- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 27,254
- Reaction score
- 9,350
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Just another example of why your so called argument is poor and unpersuasive. It consist of asking silly questions that have nothing to do with my comments. I'm sure you would love to sit back, pose a thousand questions you think are very thoughtful and then at the end of the day pat your own back for such a well stated "argument". Still a poor and unpersuasive argument and it is that simple. As I said, if you decide you are up to addressing what I did say rather than the way I turned your own words back on you (guess it was over your head despite how obvious it was) and explaining how voters will be disenfranchised, please do so. At this point you clearly can't do that, despite how much your trumpet your so called "thought".
Here let me rephrase. That's what I thought six hours ago when I asked. You can't detail how anyone will be disenfranchised by requiring an ID to vote. Good night.
I have already a posted a link to study that explains how 5 million voters would be disenfranchised. The question I asked speaks directly to the lack of need for a photo ID law.
By your being unable to list a single example of any other criminal fraud that is currently prevented as well, you are acknowledging, whether you realize it or not, this not a burning issue.
Last edited: