• 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!

Ex-staffer: Wisconsin GOP intended ID law to disenfranchise Dems

imyoda said:
Of course you do not understand this thinking.......
Either because you do not want to ......
Or because you are not poor, a person of color, old. or sick....
Click to expand...

You can get them free of no charge.
So none of that matters.
 
ludin said:
You can get them free of no charge.
So none of that matters.
Click to expand...

The intent of the law is to disenfranchise voters.............This is the purpose of these new voter ID law and is well known; and has been publicly admitted by several GOP officials and Congressional members.......

And rhetorical arguments are just that.........empty words.............Argue as you will............these laws are intended as voter suppression .........
 
imyoda said:
Ex-staffer: Wisconsin GOP intended ID law to disenfranchise Dems | MSNBC
Ex-staffer: Wisconsin GOP intended ID law to disenfranchise Dems


“….Ex-Republican staffer in Wisconsin: Legislators cheered voter ID bill for what It 'could do for us'….”

“A day after Wisconsin’s strict voter ID law helped cause long lines at the polls and kept some would-be voters from casting a ballot at all, a former GOP staffer told MSNBC his party actively intended for it to disenfranchise Democratic voters.
……“Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI), spilled the beans on Wisconsin's voter ID law Tuesday, when he admitted that the new voter ID law in the state would help Republicans win it in November……..
“Now a former top Republican legislative staffer says that was an intent of the law. Todd Allbaugh, who served as chief of staff for state Sen. Dale Schultz (R) until he retired, first made the claims in a Facebook post. TMP followed up with an interview in which Allbaugh, now a coffee shop owner, unloaded on the Wisconsin Republicans …………

….. Allbaugh originally described the caucus meeting in a Facebook post Tuesday that drew widespread attention. Without naming names, he wrote that some GOP senators were “giddy” about the law’s ability to suppress Democratic votes. Allbaugh told MSNBC that he was inspired to write the post after a young employee at his coffee shop found himself disenfranchised by the ID law because he has an out-of-state driver’s license……….
ALSO SEE:
House Republican accidentally tells the truth about voter ID | MSNBC
Wisconsin Republican lets the truth slip: Voter ID will help GOP in general election
Ex-Staffer: Wisconsin GOPers Cheered Voter ID Bill For What It 'Could Do For Us’
Ex-Republican staffer in Wisconsin: Legislators cheered voter ID bill for what It 'could do for us'
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=221323231557115&id=100010383187417&pnref=story
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statep...ter-first-big-test-b99701512z1-374789941.html
https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/717420501203861505?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

THEY MUST CHEAT TO WIN?

AND SEE NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT?
Click to expand...

Its pretty clear. Republicans have many time explained the real reason why these kind of laws are needed, and it has nothing to do with "combating fraud" (this is a talking point that has been debunked over and over again), it has to do with disenfranchising a certain part of the electorate who overall mainly does not vote for the GOP.
 
imyoda said:
I am not sure.............

But I believe the issue here is not how many but the dishonesty and un-American of denying a citizen his/her right to vote by the use of flim-flam rules and regulation designed to do so.......

It would be a service if you could research just how many citizens will be denied their right to vote.........
Click to expand...

Sounds a lot like some of the proposed anti gun laws.
 
imyoda said:
Did you bother to the news report?

Why not try responding to that.........
Click to expand...

Did the news report contradict what you posted? You made a post. I responded to your post. Did you feel that your opinion was worthless in light of the opinion of the Wisconsin staffer?

I still do not understand how any of the personal qualities you noted keep someone who wants to vote from voting.

Personal stupidity, bad planning and intentional obstinacy seem to be bigger impediments to voting than any restraint placed on individuals by others.

All of that said, though, you will need to present a better case for allowing anyone to vote without credentials than you have.

