Now to get to where I am going: Would you agree with me that preventing a person from voting (having, say, an "intelligence" or "industriousness" test) is different in kind than having voting requirements that impose some burden, but do not prevent, voting? An example of a hypothetical burden ...

But normatively, I think citizenship in a republic or democracy carries with it a responsibility/duty to exercise the vote conscientiously. To familiarize yourself with a candidate's positions and also to try and understand how those positions will manifest (or have manifested) into public policy ...

Gonna be tough for the "ID less" NY group 5th notates to get the cheap food which is kind of the point of the cheap food no. and this is the irony of the situation. The folks saying no to voter ID are the ones asking for ID from grocery shoppers. Shoppers of the economic demographic these ...

Are these the votes that would cancel out a hard working tax paying I D voters vote… are these the voters you want voting? If someone is too stupid to get on the voters list, do you really want them participating? These are the attitudes that help marginalise these groups and underpinned voter s ...

So why not enable them to vote? Especially since it does nothing to harm election integrity. Why does everyone have such a hard-on for photo ID which has virtually no benefit? Let me ask you this -- if you were mistaken about your premises -- if voter id enhanced election integrity and had a net ...

... and it's just not worth it to them to go through the trouble and expense of getting a photo id just to vote. The bold italics.....perhaps rephrase it, because while it might be challenging for some of the examples you list, it is not impossible. It may be mildly time consuming, and there may be ...

Are these the votes that would cancel out a hard working tax paying I D voters vote… are these the voters you want voting? If someone is too stupid to get on the voters list, do you really want them participating? These are the attitudes that help marginalise these groups and underpinned voter s ...

Topper wrote: ↑Fri Jul 31, 2026 2:21 pm Many of us have entered the digital age

https://youtu.be/wF2gjAAkgs4?si=wK9NutKnqJjxbCRn

So you want to call it malarkey but not have to back up your words. You're disengaging from the topic again. Honest question here 5th, and I'd appreciate an honest answer. Do you actually believe the things you say, or are you simply playing devil's advocate for the sake of conversation? Why would ...

No, it's not needed. Election fraud due to in-person voter impersonation is incredibly rare. There is no problem to solve. So photo ID just ends up disenfranchising minorities and the poor. Politicians deliberately use this fake issue to get an edge in elections. Why does it disenfranchise them ...

So you want to call it malarkey but not have to back up your words.

You're disengaging from the topic again.

No, it's not needed. Election fraud due to in-person voter impersonation is incredibly rare. There is no problem to solve.

So photo ID just ends up disenfranchising minorities and the poor. Politicians deliberately use this fake issue to get an edge in elections.

rats19 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 03, 2026 5:25 pm Other than it’s stupid?

Your comment is about as useful as a Fuck Trudeau bumper sticker.

Why don't you engage with the topic instead Rats?

If requiring photo Id is not necessary for election integrity but disenfranchises some groups then it clearly can be racist. What's so hard to understand about that?

Apparently there's a thing where guys ejaculate on women in Dollar Tree stores and post about it online. Even a Dollar Tree employee has been caught jerking off behind the cash register. It's getting harder and harder for poor people. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/jul/20 ...