Page 24 of 58 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 573

Thread: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

  1. #231
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    People can make any claim they want, but not in court, if they do that it is perjury.
    When the people who have been making these claims in public were sworn in, their story changed.
    Now that there is a place to get a free voter ID in every county, I wonder how many will actually be requested.
    Whose story changed? The state of Texas defending photo ID didn't bother to estimate how many didn't have ID. But a half dozen opposed to the law made claims in court, subject to discovery and cross examination, etc. same as in other states where the laws are being contested. So I assume "the people who have been making these claims in public were sworn in their story changed" are GOPers defending photo ID rules - it is their stories that change from the public to court, not those opposed.

  2. #232
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,309

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Whose story changed? The state of Texas defending photo ID didn't bother to estimate how many didn't have ID. But a half dozen opposed to the law made claims in court, subject to discovery and cross examination, etc. same as in other states where the laws are being contested. So I assume "the people who have been making these claims in public were sworn in their story changed" are GOPers defending photo ID rules - it is their stories that change from the public to court, not those opposed.
    The state of Texas claimed in court that the DOJ numbers were not valid.
    DOJ’s List of Voters Who Lack Photo Identification Includes:
    50,000 Dead Voters1
    330,377 Voters over the age of 65 (who can vote by mail without ID)2
    261,887 Voters who included a DL number on their voter registration form.3
    800,000 Voters successfully matched by the State4
    These were presented as testimony in court, or sworn deposition.
    1 Deposition of Stephen Ansolabehere, June 22, 2012 at p. 97.
    2 Testimony of Prof. Thomas Sager Trial Transcript, Tuesday, July 10, 2012, Vol. I at p. 25
    3 Testimony of Prof. Thomas Sager Trial Transcript, Tuesday, July 10, 2012, Vol. I at p. 26.
    4 Testimony of Prof. Thomas Sager Trial Transcript, Tuesday, July 10, 2012, Vol. I at p. 26.
    So whose Story changed? the DOJ says 500,000 people lack the proper ID's,
    The State of Texas shows in court that the DOJ included false positives in their counts.
    DOJ’s List of ‘No-Identification’ Voters Failed to Exclude:
    - Dead Voters12
    - Voters who have passports and military IDs13
    - Former Texas residents who have moved to other states14
    - Exempt voters who have been certified disabled by the federal agencies15
    - Non-citizens who are improperly registered to vote16
    When asked to produce even a single person, that did not have an ID, they could only produce
    one College student, who seemed to be able to fly to DC to give testimony before the DOJ.
    Maybe the TSA should question how she got on an airplane without an ID?

    A different footnote, the Mayor of Houston made a scan for the news, by using her CCW ID to
    vote last night!

  3. #233
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    The state of Texas claimed in court that the DOJ numbers were not valid.
    You quoted me, so why did you ignore what I said.... "The state of Texas defending photo ID didn't bother to estimate how many didn't have ID."

    Texas didn't bother to determine how many didn't have ID. Many experts did and presented their figures in court. Read the court opinion.


    These were presented as testimony in court, or sworn deposition.
    I'm only an accountant and math challenged, but that lists adds up to about 1.4 million 'errors' according to the propaganda sheet. But the experts testified IN COURT that only about 600,000 didn't have ID. So this list has apparently NOTHING to do with any court testimony, at least not testimony in the Federal District Court trial that was in 2014 and ended with the judge striking down SB14.

    So whose Story changed? the DOJ says 500,000 people lack the proper ID's,
    The State of Texas shows in court that the DOJ included false positives in their counts.
    Again, you're repeating points off a list that wasn't ever presented in court. In court the experts testified that they matched the registrations against passport lists and veterans lists and lists of the dead. The court opinion addresses those who have moved. The court opinion notes that about 100,000 of the 600,000 were disabled and eligible to vote by mail. Read what was actually presented as testimony in court, not a propaganda sheet put out by partisans.

    When asked to produce even a single person, that did not have an ID, they could only produce
    one College student, who seemed to be able to fly to DC to give testimony before the DOJ.
    Maybe the TSA should question how she got on an airplane without an ID?
    I think we're talking about two different trials here.