Where does it stop? If the prospective voter cannot speak English? Is obviously pre-teen? does the prospective voter need to be a human? What if cow is presented to vote? We'll assume that the cow self identifies as a human. If the cow self identifies as a human male? How about insects? How about a clairvoyant who claims to be in contact with numerous entities that all want to vote and all claim to be legitimate voters? Should she be able to cast votes for each of those that she represents?

Exactly where do you draw the line to disallow the voting franchise to an entity who wants to vote?
 
Last edited:
imyoda said:
I am not sure.............

But I believe the issue here is not how many but the dishonesty and un-American of denying a citizen his/her right to vote by the use of flim-flam rules and regulation designed to do so.......

It would be a service if you could research just how many citizens will be denied their right to vote.........
Click to expand...

So is it a violation of persons right to a public trial that you need ID to enter federal courthouses?
 
I suspect the point was that those who vote and aren't entitled to vote at all overwhelmingly tend to vote Democratic <sic>.
However if through some fluke the intended law also excluded anyone who would have voted Republican and wasn't entitled to vote at all that's okay too.

But either way it's not called disenfranchisement.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
So is it a violation of persons right to a public trial that you need ID to enter federal courthouses?
Click to expand...

Of course............ but first that person must have violated a law to be charged so..........

Having the Federal Government put one's name on a list is not a crime ........nor does it violate anyone rights...........

Now I know yall are going to say it is a violation of that persons right to buy a gun or fly...........

Well the person you say had hid rights violated can do with so many other cases of like nature..................to sue the Federal government........


BTW

Where have you been for the pass 15 years "fighting" against the "violation of civil rights" since the NO FLY list began..........

Please tell us that?
 
code1211 said:
Did the news report contradict what you posted? You made a post. I responded to your post. Did you feel that your opinion was worthless in light of the opinion of the Wisconsin staffer?

I still do not understand how any of the personal qualities you noted keep someone who wants to vote from voting.

Personal stupidity, bad planning and intentional obstinacy seem to be bigger impediments to voting than any restraint placed on individuals by others.

All of that said, though, you will need to present a better case for allowing anyone to vote without credentials than you have.

Where does it stop? If the prospective voter cannot speak English? Is obviously pre-teen? does the prospective voter need to be a human? What if cow is presented to vote? We'll assume that the cow self identifies as a human. If the cow self identifies as a human male? How about insects? How about a clairvoyant who claims to be in contact with numerous entities that all want to vote and all claim to be legitimate voters? Should she be able to cast votes for each of those that she represents?

Exactly where do you draw the line to disallow the voting franchise to an entity who wants to vote?
Click to expand...

Where to draw the line?

ON the word of the one who claims to have the right to vote...........

The system we have used for so many years............and has proven by studies...........illegal voting occurs at the rate of .0007............
 
imyoda said:
Ex-staffer: Wisconsin GOP intended ID law to disenfranchise Dems | MSNBC
Ex-staffer: Wisconsin GOP intended ID law to disenfranchise Dems


“….Ex-Republican staffer in Wisconsin: Legislators cheered voter ID bill for what It 'could do for us'….”

“A day after Wisconsin’s strict voter ID law helped cause long lines at the polls and kept some would-be voters from casting a ballot at all, a former GOP staffer told MSNBC his party actively intended for it to disenfranchise Democratic voters.
……“Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-WI), spilled the beans on Wisconsin's voter ID law Tuesday, when he admitted that the new voter ID law in the state would help Republicans win it in November……..
“Now a former top Republican legislative staffer says that was an intent of the law. Todd Allbaugh, who served as chief of staff for state Sen. Dale Schultz (R) until he retired, first made the claims in a Facebook post. TMP followed up with an interview in which Allbaugh, now a coffee shop owner, unloaded on the Wisconsin Republicans …………

