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.
I have already posted a link showing that the study from 2006 does not jive with the results from the actual elections from 2008. You are desperately comparing a "guess" from a study in 2006, to actual results from the 2008 elections. It was reported from the 15 states that already have voter ID laws that effects on voter turn out was less than a percent. No 5 million disfranchised voters.
You can keep ignoring it though. I understand.
Good reading as well...
Kris W. Kobach: The Case for Voter ID - WSJ.com
Let me see…..On average, less than 17.2 out of 190 million voters..... omg, it will devastate our voting system!!!! Totally worth disenfranchising 5 million eligible voters. :roll:
Let me see…..
17.2 million out of 190 million = 10%.
5 million out of 190 million = 2%
Mathematically, you lose.
As I noted the last time you printed this right wing opinion piece.
Photo ID laws have nothing to do with the cases of absentee voting fraud they speak of. Your red font was more convincing! LOL!
There is no criminal fraud that we do a better job of preventing in the US than voter fraud.
I was using your words, not the words of some study you think I am aware of, or care about.LOL! You misread the study, it is 17.2 people out of 190 million voters.
I was using your words, not the words of some study you think I am aware of, or care about.
Are you are trying to tell me that there were only 17.2 illegal votes out of 190 million votes in any recent election?
I was using your words, not the words of some study you think I am aware of, or care about.
Are you are trying to tell me that there were only 17.2 illegal votes out of 190 million votes in any recent election?
Between 2002 and 2006 according to the study 120 people were arrested and 86 convicted of Federal vote fraud in a national election.
Um, I dunno, cuz I have no clue what study you speak of? Do you really think I read every link you post? Been there, done that, know better.Sure, why would I expect you to read the actual study before you weighed in with your words of wisdom?
Here is your exact quote:My words were 17.2 which you assumed meant million rather than individuals.
You didn’t do well with word problems in math, did you?On average, less than 17.2 out of 190 million voters..... omg, it will devastate our voting system!!!! Totally worth disenfranchising 5 million eligible voters. :roll:
I’ll add more as I see fit. Why are you trying to disenfranchise me here on this forum? Seems you are all in favor of the right of others to have a voice until it carries a different tone than you want to listen to.Do you have anything to add to the topic discussion, or are you here to argue over your misunderstanding of a subject you have no interest in learning more about?
Do you live in another dimension where the only crimes committed equal those arrested or convicted? Come on Catawba, even you know this is beyond laughable.Over a five year period, that's right, that averages 17.2 people a year convicted out of 190 million voters.
Great googly moogly!!!!
Over a five year period, that's right, that averages 17.2 people a year convicted out of 190 million voters.
Great googly moogly!!!!
Only 2 national elections were held in that 5 year period. Again you keep ignoring that like the amount of time somehow makes it better, lol.
Do you live in another dimension where the only crimes committed equal those arrested or convicted? Come on Catawba, even you know this is beyond laughable.
And you dare ask me what I have to offer after you attack my opinion based on such dog terds like this? Get a life dude.
The idea that there are only 17.2 illegal votes out of 190 million (his numbers) isn't even worth further consideration. Even he knows he looks like a fool for standing by such claims.
Clearly he does not know that, as he has doubled down on the double dumb claim.The idea that there are only 17.2 illegal votes out of 190 million (his numbers) isn't even worth further consideration. Even he knows he looks like a fool for standing by such claims.
He does not need to, the only person on planet Earth trying to make the "17.2" people claim is you. The poor argument grows ever more unpersuasive (or intelligent) with each post.Take it up with the Bush Justice Dept. that did the 5 year study.
I see I made it too difficult to follow using If-then.I am using YOUR own language
So why are you happy about this?
I see I made it too difficult to follow using If-then.
If reasonable requirements equals disenfranchising then perhaps we should be happy they are not voting.
I wonder who cast one-fifth of a vote? Don't we normally vote in natural numbers?I was using your words, not the words of some study you think I am aware of, or care about.
Are you are trying to tell me that there were only 17.2 illegal votes out of 190 million votes in any recent election?
Actually, with voter fraud, that is indeed the way you know the crime was committed.. . .
We only know that voter fraud has occurred when we get a conviction for it.
Even in a case where we have more votes cast than voters, there may not be any fraud due to technical problems.
Regardless if you like it or not, that is the reality of voter fraud.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?