• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

The rise of domestic extremism in America

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
Again, the goal of the left is to allow everyone currently in the US for whatever reason the right to vote. They don’t cate if they are a citizen of the country or not.

They want no regulations or voting laws. Just open it up to anyone and everyone. They want ballots to be sent to every mail box in America and stacks of ballots to be placed on every street corner so anyone can fill one out and drop it in a mail box as many times as they want.

After all, laws and regulations are based on racism. Anyone who wants to secure our electoral process and restrict it to legally registered US citizens is a racist.
Given that you've never once been able to demonstrate that voter fraud influenced the results of even a local election, then I'm going to say yes, your motivation is most likely racism, and being a sore loser.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
And yet you have no problem restricting "legal, legitimate" voters, simply because they have no ID. You have no moral high ground.
Part of being a legal, legitimate" voter is the ability to show the required ID.
It's not a moral question. It's a question of validation / verification of being eligible to vote.
 

Tahuyaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,844
Reaction score
974
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
So what you are saying is that legal, legitimate voters should be prevented from voting if they don't meet the new restrictions and ID requirements. But don't worry guys, he doesn't want to make voting harder XD
Who doesn’t have some form of valid ID? Maybe we should create a new government agency which travels from door to door in every region of the country to provide everyone with a new approved ID card and a ballot.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
So what you are saying is that legal, legitimate voters should be prevented from voting if they don't meet the new restrictions and ID requirements. But don't worry guys, he doesn't want to make voting harder XD
Reading in what you wish were there, but isn't.

Voters who don't meet the voting requirements, as stated by the State law, aren't legal, legitimate voters. This includes the ID requirement if so stated by law.
All legal, legitimate voters should be permitted to vote if they want to. No one should force them to, if they don't want to.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
Part of being a legal, legitimate" voter is the ability to show the required ID.
It's not a moral question. It's a question of validation / verification of being eligible to vote.
No, being a legitimate voter does not require you to have an ID. Not unless a state legislature artificially creates such a requirement in order to make voting more difficult.
 

mrjurrs

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
9,066
Reaction score
3,334
Location
The Bay
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
?? How so. White supremicists, by the numbers, are pretty uncommon in general. They aren't even in the same league as antifa/blm/anti-government unrest that we've seen in portland, seattle, wisconsin, etc.
Some news outlets say that. DoJ disagrees.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
No, being a legitimate voter does not require you to have an ID. Not unless a state legislature artificially creates such a requirement in order to make voting more difficult.
State legislatures are the sole government organization which determine the laws and rules that surround elections in their states.
If the state law has an ID requirement, said ID requirement is required to be considered a legal and legitimate voter in that state.

You just discarding that requirement, if in the state's law, just because you don't like it, doesn't carry much weight or credibility. Where as the State law does carry much weight and credibility.
 

Tahuyaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,844
Reaction score
974
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Reading in what you wish were there, but isn't.

Voters who don't meet the voting requirements, as stated by the State law, aren't legal, legitimate voters. This includes the ID requirement if so stated by law.
All legal, legitimate voters should be permitted to vote if they want to. No one should force them to, if they don't want to.
In Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, soldiers went door to door on Election Day making people vote. Hussein’s last election he got 100% of the vote. Evidently that’s the system the left wants.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
State legislatures are the sole government organization which determine the laws and rules that surround elections in their states.
If the state law has an ID requirement, said ID requirement is required to be considered a legal and legitimate voter in that state.

You just discarding that requirement, if in the state's law, just because you don't like it, doesn't carry much weight or credibility. Where as the State law does carry much weight and credibility.
Not actually true, because the supreme court can overturn voting restrictions if it finds them to be unconstitutional.
 

Tahuyaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,844
Reaction score
974
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Not actually true, because the supreme court can overturn voting restrictions if it finds them to be unconstitutional.
You do realize that the US constitution places the responsibility to create voting laws in the hands of each state’s legislature, right?
 

AGENT J

"If you ain't first, you're last"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
61,702
Reaction score
17,956
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Extremism like BLM and antifa? Or imaginary extremism?


