Has there been another election in history that was decided two years beforehand?

[SlevinKelevra]

This is a Red Herring Argument, and you darn well know it.

Voter IDs can, should, and have been provided by the State Governments for Free.

You're merely defending law breaking because it brings you power and money.

I'll give the Left credit for one thing, when it comes to Power-Lust and Greed, they are very consistent.

-

citation that ALL states with voter ID laws provide them for free?

because you know....

I have evidence that some don't want to
Ohio Will Let You Vote For The Low, Low Price Of $8.50! | Wonkette

Nowhere did I defend law breaking.

 

[EdwinWillers]

That's probably true.

One of the guys I work with said of the Obama second term election that he screwed it up pretty bad so far.

He then went on to say that we should give him a chance to fix it.

I thought it was like giving a wife beater a second chance with the same victim, but there you are.

That's a good analogy - particularly inasmuch as your coworker's premise is that Obama somehow wants to fix what he's screwed up so badly - which premise itself rests on another equally incredible premise - that Obama believes what he's done so far has been a massive screw-up. I of course don't swallow either as remotely credible. Such naivete as your coworker's statement exposes is very likely the real screw-up here - people assuming Obama's "fundamental change" for America must somehow end up being a good thing - and that despite all the "screw-ups" in the process.

 

[polgara]

you might have an argument if the constitution didn't explicitly ban poll taxes in federal elections (and unless the ID is free, it's ... a poll tax)

Greetings, SlevinKelevra. :2wave:

30 States - mine included - have required a photo ID for years in order to vote. How did they get around the poll tax thing? In Ohio, a State issued driver's license, or any other State-issued document, or a passport, is acceptable. I don't know about the other States - maybe they absorb the cost for those that can't afford the few dollars it costs?

 

[SlevinKelevra]

Greetings, SlevinKelevra. :2wave:

30 States - mine included - have required a photo ID for years in order to vote. How did they get around the poll tax thing? In Ohio, a State issued driver's license, or any other State-issued document, or a passport, is acceptable. I don't know about the other States - maybe they absorb the cost for those that can't afford the few dollars it costs?

I would say just because things have been done, doesn't mean they are right, just, or constitutional.

If a state issues a document at birth, and updates it for free(we do age visually, after all), and replaces it if lost (for free, to a limit, maybe 3 losses in a lifetime?) I have no problem with it as a means to verify voting credentials and enforce legal voting.

 

[fmw]

Re: Has there been another election in history that was decided two years beforeh...

Nice try...

You're not really a Libertarian, you're a Leftie Shill here to convince Libertarians that there is no reason to show up at the polls to vote against one of the most corrupt, deceptive and destructive politicians in American History.

I don't want gridlock, as a Libertarian, I want the TEA Patriots, and those among the class Republican Party with some sense, to begin to Dismantle the Bloated, Self-Serving, Unsustainable, Ridiculous Spending Government we've allowed to Fester and Cancerous Grow!

-

First time in my life I've been called a leftie. I agree she is one of the most corrupt and deceptive politicians in the country but people don't seem to care about that. You and I may but most people are partisan and overlook character in favor of partisanship. The reason I like gridlock is that it keeps government spending down. The only time we have had a decline in the size of government was right after WWII and that didn't last long. Political parties all grow government because it is in their best interests. Gridlock is the only weapon we have to help control it.

 

[LowDown]

It's not a matter of if Hillary becomes president, but what her first act as President will be.

She has a 48 percent lead over ALL her republican challengers COMBINED. A FORTY EIGHT PERCENT LEAD!

Poll shows Americans not impressed with 2016 contenders - Adam B. Lerner - POLITICO

To put that in perspective, Obama had about a five percent lead in October 2012.

So in the interest of knowledge, has any other US presidential election been decided two years beforehand, like the 2016 election will be?

According to the article you cite, Hillary has 47% favorable and 48% unfavorable responses to the poll.

The Republicans all have around 30 to 35% favorable and about the same unfavorable.

I don't know how you get the idea from that that she leads by 48%. You've got some screwy math going on there.

What the poll says to me is that there is poor name recognition of the Republicans, which will change, but that most people know who Hillary is, and her unfavorables are a little higher than her favorables. Also, she is trending down.

 

[EdwinWillers]

It's not a matter of if Hillary becomes president, but what her first act as President will be.

She has a 48 percent lead over ALL her republican challengers COMBINED. A FORTY EIGHT PERCENT LEAD!

Umm, actually it says nothing of the sort.

What it does say is that of the 11 names swirling around as potential contenders, NONE have a "favorability rating" above 50%.

Hillary's favorability rating among potential voters is 47% (not 48%). Hillary's UNFAVORABILITY rating is what's at 48% (down 7% from when she vacated the Sec'y of State position) - which has nothing to do with her leading anyone.

In point of fact, 51% of the potential voters said they would NOT vote for her while 50% said they wouldn't vote for any of the 11 potential candidates.

I haven't a clue how you came up with the notion that she's 48% ahead of everyone else, let alone in some sort of a combined fashion. Neither the article nor the polling numbers in the article suggest anything of the sort.

 

[Linc]

Re: Has there been another election in history that was decided two years beforeh...

i'm not even going to look up a reputable study to counter this absurd claim:

Voter Fraud Literally Less Likely Than Being Hit By Lightning | Mother Jones

Posts 32 and 33 are prime examples of some of the "lesser, low-rent" Nixon/Atwater cards
used by GOP voters to raise the negatives and drive down voter participation .