Page 24 of 52 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 519

Thread: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

  1. #231
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-12 @ 11:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,928

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by muciti View Post
    According to polls on the issue I have seen it is supported by majority of democratic and republican voters. There are just more dems who oppose it. But something like 54% of democratic voters want to see ID laws passed.
    This makes me brethe a huge sigh of relief. Do you mind finding me some kind of evidence supporting this? I'm hoping the liberal hacks on this forum are not a good representation of liberals as a whole. You dont have to do this, I'd just like a little piece of mind from what you said and it would help if I could find some kind of evidence backing it up.

  2. #232
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    08-16-13 @ 02:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    970

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Your first link there does the same thing that you disregarded another study a few posts back for doing. Only analyzing 2 elections. Your second link states....



    Which basically boils down to them talking out their ass and have no actual proof themselves past that paragraph. IE its all conjecture, opinions etc etc.



    These people are basically trying to say that if they don't have ID now then they cannot get ID period. Idiotic.



    Wow...this link jumps from religion and abortion and voter ID requirements....just...wow.



    This one was going all over the place too. From accusing churches of affecting turnout rate (both positve and negative) to percieved costs. What it boils down to is that anything and everything can affect voter turnout...both positively and negatively.....even things that have nothing to do with voter ID.



    This one is all about perceptions and how it affects voter turnout. It even makes the case that just the "idea" of voter fraud can reduce voter participation.
    Thanks, I was short on time and had to keep my last reply brief. You pretty much hit the nail on the head.

  3. #233
    Sage
    Kreton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Last Seen
    11-13-17 @ 08:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,118

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by dontworrybehappy View Post
    This makes me brethe a huge sigh of relief. Do you mind finding me some kind of evidence supporting this? I'm hoping the liberal hacks on this forum are not a good representation of liberals as a whole. You dont have to do this, I'd just like a little piece of mind from what you said and it would help if I could find some kind of evidence backing it up.
    Fox News Poll: Most think voter ID laws are necessary | Fox News
    “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.”
    Stephen R. Covey


  4. #234
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by Gie, replying to AdamT View Post
    Actually no you have not posted three studies packed with statistics that support your argument. You posted one link to a PDF that contains the results of multiple studies and that is a bit of a mixed bag as far as results go. Given that you dismiss out of hand everything shown to you, you really are just interested in stating your obstinate opinion and basically doing the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and shouting nannananabobobo, I can't hear you. Over and over again, and you have been doing this across several threads for over a month.

    Posting links to articles and pieces from the NY Times does not three linked studies packed with stats that support your ever shifting and changing "argument" make.
    Sounds like you are "basically doing the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and shouting nannananabobobo, I can't hear you. Over and over again, and you have been doing this across several threads for over a month."

    Also sounds like you are "attacking the source".

    Quote Originally Posted by mike2810, replying to AdamT View Post
    Why did I know that AT would attack the source. So no matter what study or info, guess the dems are always right. or is it left.? Truth hurts.

  5. #235
    Battle Ready
    Grim17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southwestern U.S.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,136
    Blog Entries
    20

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    That would be a lie.
    As proven by the fact that Indiana couldn't produce one disenfranchised voter for their Supreme Court case... LMAO

  6. #236
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by Grim17 View Post
    As proven by the fact that Indiana couldn't produce one disenfranchised voter for their Supreme Court case... LMAO
    And therefore it doesn't happen? I guess we can use the same logic to conclude that, since they couldn't cite a single example of voter impersonation, that doesn't happen either. And thus, there is no reason to have the ID law. Thanks for playing.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  7. #237
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    As we can see on internet forums such as this, the general public is often insufficiently informed to make a reasoned decision on weighty issues, and tends to fall back on "common sense"; something which once told the majority that the world was flat, then that the Sun orbited the Earth. This is one reason the founders steered clear of a direct democracy and instead went with a representative version.

    By my count, the fallacies of the right wing argument are multiplying. So far we have:

    1. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove citizenship, when such an ID -- as a drivers license, for example -- is no guarantee of proof of citizenship.

    2. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove identity, when other forms of ID -- such as a credit card or even a utility bill -- would, in essentially all cases, prove the same thing.

    3. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove identity, when a simple signature -- if compared to the signature on file from the registration process -- would, unless the imposter had been practicing the victim's signature, prove the same thing.

    In light of all that, does the quest for photo ID -- and only photo ID -- at the polls really make 'common sense'?

    And if it can be shown that the vast majority of those currently lacking govt issued photo ID are likely Democratic voters, does it also not make 'common sense' that something more nefarious may be lurking behind the Republican agenda? Especially given that, over the past few decades, the Democratic agenda has been to get as many people to vote as possible, while the Republican plan is to prevent as many people voting as possible (specifically, the 'lower' classes) with caging lists and the like. One would have to be obtuse to not see at least the possibility that the Republican goal is disenfranchisement; either that, or a supporter of it.

  8. #238
    defected to kekistan
    beerftw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    kekistan
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    13,376

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    As we can see on internet forums such as this, the general public is often insufficiently informed to make a reasoned decision on weighty issues, and tends to fall back on "common sense"; something which once told the majority that the world was flat, then that the Sun orbited the Earth. This is one reason the founders steered clear of a direct democracy and instead went with a representative version.

    By my count, the fallacies of the right wing argument are multiplying. So far we have:

    1. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove citizenship, when such an ID -- as a drivers license, for example -- is no guarantee of proof of citizenship.

    2. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove identity, when other forms of ID -- such as a credit card or even a utility bill -- would, in essentially all cases, prove the same thing.

    3. Demands for a gov't issued photo ID at the polls in order to prove identity, when a simple signature -- if compared to the signature on file from the registration process -- would, unless the imposter had been practicing the victim's signature, prove the same thing.

    In light of all that, does the quest for photo ID -- and only photo ID -- at the polls really make 'common sense'?

    And if it can be shown that the vast majority of those currently lacking govt issued photo ID are likely Democratic voters, does it also not make 'common sense' that something more nefarious may be lurking behind the Republican agenda? Especially given that, over the past few decades, the Democratic agenda has been to get as many people to vote as possible, while the Republican plan is to prevent as many people voting as possible (specifically, the 'lower' classes) with caging lists and the like. One would have to be obtuse to not see at least the possibility that the Republican goal is disenfranchisement; either that, or a supporter of it.
    from my count i have seen more logical fallacies from you than the whole supposed right wing agenda combined.

    Appeal to Common Sense Fallacy: claiming that a statement/argument is valid or
    invalid because everyone knows it
    Last edited by beerftw; 04-19-12 at 08:35 PM.
    “[The metric system is the tool of the Devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that’s the way I likes it!” – Abe “Grampa” Simpson”

  9. #239
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    Μολὼν λαβέ's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    09-29-17 @ 11:22 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,914

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Republicans are trying to use voter ID laws to suppress Democratic voter turnout. That's why Democrats have a problem with it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Generalizations are stupid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Steel View Post
    The Second Amendment has nothing to do with guns.

  10. #240
    Battle Ready
    Grim17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Southwestern U.S.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,136
    Blog Entries
    20

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Arizona's Voter ID Requirement

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    And therefore it doesn't happen? I guess we can use the same logic to conclude that, since they couldn't cite a single example of voter impersonation, that doesn't happen either. And thus, there is no reason to have the ID law. Thanks for playing.
    Explain to me how you present a case to the United States Supreme Court claiming a law disenfranchises voters, and not being able to produce one?

    LMMFAO
    Last edited by Grim17; 04-19-12 at 10:47 PM.

Page 24 of 52 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •