Page 28 of 58 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 573

Thread: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

  1. #271
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,771

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    They can cast a provisional, but it won't count unless they get the photo ID.
    Yep, so I guess they should go get the proper ID. All the other excuses are just nonsense.

    Yeah, whatever.
    Whatever is right...You know that is what happened and have no response to it...Noted.

    Democrats bad, republicans good, only democrats cheat, I get it.
    No one said that, so you have to create a strawman...

    No, we don't want right wingers seeking partisan advantage by putting barriers to the right to vote in front of the poor that will have no effect on 'voter fraud' at the polls, which by every estimate everywhere is nearly zero.
    No, that argument is nonsense...Everyone in this country has ID, the over the top faux outrage over requiring an ID only goes to show that it would cut into liberal election tampering, NOT disenfranchising of any kind...Me thinks thou protest too much.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #272
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    68,316

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    That's a deliberate, I assume, misstatement of my position. What I object to is the a belief that easy, gutless, cowardly decision to pair spending increases with tax rate CUTS requires someone to believe in a free lunch, a Tax Santa Clause, a Tax Fairy, magic - pick your metaphor.

    Bottom line is society has a difficult task setting spending levels. If we want to spend MORE, we have to raise taxes. If we want to cut taxes, then some very painful decisions have to be made about spending CUTS. Right wing fiscal policy rests on the notion that if we want to spend MORE, then to pay for it, we give everyone another tax cut!



    Yes, I understand what taxes I pay because I've done taxes for a living since 1988.

    And like I said, we have a natural experiment in our lifetimes. On an inflation adjusted bases, tax receipts (total, individual, corporate, payroll) increased by 20% in the Reagan era. Receipts increased by 47% in the Clinton era. Real GDP growth during that time was roughly the same - about 33% for both periods.

    Real tax data here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...s/hist01z3.xls
    I will find a real GDP link if you want to check that number.

    So tax receipts, given similar increases in GDP, rose more than twice as fast (47 versus 20) during the Clinton era, following Clinton tax rate increases. And that's consistent with individual income taxes as a percent of GDP. During the Reagan years, that decreased from 9% to 8%. During Clinton years, that increased from 7.5% to 9.4%. This is baby math, and the GOP wants to argue with math. Tax cuts lower revenue, tax increases raise revenue.



    If you have a point, make it. I'm not going to guess what that point might be. Several things happened in 1994. Other things happened in 1996. Etc.
    Don't really give a damn about "real" GDP because spending, revenue, and economic activity are in real time, not future value of the dollar. You seem to have a very distorted view as to the role of the Federal Govt. What exactly is that role and why do we need a 3.9 trillion dollar(Obama proposed)budget?

    Inflation adjusted expenses and debt are always an issue with you, why not inflation adjusted revenue? why is it such a problem to allow people to keep more of what they earn so they need less govt?

    I don't think you really have a clue as to what taxes you pay and their purpose. SS and Medicare were never intended to be on budget. Highway and bridge funding are not part of the FIT expenses, Police, fire, and schools are state responsibilities.

    Again, you seem to forget that in 1994 the Clinton economic policy led to a take over of Congress by the Republicans and most of the Clinton tax increases were reversed. You seem to have a problem understanding the Contract with America and how much of it was implemented. You further ignored the Clinton Tax reduction act of 1997. Why is that?

  3. #273
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,280

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Don't really give a damn about "real" GDP because spending, revenue, and economic activity are in real time, not future value of the dollar. You seem to have a very distorted view as to the role of the Federal Govt. What exactly is that role and why do we need a 3.9 trillion dollar(Obama proposed)budget?
    The only way to compare apples to apples in the presence of variable inflation is to remove inflation from the figures. Bottom line is you asked a question you didn't know the answer to, got caught, found out that receipts rose more than twice as fast under Clinton as under Reagan, and so are trying anything to keep from recognizing that evidence.

    I'd address the Obama point but it's off topic and has nothing to do with this discussion.

    Inflation adjusted expenses and debt are always an issue with you, why not inflation adjusted revenue? why is it such a problem to allow people to keep more of what they earn so they need less govt?
    I just gave you inflation adjusted revenue, and linked to the proper table.

    I don't think you really have a clue as to what taxes you pay and their purpose. SS and Medicare were never intended to be on budget. Highway and bridge funding are not part of the FIT expenses, Police, fire, and schools are state responsibilities.
    Intended or not, SS and Medicare were on budget almost all of the Reagan years, most of the Clinton years, the Bush years, and Obama years. And you're quoting total receipts, and growth in total receipts, then claiming that highway and bridge funding, paid for at least in part with gasoline taxes, and so aren't part of federal income taxes. Yes, but gasoline taxes are included in total receipts so what's the point?

    You seem to forget that in 1994 the Clinton economic policy led to a take over of Congress by the Republicans and most of the Clinton tax increases were reversed. You seem to have a problem understanding the Contract with America and how much of it was implemented. You further ignored the Clinton Tax reduction act of 1997. Why is that?
    No, most were not reversed. The capital gains tax rates came down in 1997, but the bulk of the tax rate increases in the 1993 bill were left in place.