    The hilarious thing is you make a claim that some people make assertions out of court and their testimony changes when they get in court, then the entire basis for this post is a propaganda sheet never presented in court, that makes proved false claims, claims errors in an estimate total more than double the estimated number, and then cites supposed testimony from a lawsuit that apparently is entirely different than the Federal District Court trial concluded in September of 2014.
    Last edited by JasperL; 10-21-14 at 12:48 PM.

  4. #234
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,309

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    You quoted me, so why did you ignore what I said.... "The state of Texas defending photo ID didn't bother to estimate how many didn't have ID."

    Texas didn't bother to determine how many didn't have ID. Many experts did and presented their figures in court. Read the court opinion.




    I'm only an accountant and math challenged, but that lists adds up to about 1.4 million 'errors' according to the propaganda sheet. But the experts testified IN COURT that only about 600,000 didn't have ID. So this list has apparently NOTHING to do with any court testimony, at least not testimony in the Federal District Court trial that was in 2014 and ended with the judge striking down SB14.



    Again, you're repeating points off a list that wasn't ever presented in court. In court the experts testified that they matched the registrations against passport lists and veterans lists and lists of the dead. The court opinion addresses those who have moved. The court opinion notes that about 100,000 of the 600,000 were disabled and eligible to vote by mail. Read what was actually presented as testimony in court, not a propaganda sheet put out by partisans.



    I think we're talking about two different trials here.

    The hilarious thing is you make a claim that some people make assertions out of court and their testimony changes when they get in court, then the entire basis for this post is a propaganda sheet never presented in court, that makes proved false claims, claims errors in an estimate total more than double the estimated number, and then cites supposed testimony from a lawsuit that apparently is entirely different than the Federal District Court trial concluded in September of 2014.
    I believe that the State of Texas position which they based on a survey was that everyone ether had an ID
    or met the criteria that did not need one.
    There have been several cases about about the voter ID law, but all of the testimony is still sworn.
    Since this became an issue, I have been trying to think of anyone I have met who did not have an ID,
    that would count for voting in Texas, and cannot think of a single person.
    It just is not common for someone to not have an ID of some sort.
    I am not saying there are not a few hermits out there(because there are),
    but even those have ID's
    the idea that the DOJ's list had over 50,000 dead people on it, implies it may have a few errors.
    Since the supreme court has ruled Texas can keep their Voter ID law for this election,
    it will be interesting to see how many of the free voter ID's are requested?

  5. #235
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    I believe that the State of Texas position which they based on a survey was that everyone ether had an ID
    or met the criteria that did not need one.
    They sure as heck didn't present that "position" or alleged "survey" in court. It's a baseless claim that's easy to make in propaganda for which there is no penalty for presenting half truths or lies, but a little more risky when that claim can be subject to discovery and cross examination.

    There have been several cases about about the voter ID law, but all of the testimony is still sworn.
    Since this became an issue, I have been trying to think of anyone I have met who did not have an ID,
    that would count for voting in Texas, and cannot think of a single person.
    Well, who YOU know isn't actually a fact that is relevant at all in court. I don't know anyone either, but several states have estimated the number affected and those numbers run into the hundreds of thousands each time.

    It just is not common for someone to not have an ID of some sort.
    I am not saying there are not a few hermits out there(because there are),
    but even those have ID's
    They don't need to be 'hermits.' Poor people who do not drive lack the one ID that most without passports rely on, and one can work, cash checks, pay rent, utilities, etc. without a state issued photo ID. Before the GOP rules changes, one could vote without a state issued photo ID.

    the idea that the DOJ's list had over 50,000 dead people on it, implies it may have a few errors.
    Since the supreme court has ruled Texas can keep their Voter ID law for this election,
    it will be interesting to see how many of the free voter ID's are requested?
    You're citing a propaganda sheet that wasn't presented as evidence in court. That sheet listed supposed 'errors' totaling 1.4 million. The estimates presented IN COURT were that about 600,000 had no ID accepted to vote in person in Texas. How can a list of 600K have more than 1.4 million errors in it? This is why I tend to disregard propaganda and rely on claims presented in court, subject to discovery and cross examination.

