Wow, how predictable. Logging in, checking your 'subscribed to' threads where a certain not so talented sham fartist foisted the whole "17.2" emission and never could deliver on "how" requiring an I.D. to vote would do as he claimed? Then noticing that like most internet "debaters" he went *poof* when it became obvious how sad and trite his organ grind had become is now "trolling"? OK! Correct trolling none the less. I know I'd post a picture that implied a message even more weak than the noxious one I had before. If confronted with such and I had no stones. Or really would just rather, slither.......................
I really could care less what you are willing to sacrifice. Do you understand how this works? As in, got sources for your stats or are they plucked from the air whole cloth? Remember ahead of time, you're supposedly trying to convince someone that requiring voters to prove they have the right to vote is supposed to hurt the system more than allowing non citizens with no right to vote won't. Ya gotta come to the internet to see people making the same case shylock politicians trolling for every vote with a "hole" in the system that everyone knows needs addressing. Only your so called "argument is it does not need addressing. All because you are willing to "sacrifice"? Thankfully that kind of idiocy is relegated to people trying to make the argument you are. Must be frustrating watching common sense prevail state after state. I predict it is going to be a difficult road ahead for you as more states follow suit. Or don't you follow the news?
There really is nothing like another Catawba bromide blindly issued campaign statement sounding rationale. So what if it is out of left field and addresses nothing anyone said and looks like nothing more than just play by the book posturing. Posturing? Catawba doing this? No way! You mean when he should be making his previously abandoned case or his idiotic "17.2" brain fart try to go away, but instead seems to have downed a gallon can of beans with bran flakes and is doubling down? Catawba the internet debater? No way!
Don't know. Is the topic supposed to be the prosecution rate for voting fraud cases? I am supposed to assume that you are arguing that if we simply require voters to prove they are who they say they are, that rate will go down and all monies and efforts directed in that direction will be better spent elsewhere? Hell that is a good argument. I agree completely, thanks for the assistance.
Simply link where the data in that material supports your comments. Then correlate how this means we should not reform the system, try to sell it to the masses and good luck. Expect disappointment. Just saying the masses clearly are not buying it. Which is A-OK in my book. Like I said, you gotta come to the internet to see the whole don't reform it argument passionately made. Regardless how flat and lifeless it comes across.
You trying the whole "you are saying" tripe again? Know how to tell what I am saying? I said it, it appears in English text and can be copied and pasted. Get out of here with that limp noodle.
Source? I need none at all. Are you not able to follow along? You are right, my "blowhardiness" does not find a thing you have said to make a valid or even common sense argument for why we should NOT require voters to prove they are who they say they are and have the right to vote. How silly of you to make the 'a little bit of fraud never hurt anybody except a few people' case. What about the fact that neither I nor to judge the public at large is not buying your case is it that bothers you? Wait. Sorry. Who cares? This has nothing to do with how many times anything has been prosecuted and that is a seriously limp noodle you have there. Just saying. This is why you are in for reams of frustration, your silly internet argument, meandering and unrelated as it is to the issue of reform, is only that. An internet argument, I'm very thankful that is the only place anyone will pay it any attention.
The fact of the matter is that despite political posturing, the border towns in Texas are some of the safest to live in, in the United States.
Nothing but a thinly veiled ad hom. I'd be careful from here on out in this thread, since that is all you have to fall back on. It really does steam your Cleavland that you can't make any head way with your empty rhetoric huh? You just can't wrap your limp noodle around the fact you can't put forth a cognizant and even relevant argument on the topic. Clearly. That is not my fault, or anyone else's for that matter. You take up the "a little bit of fraud is OK" banner you get what you volunteered for. So what if this leaves you making the same sad little case that the crooked politicians who count on being able to count on illegal and fraudulent votes does. You wanna blabber about prosecution rates, well blabber away. Just stop looking for atta-boys for it. I don't atta-boy folks thumb gouging themselves in both eyes while they crow about their "view" of the world through the same prism.
I did not say you postured. The border towns in Texas are statistically safer than most parts of the US. I thought you said "don't believe" Rick Perry? You paying attention here?