    And you can't complain that I don't go through every tax bill in the Clinton era, when you first ignored everything in the Reagan era post the big tax cuts in ERTA 81, including the biggest tax increase in history the very next year with TEFRA 82.

    Finally, yes, I know that all that's good is the result of republicans and all that's bad is caused by democrats, but we are talking about taxes here, so let's limit the discussion to that and not bring in the Contract on America unless relevant.

  4. #274
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,280

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    No, that argument is nonsense...Everyone in this country has ID, the over the top faux outrage over requiring an ID only goes to show that it would cut into liberal election tampering, NOT disenfranchising of any kind...Me thinks thou protest too much.
    Everyone might have "ID" but about 600,000 in Texas do not have one of the narrow list of Photo IDs accepted at the polls.

    And you can't show any "liberal election tampering" occurs through impersonation fraud at the polls. Republicans have tried like heck to find a problem of "voter fraud." Years of futile efforts to find a problem they could "solve" with Photo ID. So, finally, they gave up looking for any evidence of an actual problem of 'voter fraud' and just rammed through solutions to a non-problem anyway.

    Texas was a hilarious example. There is no one that can demonstrate more than a handful of impersonation fraud cases in Texas, total, over a decade or more. But despite this total lack of any evidence of a problem, Texas fast tracked the photo ID rules under almost unprecedented rules reserved for "EMERGENCY!!!" legislation. What was the "emergency?" Demographic changes that are eroding GOP prospects in Texas. They're hanging on to a declining majority by their fingernails - that's the "emergency" that needed solving with Photo ID rules.

  5. #275
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,647

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Everyone might have "ID" but about 600,000 in Texas do not have one of the narrow list of Photo IDs accepted at the polls.

    And you can't show any "liberal election tampering" occurs through impersonation fraud at the polls. Republicans have tried like heck to find a problem of "voter fraud." Years of futile efforts to find a problem they could "solve" with Photo ID. So, finally, they gave up looking for any evidence of an actual problem of 'voter fraud' and just rammed through solutions to a non-problem anyway.

    Texas was a hilarious example. There is no one that can demonstrate more than a handful of impersonation fraud cases in Texas, total, over a decade or more. But despite this total lack of any evidence of a problem, Texas fast tracked the photo ID rules under almost unprecedented rules reserved for "EMERGENCY!!!" legislation. What was the "emergency?" Demographic changes that are eroding GOP prospects in Texas. They're hanging on to a declining majority by their fingernails - that's the "emergency" that needed solving with Photo ID rules.
    What about any evidence of the 600,000 Texans without a valid ID?

  6. #276
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Last Seen
    11-16-17 @ 04:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,775

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Everyone might have "ID" but about 600,000 in Texas do not have one of the narrow list of Photo IDs accepted at the polls.

    And you can't show any "liberal election tampering" occurs through impersonation fraud at the polls. Republicans have tried like heck to find a problem of "voter fraud." Years of futile efforts to find a problem they could "solve" with Photo ID. So, finally, they gave up looking for any evidence of an actual problem of 'voter fraud' and just rammed through solutions to a non-problem anyway.

    Texas was a hilarious example. There is no one that can demonstrate more than a handful of impersonation fraud cases in Texas, total, over a decade or more. But despite this total lack of any evidence of a problem, Texas fast tracked the photo ID rules under almost unprecedented rules reserved for "EMERGENCY!!!" legislation. What was the "emergency?" Demographic changes that are eroding GOP prospects in Texas. They're hanging on to a declining majority by their fingernails - that's the "emergency" that needed solving with Photo ID rules.

    Hardly a "narrow list" .....

    Here is a list of the acceptable forms of photo ID:

    Texas driver license issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS)
    Texas Election Identification Certificate issued by DPS
    Texas personal identification card issued by DPS
    Texas concealed handgun license issued by DPS
    United States military identification card containing the person’s photograph
    United States citizenship certificate containing the person’s photograph
    United States passport

    With the exception of the U.S. citizenship certificate, the identification must be current or have expired no more than 60 days before being presented for voter qualification at the polling place
    Remember, on the other side of that screen is a real person. ( Missouri Mule )

  7. #277
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    68,316

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    JasperL;1063896257]The only way to compare apples to apples in the presence of variable inflation is to remove inflation from the figures. Bottom line is you asked a question you didn't know the answer to, got caught, found out that receipts rose more than twice as fast under Clinton as under Reagan, and so are trying anything to keep from recognizing that evidence.
    that seems to be a problem with you, living in the moment is a foreign concept and the only way it apparently makes you feel better is to adjust real time money into the future value. I recognize reality, you don't. Reality is Reagan doubled GDP, created 17 million jobs, created a peace dividend, cut FIT and grew FIT revenue 60%. noticed that the 1.7 trillion Reagan debt is a problem for you but not the 1.4 trillion Clinton debt. Why is that

