• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

DNC Chair: GOP wants to "Drag Us Back To Jim Crow Laws"

Instead of addressing my points, you guys are blowing what I'm saying out of the window and accusing me of actually saying they want to re institute Jim Crow. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the issue is there is voter disenfranchisement going on here, and it needs to stop.

The issue of military using absentee ballots is a different situation. Totally different.

you have twice now accused the GOP of trying to 'disenfranchise' 'certain voters', without bothering to clarify exaclty 'what' they are doing, or 'who' they are trying to disenfranchise.

I don't want talking points either. I want specific details on exactly WHO and WHAT.

Is that too difficult for you? Would you prefer, as usual, to simply parrot whatever your liberal handlers spoon feed you?
 
you have twice now accused the GOP of trying to 'disenfranchise' 'certain voters', without bothering to clarify exaclty 'what' they are doing, or 'who' they are trying to disenfranchise.

I don't want talking points either. I want specific details on exactly WHO and WHAT.

Is that too difficult for you? Would you prefer, as usual, to simply parrot whatever your liberal handlers spoon feed you?

Agreed. God forbid a college student actually have to get an absentee ballot, or make the effort to vote early or by mail. Is this some gargantuan challenge when they have family back in the home state who are likely paying thousands for the kid to go to screwl to begin with ?

Liberals, forgive me, but its time to stop acting like everyone is so ****ing stupid. Let's get the system honest and clean and you can finally learn to play by the rules. You'll feel better about yourself as you grow older, knowing that you matured from being such a scumbag in your youth.
 
Last edited:
For the hundredth time, look at my post. I posted the same thing twice with a clear and concise explanation, and it was blown off. Please go ahead and take a look.
 
For the hundredth time, look at my post. I posted the same thing twice with a clear and concise explanation, and it was blown off. Please go ahead and take a look.

sorry...I did not read back that far, as my questions (twice) was posted several pages after that. A link to the post might make it easier next time you're asked about something you may have already answered in a thread... just sayin.

Your post:
Gargantuan said:
This actually does have some merit. They are trying to make it harder in some cases for younger members of the population to vote by requiring more identification/stopping voting in college districts.

"Recent Republican proposals have or would put in place onerous voter ID requirements, curtail early voting, and prevent students from casting ballots where they go to school. These proposals are costly and could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands if not millions of voters, but most of those affected are more likely to vote for Democrats. Republicans have invoked the specter of voter fraud to justify the restrictions, but the type of voter fraud these laws are designed to address are extremely rare — the Bush administration, despite pursuing the issue vigorously, never produced more than a handful of voter fraud prosecutions."


More: Hyperbole about Jim Crow shouldn’t obscure truth about GOP voting proposals - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

Man I seem to be finding myself defending this woman a lot

OK... lets address those one at a time...

1... I see nothing wrong with requiring ID to be able to vote at a polling station. I was taken aback in PA the first time I voted here after moving, when I simply told them who I was, signed a register the first time, and was given my ballot. No ID check, nothing. I could have been anyone, and they never would have known. As for stopping voting in colleges, I see nothing wrong with that either. If the soldier in other countries have to cast absentee ballots, why can't college students who are away from home?

2... Pretty much covered in my first response. I have no idea what your personal definition of onerous is, but if it's showing a valid form of ID, then you're barking up the wrong tree.

3... Requiring voters to prove who they are by showing valid ID is not even remotely close to preventing them from voting. It would ensure their eligibility. You know, like proving your a natural born citizen so you can run for President?

4... You have GOT to be kidding! The alleged 'millions of college students' that would be affected... would be Democrats? No Republican college students would be hit by this? Really? You don't happen to have any hard numbers to back that up, do you?


That's almost a bigger FAIL for you than the other thread. :rofl:
 
Instead of addressing my points, you guys are blowing what I'm saying out of the window and accusing me of actually saying they want to re institute Jim Crow. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the issue is there is voter disenfranchisement going on here, and it needs to stop.

The issue of military using absentee ballots is a different situation. Totally different.

How is it totally different?

Both the Soldier living in the Barracks/On Base and the Student on a College Campus are "Non-Residents" of the state/district that they are currently residing in, but are allowed to cast a ballot obviously. (Granted the Student is out of State or Away from his home town area).

Yet this is handled much differently.
Both groups are typically "Young Americans".
 
Wow.

This was the same lady who accused Republicans of wanting to criminalize illegal immigration, and who accused Republicans of driving foriegn cars (when she herself did as well).

Dear DNC. Please keep this woman in charge of your organization. Because she is making you look amazingly stupid.


The video here

Hyperbole.

Reminds me of "Obama is a socialist."
 
Welfare recipients don't pay taxes. Get over it.

"Poor people shouldn't be able to vote." Another winning slogan for the GOP!

You guys are hilarious. Someone accuses you of keeping people from voting and you get all defensive. Then you list off people you think shouldn't be allowed to vote.
 
"Poor people shouldn't be able to vote." Another winning slogan for the GOP!

You guys are hilarious. Someone accuses you of keeping people from voting and you get all defensive. Then you list off people you think shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Why don't you tell me how everyone being able to vote is good for the country? Can you?
 
Why don't you tell me how everyone being able to vote is good for the country? Can you?

uh, representative democracy
did you skip civics class or something?
 
Yes, but they are essentially constant for all. The ability of politicians to manipulate income taxes, especially Democrats to continue to foment class envy and buy votes, is the overwhelmingly obvious issue with regard to tax carrots and sticks.

Why do you keep putting such absurd red herrings out there when the issue is so obvious even a caveman, and a liberal, should be able to see it ?

You hit the nail on the head. Progressive and Democrats want to continue to oppress minorities into a growing voter class dependent on the government handout of cheese - and they continue to not only be successful at it but grow those numbers each and every year using class warfare rhetoric and redistribution as their major vehicles.
 
