosophically, these people believe that encouraging more people voting is something that strengthens a democracy.
There are plenty of other considerations that round out the argument, such as some states' very arbitrary enforcement of what constitutes "valid ID" for voting purposes, but that's the jist of it. If you don't believe any of the above assumptions, especially around voter fraud not being a material risk, then you probably won't find this argument very persuasive. Unsurprisingly, about 95% of the Tug is going to be in that camp.
But an Article of Faith among the Left. -
The dazzler continues to ignore the real collusion between the CIA, DOJ, FBI and the PIPS campaign paying for the Russian disinformation. Or unlike Cho Bai Den's quid pro quo for his son and the millions that flowed to the Biden family. Just more evidence of the strong character that is so attractive to Snow and the dazzler.SFGbob said:Mueller's case was so strong that he didn't bring it, and didn't think he could even get a conviction with a DC jury. But hey Krauthammer wrote a column in July of 2017!!!!
And it's not as if Mueller would never file an indictment against people he knew he could never prosecute. He filed charges against Russians that he knew were never going to see the inside of US court room, purely for its PR value.
But in this case we're to believe that Mueller had a rock solid case of "collusion" but he just was too ethical to pull the trigger.
Tell me again about Krauthammer's OpEd lightweight. -
And what leads you to that conclusion, Dazzler?HHusky said:
Madam, voter impersonation isn't happening. Your refusal to engage with that basic truth is telling.thechatch said:Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
You know jack shit about systems and controls and human behavior. If proper controls aren't in place, this is standard criminal/embezzlement drive a truck through and steal the gold shit. Responsible people lock down ANY identifiable potential for wrong doing. I've personally uncovered 5 people who subsequently went to prison for circumventing controls. And you don't think the most powerful office in the world wouldn't be subject to people trying to grab it? You're a fucking idiot beyond compare. Level 8 fucktard.
You just let your employees have access to cash drawer or let them do all accounting functions in your pretend practice? NO - because that would be fucking stupid to give them the opportunity when combined with the temptation to take your money.
Or maybe you are such a fucktard that you 'trust' your bookkeeper completely. She is ripping you off blind if so.
Fuck. -
One of the things I found shocking once I started working was the number of clients who has SERIOUS money embezzled by "trusted" employees who they essentially treated as family. Controllers who made the bank deposits, "balanced" the bank statements and approved vendor invoices and "prepared" the financial statements.PurpleThrobber said:
And what leads you to that conclusion, Dazzler?HHusky said:
Madam, voter impersonation isn't happening. Your refusal to engage with that basic truth is telling.thechatch said:Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
You know jack shit about systems and controls and human behavior. If proper controls aren't in place, this is standard criminal/embezzlement drive a truck through and steal the gold shit. Responsible people lock down ANY identifiable potential for wrong doing. I've personally uncovered 5 people who subsequently went to prison for circumventing controls. And you don't think the most powerful office in the world wouldn't be subject to people trying to grab it? You're a fucking idiot beyond compare. Level 8 fucktard.
You just let your employees have access to cash drawer or let them do all accounting functions in your pretend practice? NO - because that would be fucking stupid to give them the opportunity when combined with the temptation to take your money.
Or maybe you are such a fucktard that you 'trust' your bookkeeper completely. She is ripping you off blind if so.
Fuck. -
You're accidentally making very good point.PurpleThrobber said:
And what leads you to that conclusion, Dazzler?HHusky said:
Madam, voter impersonation isn't happening. Your refusal to engage with that basic truth is telling.thechatch said:Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
You know jack shit about systems and controls and human behavior. If proper controls aren't in place, this is standard criminal/embezzlement drive a truck through and steal the gold shit. Responsible people lock down ANY identifiable potential for wrong doing. I've personally uncovered 5 people who subsequently went to prison for circumventing controls. And you don't think the most powerful office in the world wouldn't be subject to people trying to grab it? You're a fucking idiot beyond compare. Level 8 fucktard.
You just let your employees have access to cash drawer or let them do all accounting functions in your pretend practice? NO - because that would be fucking stupid to give them the opportunity when combined with the temptation to take your money.
Or maybe you are such a fucktard that you 'trust' your bookkeeper completely. She is ripping you off blind if so.
Fuck.
The motive to steal a large amount of money even at the risk of committing a felony is obvious.
The motive to commit a felony in order to add a single vote is absent. -
Opportunity plus temptation = bad system = impropriety. It NEVER fails. It is always that. It boggle your mind what I've uncovered in my career committed by the 'nicest' people.WestlinnDuck said:
One of the things I found shocking once I started working was the number of clients who has SERIOUS money embezzled by "trusted" employees who they essentially treated as family. Controllers who made the bank deposits, "balanced" the bank statements and approved vendor invoices and "prepared" the financial statements.PurpleThrobber said:
And what leads you to that conclusion, Dazzler?HHusky said:
Madam, voter impersonation isn't happening. Your refusal to engage with that basic truth is telling.thechatch said:Steaming toward page 5 and HH still has nothing to offer. What a useless fucking hack you are.
You know jack shit about systems and controls and human behavior. If proper controls aren't in place, this is standard criminal/embezzlement drive a truck through and steal the gold shit. Responsible people lock down ANY identifiable potential for wrong doing. I've personally uncovered 5 people who subsequently went to prison for circumventing controls. And you don't think the most powerful office in the world wouldn't be subject to people trying to grab it? You're a fucking idiot beyond compare. Level 8 fucktard.
You just let your employees have access to cash drawer or let them do all accounting functions in your pretend practice? NO - because that would be fucking stupid to give them the opportunity when combined with the temptation to take your money.
Or maybe you are such a fucktard that you 'trust' your bookkeeper completely. She is ripping you off blind if so.
Fuck.
But somehow the Dazzler thinks every election process is pure as the driven snow.
Bullshit.