    I'd address the Obama point but it's off topic and has nothing to do with this discussion.
    It has everything to do with the direction of the country. Obama's is wrong, Reagan got it right

    I just gave you inflation adjusted revenue, and linked to the proper table.
    If you are going to adjust numbers to inflation, adjust all numbers


    Intended or not, SS and Medicare were on budget almost all of the Reagan years, most of the Clinton years, the Bush years, and Obama years. And you're quoting total receipts, and growth in total receipts, then claiming that highway and bridge funding, paid for at least in part with gasoline taxes, and so aren't part of federal income taxes. Yes, but gasoline taxes are included in total receipts so what's the point?
    Yes, but the accounts were almost broke and that is the point therefore Reagan didn't have any funds to use as the outflow matched the income. Just like a liberal, one big pot of money, right? Gasoline taxes are to fund what? Why are they on budget for other items? A liberal hasn't seen a dollar they they will not spend and it doesn't matter what pot it is supposed to be in.

    No, most were not reversed. The capital gains tax rates came down in 1997, but the bulk of the tax rate increases in the 1993 bill were left in place.
    Do you realize how irrelevant tax rates are? Effective rates matter, that is what people pay. Congress lowered the tax rates in spite of Clinton's rhetoric and he signed them. now you want to give him credit for what Congress did

    And you can't complain that I don't go through every tax bill in the Clinton era, when you first ignored everything in the Reagan era post the big tax cuts in ERTA 81, including the biggest tax increase in history the very next year with TEFRA 82.
    Reagan increased USE taxes not Federal Income Taxes. If you didn't use the product you didn't pay the taxes. Everyone who earned income got a tax cut. what a novel idea, keeping more of what you earn

    Finally, yes, I know that all that's good is the result of republicans and all that's bad is caused by democrats, but we are talking about taxes here, so let's limit the discussion to that and not bring in the Contract on America unless relevant.
    If you want to talk taxes, why is it that liberals only want to raise them? Liberals want to give tax cuts to people who don't pay taxes. You call that a taxcut? I call it a handout

  8. #278
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,280

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    What about any evidence of the 600,000 Texans without a valid ID?
    Read the court opinion and the transcripts. Several people compared the list of registered voters with lists of those with photo IDs, those were subject to discovery, cross examination, presented in court, subject to perjury rules, etc. And those estimates by independent researchers were largely consistent - all showed several hundred thousand registered voters had no acceptable Photo ID.

    Texas didn't bother to try to estimate the number, and no one made a claim in court that the number was approaching zero.

    See the difference?

  9. #279
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,647

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Read the court opinion and the transcripts. Several people compared the list of registered voters with lists of those with photo IDs, those were subject to discovery, cross examination, presented in court, subject to perjury rules, etc. And those estimates by independent researchers were largely consistent - all showed several hundred thousand registered voters had no acceptable Photo ID.

    Texas didn't bother to try to estimate the number, and no one made a claim in court that the number was approaching zero.

    See the difference?
    There is a big difference between an estimate, and actually producing
    someone who cannot vote because they do not have an ID.
    If the estimates did not exclude people who have died, got married,
    or had other forms of valid ID, it did not account for the error in the process.
    The fact that the opponents could only produce one person who claimed
    she did not have an id, says much about how overstated the problem is.

  10. #280
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,771

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Everyone might have "ID" but about 600,000 in Texas do not have one of the narrow list of Photo IDs accepted at the polls.

    And you can't show any "liberal election tampering" occurs through impersonation fraud at the polls. Republicans have tried like heck to find a problem of "voter fraud." Years of futile efforts to find a problem they could "solve" with Photo ID. So, finally, they gave up looking for any evidence of an actual problem of 'voter fraud' and just rammed through solutions to a non-problem anyway.

    Texas was a hilarious example. There is no one that can demonstrate more than a handful of impersonation fraud cases in Texas, total, over a decade or more. But despite this total lack of any evidence of a problem, Texas fast tracked the photo ID rules under almost unprecedented rules reserved for "EMERGENCY!!!" legislation. What was the "emergency?" Demographic changes that are eroding GOP prospects in Texas. They're hanging on to a declining majority by their fingernails - that's the "emergency" that needed solving with Photo ID rules.
    As you've already been shown by previous posters there are multiple forms of ID that are acceptable. What other ID would you suggest be acceptable?

    Look, we live in a society where ID is used to verify the person's identification for nearly everything in life from buying a beer, to getting an assistance payment from the state. The common sense thing here is that if we want to protect our voter integrity from fraud, or illegal voting, that we require a simple proof of identity to cast a ballot.

    If you think that the absentee system is being abused then we can address that, but for now we are talking about voting at the polls. Now, if you want to say that the voter registration card should be enough, when it displays no picture, or anything that would prove that someone else is using another's card then I don't know what to tell you.

    As for it being provable, I really don't know how we would prove enough cases to make liberals agree that ID is required...Further, the past is nothing like what we see today with the absolute flood of illegals entering the country, and groups like LaRaza, and MeCha working to muddy those waters...
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 28 of 58 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... 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
  •