LMAO
no matter how much you hop up and down and proclaim otherwise its never going to fool honest, educated. objective people right left and center

"BLM" =/= antifa =/= extremists 🤷‍♂️
 

Tahuyaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,844
Reaction score
974
Location
Bremerton, Washington
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
No, being a legitimate voter does not require you to have an ID. Not unless a state legislature artificially creates such a requirement in order to make voting more difficult.
Why do you oppose a system which ensures the person voting is the person they claim to be?
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
You do realize that the US constitution places the responsibility to create voting laws in the hands of each state’s legislature, right?
Yes, and it also permits the Supreme Court to overturn those laws if it finds them unconstitutional.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
In Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, soldiers went door to door on Election Day making people vote. Hussein’s last election he got 100% of the vote. Evidently that’s the system the left wants.
Hence H.R. 1 contains the nationalization of ballot harvesting, which by all reasonable measures should be illegal in all states.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
62,962
Reaction score
30,303
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
"In August, a supporter of President Donald Trump was shot dead in Portland, Ore., by a suspected gunman who was a self-described antifa supporter. That killing was the only death last year attributed to far-left violence, the data shows. There were two deaths attributed to far-right attacks."

Wow, that really is a huge problem, indeed.
Your cherry picking fail...

Since 2015, right-wing extremists have been involved in 267 plots or attacks and 91 fatalities, the data shows. At the same time, attacks and plots ascribed to far-left views accounted for 66 incidents leading to 19 deaths.​
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
Why do you oppose a system which ensures the person voting is the person they claim to be?
Because voter fraud has never once been proven to affect the outcome of even a local election, let alone a national one.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Not actually true, because the supreme court can overturn voting restrictions if it finds them to be unconstitutional.
True, but that's a big IF, in the case of voter ID.

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an Indiana law requiring voters to provide photographic identification did not violate the United States Constitution.[1]
Seems SCOTUS has already ruled that State law requiring voter ID is not unconstitutional.
 

poweRob

USMC 1988-1996
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
62,962
Reaction score
30,303
Location
New Mexico
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The threat of white supremacy is a myth used to justify or excuse the true threat we are experiencing in every Democrat run big city in America.
More right wing minimization of their actions.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
True, but that's a big IF, in the case of voter ID.

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an Indiana law requiring voters to provide photographic identification did not violate the United States Constitution.[1]
Seems SCOTUS has already ruled that State law requiring voter ID is not unconstitutional.
I'm sure we could convince them to consider the question again, perhaps under more favorable circumstances.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I'm sure we could convince them to consider the question again, perhaps under more favorable circumstances.
'more favorable circumstances.'
Like a SCOTUS packed with leftist activist jurists?

Let's hope not. SCOTUS precedent, once set, isn't easily, or lightly, overturned, thank goodness.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
'more favorable circumstances.'
Like a SCOTUS packed with leftist activist jurists?

Let's hope not. SCOTUS precedent, once set, isn't easily, or lightly, overturned, thank goodness.
Not lightly or easily, but it can be overturned. FDR tried to pack the court to get his way. He failed, but then eight justices died. So he got what he wanted anyway.
 

eohrnberger

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
42,066
Reaction score
27,248
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Not lightly or easily, but it can be overturned. FDR tried to pack the court to get his way. He failed, but then eight justices died. So he got what he wanted anyway.
FDR was in office like 3 terms. That's a long time.

'Getting what you want' - what the left is all about all the time ('never let a crisis go to waste' - to gain more power, 'By any means necessary')
Never mind the negative consequences to others or the nation. Just as long as they get what they want.
Isn't that a prime example of 'party before nation'? That which they accuse other of all the time?
Just goes to demonstrate the truism: 'The left accuses other exactly of what they themselves are guilty of'.
 

Irredentist

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
4,391
Reaction score
1,767
Gender
Male
FDR was in office like 3 terms. That's a long time.

'Getting what you want' - what the left is all about all the time ('never let a crisis go to waste' - to gain more power, 'By any means necessary')
Never mind the negative consequences to others or the nation. Just as long as they get what they want.
Isn't that a prime example of 'party before nation'? That which they accuse other of all the time?
Just goes to demonstrate the truism: 'The left accuses other exactly of what they themselves are guilty of'.
Fine speech coming from the party passing new voting restrictions because they're mad they lost the last election.
 
Top Bottom