No, I didn't skip it. I even took it into account.

Well, if you don't like democracy, there are plenty of non-democracies in the world that you can live in. I believe in dissent as an important part of our political system, but if you don't even believe in our political system, then I can't help you. I always hated people who said "Love it or leave it," (mostly because what they really meant was "agree with the Republicans of leave it), but I do think that if you don't have any respect or attachment to the basics of our political system...well, don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you.

If you read the Constitution there are little things like Freedom of Speech, Free Press and Freedom to Assemble. Political involvement is inherent in those things. John Adams believed that the Congress should be a "miniature" of American society. When you only let certain people vote, it looks like a "miniature" of that segment of society.
 
Welfare recipients don't pay taxes. Get over it.

Sales taxes are paid by anyone who buys just about anything.
 
You hit the nail on the head. Progressive and Democrats want to continue to oppress minorities into a growing voter class dependent on the government handout of cheese - and they continue to not only be successful at it but grow those numbers each and every year using class warfare rhetoric and redistribution as their major vehicles.

You have to have an income of around $100k/year before you start paying out more than you get back in terms of tax benefits.
 
really
no sales tax
no gasoline tax
amazing

That's exactly right. They don't pay those taxes. We pay those taxes, because they are spending our money, to begin with.
 
"Poor people shouldn't be able to vote." Another winning slogan for the GOP!

You guys are hilarious. Someone accuses you of keeping people from voting and you get all defensive. Then you list off people you think shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Care to show us the source of that slogan?
 
That's exactly right. They don't pay those taxes. We pay those taxes, because they are spending our money, to begin with.

That's a really stupid argument. That's like saying since I am a federal worker and you pay taxes to the gov you pay my salary and therefore anything I buy is yours.
 
You have to have an income of around $100k/year before you start paying out more than you get back in terms of tax benefits.

No you don't. The earned income credit stops short of 50 grand. Try again.

I made 430 g's last year and had to pay $7,000 in taxes, because I'm self employed, so don't give us that crap, bro.
 
That's a really stupid argument. That's like saying since I am a federal worker and you pay taxes to the gov you pay my salary and therefore anything I buy is yours.

That's an even stupider argument. All I'm saying is that the welfare class doesn't pay taxes. How can they possibly pay taxes, when the money they spend is government money, to begin with?
 
Well, if you don't like democracy, there are plenty of non-democracies in the world that you can live in. I believe in dissent as an important part of our political system, but if you don't even believe in our political system, then I can't help you. I always hated people who said "Love it or leave it," (mostly because what they really meant was "agree with the Republicans of leave it), but I do think that if you don't have any respect or attachment to the basics of our political system...well, don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you.

If you read the Constitution there are little things like Freedom of Speech, Free Press and Freedom to Assemble. Political involvement is inherent in those things. John Adams believed that the Congress should be a "miniature" of American society. When you only let certain people vote, it looks like a "miniature" of that segment of society.

What's that got to do with anything ? This is about legal voting. One qualified person = one vote. Cry me a river because dead folks will no longer be able to vote ! Or punks and scammers won't be able to vote more than once ! Boo-friggin hoo !!!!!

FYI, John Adams was a proponent of white propertied men being the only ones with appropriate "skin in the game" to vote. Which was proper for the time.
 
That's a really stupid argument. That's like saying since I am a federal worker and you pay taxes to the gov you pay my salary and therefore anything I buy is yours.

Wrong. The difference is that you did something to EARN that money.

The welfare recipients did not earn the money they have received.
 
Gargantuan said:
For the hundredth time, look at my post. I posted the same thing twice with a clear and concise explanation, and it was blown off. Please go ahead and take a look.

sorry...I did not read back that far, as my questions (twice) was posted several pages after that. A link to the post might make it easier next time you're asked about something you may have already answered in a thread... just sayin.

Your post:
Gargantuan said:
This actually does have some merit. They are trying to make it harder in some cases for younger members of the population to vote by requiring more identification/stopping voting in college districts.

"Recent Republican proposals have or would put in place onerous voter ID requirements, curtail early voting, and prevent students from casting ballots where they go to school. These proposals are costly and could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands if not millions of voters, but most of those affected are more likely to vote for Democrats. Republicans have invoked the specter of voter fraud to justify the restrictions, but the type of voter fraud these laws are designed to address are extremely rare — the Bush administration, despite pursuing the issue vigorously, never produced more than a handful of voter fraud prosecutions."


More: Hyperbole about Jim Crow shouldn’t obscure truth about GOP voting proposals - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

Man I seem to be finding myself defending this woman a lot

OK... lets address those one at a time...

1... I see nothing wrong with requiring ID to be able to vote at a polling station. I was taken aback in PA the first time I voted here after moving, when I simply told them who I was, signed a register the first time, and was given my ballot. No ID check, nothing. I could have been anyone, and they never would have known. As for stopping voting in colleges, I see nothing wrong with that either. If the soldier in other countries have to cast absentee ballots, why can't college students who are away from home?

2... Pretty much covered in my first response. I have no idea what your personal definition of onerous is, but if it's showing a valid form of ID, then you're barking up the wrong tree.

3... Requiring voters to prove who they are by showing valid ID is not even remotely close to preventing them from voting. It would ensure their eligibility. You know, like proving your a natural born citizen so you can run for President?

4... You have GOT to be kidding! The alleged 'millions of college students' that would be affected... would be Democrats? No Republican college students would be hit by this? Really? You don't happen to have any hard numbers to back that up, do you?


That's almost a bigger FAIL for you than the other thread. :rofl:

cricket.. cricket.. cricket.....
 
Back
Top Bottom