….. Allbaugh originally described the caucus meeting in a Facebook post Tuesday that drew widespread attention. Without naming names, he wrote that some GOP senators were “giddy” about the law’s ability to suppress Democratic votes. Allbaugh told MSNBC that he was inspired to write the post after a young employee at his coffee shop found himself disenfranchised by the ID law because he has an out-of-state driver’s license……….
ALSO SEE:
House Republican accidentally tells the truth about voter ID | MSNBC
Wisconsin Republican lets the truth slip: Voter ID will help GOP in general election
Ex-Staffer: Wisconsin GOPers Cheered Voter ID Bill For What It 'Could Do For Us’
Ex-Republican staffer in Wisconsin: Legislators cheered voter ID bill for what It 'could do for us'
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=221323231557115&id=100010383187417&pnref=story
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statep...ter-first-big-test-b99701512z1-374789941.html
https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/717420501203861505?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

THEY MUST CHEAT TO WIN?

AND SEE NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT?
Click to expand...

:applaud

Well, now we're getting them to admit that it's not about America or the constitution, it's about their agenda.

Nice post.
 
Fenton said:
Obama's DOJ basically claimed Blacks were too stupid to obtain a ID.

DOJ Expert Witness: Blacks Are Less Sophisticated Voters - Katie Pavlich
Click to expand...


They know what the reasons are for the suppression laws..............as a matter of fact, an organization whose name escapes me funded and directed by the Koch brothers has conferences on issues like so-called voter fraud............for elected officials..........and they write proposed legislation to "solve" the problem...................which than can be brought back an offered for debate ........and hopefully passage into law.........

Canned legislation to be passed and sure to solve an n on-excitant problem....yet having the effect of suppressing the vote.........

And the posts as below are nothing more than rhetoric................empty words to deny what the real purpose of the law was......

They have no shame
 
imyoda said:
And of course you believe that...........
Click to expand...



That's one lazy and vacuous response there Imyoda

How about you put forth the effort to read the article I posted so you can offer up a intelligent and informed rebuttal
 
Fenton said:
That's one lazy and vacuous response there Imyoda

How about you put forth the effort to read the article I posted so you can offer up a intelligent and informed rebuttal
Click to expand...

WOW............You're into big words eh friend....................But you just described your reply...........

And a tad nasty and judgmental if I might add..........


I think this subject has been beaten to death with yall not faltering in repeating the same old empty words talking points.......

So don't waste my time with a reply
 
imyoda said:
WOW............You're into big words eh friend....................But you just described your reply...........

And a tad nasty and judgmental if I might add..........


I think this subject has been beaten to death with yall not faltering in repeating the same old empty words talking points.......

So don't waste my time with a reply
Click to expand...

Lol....

Beaten to death ? You haven't even offered up a intelligent and relevant rebuttal yet

Obama's DOJ argued that Blacks were less " sophisticated ". Thats just another way of saying they're dumber based on their skin color

Do you not have a problem with that ?
 
imyoda said:
Where to draw the line?

ON the word of the one who claims to have the right to vote...........

The system we have used for so many years............and has proven by studies...........illegal voting occurs at the rate of .0007............
Click to expand...

Then there should be no problem with using the kind of ID required to buy a loaf of bread.

That said though, if there is absolutely no method available to establish if a vote is cast by a qualified voter or a not qualified voter, how would the rate of illegal voting be determined?

Just wondering if the statistic you cite means anything.

Do you have a link for that?
 
code1211 said:
Then there should be no problem with using the kind of ID required to buy a loaf of bread.

That said though, if there is absolutely no method available to establish if a vote is cast by a qualified voter or a not qualified voter, how would the rate of illegal voting be determined?

Just wondering if the statistic you cite means anything.

Do you have a link for that?
Click to expand...

I did not do the study ands do not know the methodology used..........

Goggle it and find out.........

And no I'm not going to go look for it......

What I said is what I read.........take it or leave it....
 
imyoda said:
I did not do the study ands do not know the methodology used..........

Goggle it and find out.........

And no I'm not going to go look for it......

What I said is what I read.........take it or leave it....
Click to expand...

If that is the level of your proof, I will give it exactly the weight that it deserves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom