Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Voter ID Redux

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Starlight View Post
    Do you understand the extent to which that value is a partisan left-wing value though? Especially in the US.
    Unfortunately, yes... I do

    On this topic, I definitely lean much further left than right. I find no compelling evidence to suggest voter fraud is a serious problem. So if someone succeeds in preventing 100 instances of voter fraud by disenfranchising 65K people, I consider that a bad solution. It denies a basic right in order to prevent a very small number of instances of fraud. It is out of balance. The solution should not disenfranchise significantly more people than the instances of fraud it prevents.

    So if you can show me that disenfranchising 65K people will prevent approx 65K instances of voter fraud - I'll probably say, OK - that's a reasonable swap. If you cannot show me that the fraud is happening at any significant level, then your solution should not disenfranchise people at any significant level.
    Last edited by carpedm9587; 10-11-2018, 04:26 PM.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
      You are missing that 65K+ of these people do not have a residential street address - because the USPS does not deliver on many of these lands. So they have a P.O. Box. instead. They have a mailing address - not a street address. So if they try to provide a copy of a bill, it will reflect a P.O. Box, not a residential address - thereby disqualifying them from voter registration.
      You are missing that they have to have a property address if they have water or electricity or garbage pickup --- and that appears to be allowed for on their website.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        If you read it - every part of it says that "residential address" is required. The problem is that some 65K of these tribe members do not have a residential address. They have a P.O. Box - but no numerical street address. Ergo, the tribal ID does not reflect it - the driver's license does not reflect it. Their address is a P.O. Box. As best I can tell - this is the case. So they cannot provide one of the three required pieces of information for voter registration.
        You missed "If an individual’s valid form of identification does not include the North Dakota residential address or date of birth, or the North Dakota residential address is not current, the individual may supplement the identification with a current utility bill"
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          You missed "If an individual’s valid form of identification does not include the North Dakota residential address or date of birth, or the North Dakota residential address is not current, the individual may supplement the identification with a current utility bill"
          And the current utility bill will likely have a P.O. Box - which fails to meet the requirements at the top of the page...

          Do you seriously think that the dissenters of SCOTUS are just blowing smoke, and don't have the facts?
          The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

          I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            You are missing that they have to have a property address if they have water or electricity or garbage pickup --- and that appears to be allowed for on their website.
            Where are you getting this piece of information, and how do you know that these 65K affected people are getting these services from a public utility? Citations please...
            Last edited by carpedm9587; 10-11-2018, 04:52 PM.
            The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

            I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              Where are you getting this piece of information. Citation?
              Unlike you, my friend - I didn't get it from a badly worded gossip column.

              I got it from the actual official North Dakota Secretary of State website.

              That link appears several times in this thread, including where I first supplied the information.

              SHEEEEESH, these people can be SO thick!

              sos nd.jpg
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                Where are you getting this piece of information, and how do you know that these 65K affected people are getting these services from a public utility? Citations please...
                How do you know they're not? Citations please.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                  This is the kind of thing being pushed by the right and Republicans ...
                  Let it be known that "this" (offered by Carpe) is a pinko commie leftist publication,

                  slate.jpg

                  verses the actual North Dakota Secretary of State website (offered by me ) where the qualifications are laid out.

                  You could have gone to the source yourself, brother.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    Yet the fact is that Native Americans in the U.S. have the right to vote - and have had it for a long, long time. It is now being denied in North Dakota for the lack of a specific street address.
                    Yes indeed. Your observation is correct that Native Americans have been granted federal standing to vote.
                    CowPoke already addressed the second point you tried to make.
                    Now do you have anything to add to what I pointed out?
                    Last edited by mikewhitney; 10-11-2018, 05:43 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      Let it be known that "this" (offered by Carpe) is a pinko commie leftist publication,

                      [ATTACH=CONFIG]32004[/ATTACH]

                      verses the actual North Dakota Secretary of State website (offered by me ) where the qualifications are laid out.

                      You could have gone to the source yourself, brother.
                      I DID go to the source, CP. I NEVER take one publication as writ. The website confirms the article, as does the SCOTUS dissention. I'm not sure why you are missing this.

                      And your objection is a classic example of the "genetic fallacy."
                      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        I DID go to the source, CP. I NEVER take one publication as writ. The website confirms the article, as does the SCOTUS dissention. I'm not sure why you are missing this.

                        And your objection is a classic example of the "genetic fallacy."
                        Oh, horse pucky! You're saying the official website is WRONG? It boils down to your added "street address" which is not on the ND SOS website OR the SCOTUS ruling.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                          18,000 people of voting age do not pay bills, get a paycheck, or have a bank account?

                          The Supreme Court denies certiorari in nearly all the cases it's asked to hear, and that's routinely done without explanation. It only takes 4 justices to grant; it looks like in this case only two were willing to do so.
                          Well, 4 are required for certiorari, but the request here was for staying the 8th Circuit's ruling, which requires 5. At any rate, it looks like they only got 2, unless some justices wanted to stay it but for whatever reason chose not to join Ginsburg's dissent. Which is possible, but seems unlikely to me given that it requires no extra work on their part.

                          It is a little surprising to me that she was able to get Kagan to sign onto it but not Sotomayor.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Terraceth View Post
                            Well, 4 are required for certiorari, but the request here was for staying the 8th Circuit's ruling, which requires 5. At any rate, it looks like they only got 2, unless some justices wanted to stay it but for whatever reason chose not to join Ginsburg's dissent. Which is possible, but seems unlikely to me given that it requires no extra work on their part.

                            It is a little surprising to me that she was able to get Kagan to sign onto it but not Sotomayor.
                            All of which makes me think that it wasn't the "street address" problem it was made out to be, as a utility bill could be used. Utilities have to have a physical service address -- you can't just hook up electric service to a PO box.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Oh, horse pucky! You're saying the official website is WRONG? It boils down to your added "street address" which is not on the ND SOS website OR the SCOTUS ruling.
                              Actually - I'm saying you are misreading the official website, and making assumptions it does not support. The top says clearly a "residential address" is one of the three required pieces of information, which is exactly the point of the court challenge, and the dissenter's response.
                              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                                Actually - I'm saying you are misreading the official website, and making assumptions it does not support. The top says clearly a "residential address" is one of the three required pieces of information, which is exactly the point of the court challenge, and the dissenter's response.
                                And I think you're being a blockhead. A "residential address" is not necessarily a "street address".

                                "Street address" gives the connotation of a residential homestead, like on a "street". A "residential address" could be a Rural Route, many of which we have in Texas -- like Route 4 box 37. THAT is a "residential address", but is NOT a "street address".

                                So, tell me, big chief knows everything, when a Native American's house is on fire, do they call 911 and yell "Quick, come to PO BOX 367!!!!"?



                                When they have a break-in, do they call the Tribal Police and say, "I can't tell you where I live because I don't have a freakin' STREET ADDRESS"?
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                230 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                173 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                72 responses
                                281 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X