    And we'll see I guess how many IDs are issued...

  6. #236
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,309

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    You're citing a propaganda sheet that wasn't presented as evidence in court. That sheet listed supposed 'errors' totaling 1.4 million. The estimates presented IN COURT were that about 600,000 had no ID accepted to vote in person in Texas. How can a list of 600K have more than 1.4 million errors in it? This is why I tend to disregard propaganda and rely on claims presented in court, subject to discovery and cross examination.

    And we'll see I guess how many IDs are issued...
    What you are saying is propaganda was part of sworn testimony in court.
    As to how there can be 1.4 million errors out of 600,000, it could easily be someone
    was incorrectly counted two or three times.
    In the State of Texas motion to Dismiss, the state lays out why the case lacks merit.
    https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/...20Oct%2025.pdf

  7. #237
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    What you are saying is propaganda was part of sworn testimony in court.
    You presented some numbers and snippets of alleged testimony completely ripped of any context, dating to depositions in 2012, for a trial that happened in 2014. It's impossible to know what "DOJ" estimates the State of Texas was examining - the trial had (as I recall) five experts testify about their efforts to determine the number of registered voters without the required ID. Which of those several estimates is the "DOJ" estimate with all those errors? Who the hell knows because the propaganda sheet is devoid of any context - just random snippets of stuff.

    As to how there can be 1.4 million errors out of 600,000, it could easily be someone
    was incorrectly counted two or three times.
    That makes no sense at all. Texas said they matched 800,000 people on a list of 600,000?

    In the State of Texas motion to Dismiss, the state lays out why the case lacks merit.

    https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/...20Oct%2025.pdf
    I'm not inclined to do your work for you and read 50 pages to see what you find worthy of mention but I did scan it. The main arguments are two 1) no one has standing to sue, and 2) a law can have all kinds of racially discriminatory impact, but so long as minorities aren't singled out on account of their race, no harm no foul.

    There was no argument that that few or no registered voters didn't have the ID or that the rules did not impact mostly poor minorities, only that it doesn't matter how many don't have the ID, what the burden is on them, or who they are. Texas can do as it wants and unless the law says something like, e.g. "minorities have to get these IDs, but not whites" they can make up the rules as they go.

  8. #238
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,309

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Do you really think anyone, anyone at all will be disenfranchised by this law?
    If so what about the other states which have voter ID laws?
    Like I said, the ID necessary to vote, is free and available in every county.
    Anyone who wants to vote will get an ID, no different than getting a voter registration card.
    What do you have against protecting the integrity of our elections?
    We have an election coming up in 2 weeks, if anyone is not
    allowed to vote because they lack the proper ID, I am quite sure we will hear about it.

  9. #239
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,249

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    LOL. Yes, southern and northern "mean a thing" as you can see in the vote splits. Those in the former CSA voted nearly unanimously against CRA and VRA, and had fun for the 100 years post Civil War oppressing blacks in dozens of different ways. These were real policies in those southern states. In the north, they didn't have those policies and northern democrats voted nearly unanimously FOR the CRA, VRA. So you have to be willingly blind to miss the split in regions.

    And it's hilarious how republicans work. They take credit for all the good, then blame all the bad on democrats. On another thread, right wingers were blaming democrats for the spending of the Reagan era, but of course giving the majority democrats in Congress zero credit for the tax cuts.... Now, a bill proposed by Kennedy, passed under LBJ, and supported by more democrats than republicans is a "republican" bill. It obviously needed GOP support and I'm glad they provided it. But essentially the country, both sides of the aisle, supported it except for white racists, or political cowards who pandered to racist dirtbags, in the South, my part of the world.
    Guess we have a different opinion as to the success of the CRA and other so called social programs Democrats want to take credit for. Most of the financial crisis of 2007-09 were the result of the sub prime loans created during the Clinton administration as well as other legislation signed by Democrats as they attempted to "help" people. Only a true liberal believes that Bush created the mortgage meltdown when it was Democratic programs that caused the problem and tried to help the Democratic base that they needed to win elections.

