Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
The Obvious Voting-Rights Solution That No Democrat Will Propose
Comments
-
Taking the information off the ID is probably just a substitute for what a poll worker already asks you at a polling place in the U.S. If it ever became the norm here, the same substitution of energy would apply. But the actual implementation of a national ID program, if it is implemented solely in order to prevent voter impersonation, is an enormous waste of money and effort. The crime isn't being committed in the first place.hardhat said:
I'd have to ask again why other countries do it if it's such a fucking waste of time.HHusky said:
A national ID is issued to citizens. If we uniformly say you have to show it as a condition of voting, I don't see how that can be racist.hardhat said:
Is it racist to require that ID to vote? And if it is issued to a citizen?HHusky said:
It's not racist to require a National ID, issued to every citizen without exception at the nation's expense. Apparently it's merely fascist, per Race.hardhat said:
So it's not racist to require voter id.HHusky said:
Seems like an argument there are would fail.hardhat said:
Are there are reasons that are presumably racist?HHusky said:
Presumably they require you show your national ID for all sorts of reasons. I'm not the one against a national ID. ("Your papers!" memes to follow from the libertarian hen faction.)hardhat said:
Why do other countries require voter id?TheKobeStopper said:
I’m letting the free market decide if those businesses are racist. The government, however, answers to me.thechatch said:Still waiting for @TheKobeStopper to explain why voter ID is racist while vax cards to eat at restaurants or fly on airplanes is not.
A fucking waste of time and resources, sure, but not racist. -
-
So a guy moved two years ago and thinks the registrar should have noticed.hardhat said:
Some deep/surveillance state, huh?
-
Update the rolls by telepathy?hardhat said: -
Is that how it's done?HHusky said:
Update the rolls by telepathy?hardhat said: -
I'm asking you. You think the registrar should have understood the voter's intent?hardhat said:
Is that how it's done?HHusky said:
Update the rolls by telepathy?hardhat said:
-
It's the state's responsibility to keep up to date and accurate voter rolls. I thought you were the expert on civics here. Sheesh.HHusky said:
I'm asking you. You think the registrar should have understood the voter's intent?hardhat said:
Is that how it's done?HHusky said:
Update the rolls by telepathy?hardhat said:
-
I'm sure he'll be dropped before long, assuming he hasn't been casting his California ballots.hardhat said:
It's the state's responsibility to keep up to date and accurate voter rolls. I thought you were the expert on civics here. Sheesh.HHusky said:
I'm asking you. You think the registrar should have understood the voter's intent?hardhat said:
Is that how it's done?HHusky said:
Update the rolls by telepathy?hardhat said:
The presumption is in favor of an existing state citizenship in the absence of a clear intent to change one's state citizenship.
A really simple solution is to remove himself from the rolls by notifying the registrar. -
Attaboy. But you do see the problem. No state sits back passively and waits to be notified. But we are talking about California here, and so it's not surprising.HHusky said:
I'm sure he'll be dropped before long, assuming he hasn't been casting his California ballots.hardhat said:
It's the state's responsibility to keep up to date and accurate voter rolls. I thought you were the expert on civics here. Sheesh.HHusky said:
I'm asking you. You think the registrar should have understood the voter's intent?hardhat said:
Is that how it's done?HHusky said:
Update the rolls by telepathy?hardhat said:
The presumption is in favor of an existing state citizenship in the absence of a clear intent to change one's state citizenship.