    As has been obvious all the time you have a very distorted view of history having no concept of leadership, no concept of personal responsibility, and no idea what spending actually created during the Reagan years. Just like all liberals you see the debt going from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion but ignore what caused that spending and the reality that income tax revenue went up 60%, 17 million jobs were created, the GDP doubled, and a peace dividend was created. If Obama did these things and generated these results many here would be calling for his Sainthood. By the way, tripling the debt from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion is obviously a lot worse than increasing the debt 70% by going from 10.6 trillion to 17.7 trillion as we all know that the debt service on 1.7 trillion has to be a lot worse than the debt service on that 7 trillion increase because it was a Republican President that tripled the debt

    You don's seem to comprehend how putting money in the hands of the people is much better than putting money in the hands of politicians to buy votes. Interesting logic from someone who totally doesn't understand history or economic results.
    Last edited by Conservative; 10-21-14 at 04:51 PM.

  10. #240
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,719

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Guess we have a different opinion as to the success of the CRA and other so called social programs Democrats want to take credit for. Most of the financial crisis of 2007-09 were the result of the sub prime loans created during the Clinton administration as well as other legislation signed by Democrats as they attempted to "help" people. Only a true liberal believes that Bush created the mortgage meltdown when it was Democratic programs that caused the problem and tried to help the Democratic base that they needed to win elections.
    This isn't the thread for discussing the mortgage crisis, but I have a hard time believing the WORLD WIDE housing and credit bubble is the fault of Clinton and CRA.... And this 'liberal' reserves plenty of blame for Clinton - end of Glass-Steagall, the prohibitions against regulating derivatives, and more. And I'm realistic enough to know that in Washington D.C., if the interests of the poors clash with the interests of Wall Street, Wall Street wins 1,000 out of 1,000 of those battles. So if we got CRA and all the rest, it was because the banks either didn't care, or knew such programs were a way to shovel money hand over fist from the poors into their pockets, which is what happened of course.

    As has been obvious all the time you have a very distorted view of history having no concept of leadership, no concept of personal responsibility, and no idea what spending actually created during the Reagan years. Just like all liberals you see the debt going from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion but ignore what caused that spending and the reality that income tax revenue went up 60%, 17 million jobs were created, the GDP doubled, and a peace dividend was created. If Obama did these things and generated these results many here would be calling for his Sainthood. By the way, tripling the debt from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion is obviously a lot worse than increasing the debt 70% by going from 10.6 trillion to 17.7 trillion as we all know that the debt service on 1.7 trillion has to be a lot worse than the debt service on that 7 trillion increase because it was a Republican President that tripled the debt
    I know nominal tax revenue went up under Reagan and have said so explicitly on other threads. The claim (one of several) was democrats reneged on a deal with Reagan and the big spending was all the fault of democrats. What I pointed out was Reagan proposed spending levels (his actual budgets submitted to Congress), slightly HIGHER than the budgets ultimately passed by Congress, and backed that claim up with a link to the evidence. If you want to square the "democrats reneged on a deal, deficits were the fault of big spending democrats" with "Reagan proposed spending higher than levels passed by democrats" be my guest.

    You don's seem to comprehend how putting money in the hands of the people is much better than putting money in the hands of politicians to buy votes. Interesting logic from someone who totally doesn't understand history or economic results.
    There is nothing there to debate. I'm for some spending, opposed to other spending. If you want to debate something concrete, we should take it to another thread. I'm generally not impressed with republican claims of 'fiscal responsibility' since the record is they cut taxes, ramp up spending, ignore deficits until a democrat takes over the POTUS, then claim that it's a crisis and we must take a meat axe to all spending that benefits the poors and olds, and more tax cuts for the wealth, of course.....
    Last edited by JasperL; 10-21-14 at 05:25 PM.

Page 24 of 58 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
  •