happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,046
|
Post by happyhoix on Jul 2, 2014 11:23:56 GMT -5
You know one poor guy who did a crappy thing.
I know a lot of rich guys who did crappy things, too. I work for one who is on his fifth wife, whom he started dating while he was still married to number 4 and she was still married to her previous husband. This guy is a multi millionaire. Then there is the prominent dentist who did the real estate scam, and the doctor who hired a hit man to kill his wife. And these are only the people I work with or go to church with.
I'm not saying there aren't poor people who try to scam the system. I'm saying the number of crappy people ready to screw over someone else in order to get what they want is not limited to the ranks of the poor, and, IMHO, the very rich can do a whole lot more damage than the poor, when they behave badly. Just think of Enron.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,926
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on Jul 2, 2014 11:24:46 GMT -5
Do you want a special voter ID card in addition to DLs and non-driving ID cards?
It does take effort to vote and a one-time getting of special voter ID card doesn't seem that long-lasting to me. If you are worried about whether people are US citizens perhaps that's what should be checked versus using documents that can be obtained without citizenship status.
Right now, there is no US database of citizens for states to query. Therefore, getting IDs at this time doesn't do much unless you sincerely believe there are significant amounts of people driving around voting in different locations.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,046
|
Post by happyhoix on Jul 2, 2014 11:33:04 GMT -5
No, as I said, the Republicans DON'T HAVE to educate their ranks on the new rule.
I vote in Georgia, too, and all I have to show is my driver's license - something most middle class and rich people already have. I didn't pay attention to the changes in the voting requirements, and it's a good thing I didn't have to do anything, because I would have been kicked out of the poll for not having an ID. And boy would I have been pissed that they changed the rules on me.
The people most likely not to have a license are the poor, who can't afford a car, or the elderly, who don't drive anymore. If these people weren't paying attention to the newspaper or local TV, they could very well get turned away at the polls.
The republicans were behind all these changes in the voter ID laws - are you really attempting to assert that the Republicans worked so hard to change the rules because they thought it was simply a pleasant thing to do, kind of a fun lark, and not because they coldly calculated the impact these new rules would have on voters that usually vote democratic?
What, in your opinion, was the reason the Republicans pushed so hard to get these new laws passed?
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 2, 2014 12:37:59 GMT -5
You know one poor guy who did a crappy thing.
I know a lot of rich guys who did crappy things, too. I work for one who is on his fifth wife, whom he started dating while he was still married to number 4 and she was still married to her previous husband. This guy is a multi millionaire. Then there is the prominent dentist who did the real estate scam, and the doctor who hired a hit man to kill his wife. And these are only the people I work with or go to church with.
I'm not saying there aren't poor people who try to scam the system. I'm saying the number of crappy people ready to screw over someone else in order to get what they want is not limited to the ranks of the poor, and, IMHO, the very rich can do a whole lot more damage than the poor, when they behave badly. Just think of Enron.
Just because I use an example of one poor person who has lousy priorities and zero personal responsibility doesn't actually mean I think that of all poor people. I'll say so if I think that, please do me the courtesy of not judging me without knowing me. I do not have to recount for your benefit what my working with and living with and being "the poor" has been in order to express an opinion.
The rich/poor thing is meaningless. Something very human in us encourages us to find an angle in the system we're in that we can exploit for our extrapolated self-interest. TAANSTAAFL, but that doesn't stop people from trying. The simultaneous hagiography and patronization of "the poor" by people gets my goat, is all. They're just folks, quite as capable of heroism or villainy as kings and princes.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 2, 2014 12:53:48 GMT -5
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 2, 2014 13:01:30 GMT -5
The prevalent belief in Republican circles is that Democratic operatives illegally advantage themselves in elections by encouraging the registration of ineligible voters - dead voters, multiple registrations in multiple precincts, etc., etc., etc. Voter ID requirements help to level that playing field. Yes, Republicans really think that it's tilted that way. It's like how Democrats think Republicans get too much money during election cycles, despite routinely outraising Republicans and despite most of the largest donors every cycle supporting Democrats. Harry Reid said the other day that "there are no billionaires" supporting his party. Dare to dream, Mr. Reid. Or DREAM, indeed.
For the record, I don't see there's a huge amount of evidence for this, but then there's not a huge amount of evidence that Lois Lerner coordinated a witch-hunt against Republican-aligned groups during the last election cycle either. I can see where absence of evidence is not taken as evidence of absence.
I can also see where these kind of laws sometimes overreach. In my view, Georgia's doesn't, and that's a view that's been endorsed by the courts (the analogous Indiana voter id law has a SCOTUS imprimatur, indeed).
Let me ask you something. Do you believe that "the middle class" (whoever THEY are these days) and "the rich" are Republican constituencies?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,404
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 2, 2014 13:56:49 GMT -5
The prevalent belief in Republican circles is that Democratic operatives illegally advantage themselves in elections by encouraging the registration of ineligible voters - dead voters, multiple registrations in multiple precincts, etc., etc., etc. Voter ID requirements help to level that playing field.
define "Republican circles"? do you mean management, or rank and file (voters)? i submit that there are two different opinions, there.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 2, 2014 14:53:53 GMT -5
I mean "some" Republican circles. Not all Republicans everywhere are clamoring for voter ID laws. Those Republicans are not being referred to here. I thought that was clear from context.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,046
|
Post by happyhoix on Jul 2, 2014 15:18:09 GMT -5
I'm confused, because you said this in the post before:
I know "the poor" well enough. And then you gave an example of a poor person being irresponsible and shirking his responsibilities to pay off a hospital.
That led me to believe you know poor people well enough to understand they shirk their responsibilities.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,046
|
Post by happyhoix on Jul 2, 2014 15:25:13 GMT -5
No, but I believe, if I was trying to find a way to winnow out the voters who are most likely to be democratic voters, I would try very hard to prevent the poorest people from voting.
For the middle and upper classes, I think a lot depends on where the people live. Around here, they are going to be largely republican, but around the east coast and large cities, more democratic.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 2, 2014 15:52:25 GMT -5
I'm confused, because you said this in the post before:
I know "the poor" well enough. And then you gave an example of a poor person being irresponsible and shirking his responsibilities to pay off a hospital.
That led me to believe you know poor people well enough to understand they shirk their responsibilities.
You also should have caught, although it wasn't as overt, my express contempt for any effort to homogenize "the poor" into a bloc that can be considered as susceptible to some common centrally-planned solution.
"The poor," if it has any meaning at all, references a population who has relatively little money. Whether that is wealth or income; whether it is the result of spendthriftiness or natural disaster; whether they respond with integrity and effort, or chicanery and parasitism - they're all "the poor." Some people who would clearly be seen as "the rich" - Donald Trump at various stages of his rollercoaster life - have met what would be a reasonable definition of "the poor." There is no real use to the definition - there is no valid statement you can make that begins "the poor are poor because -" or "the poor can be made less poor by -".
We can say that, if we arbitrarily subdivide a population, say, by economic quintile, and call the two poorest quintiles "the poor," that we could expect among that population an idiosyncratic response profile to polling on various questions. "Do CEOs make too much?" "Is it okay to steal bread if your children are starving?" "Have you ever been homeless?" "Is $7.25 a fair hourly wage?" "Does gas cost too much?" "Should baseball players make as much money as they do?" I'd EXPECT a certain profile to emerge from lower-economic-quintile respondents, but I'd not be at all surprised if any particular respondent didn't fit that profile.
Poor people DO shirk their responsibilities. People in all quintiles shirk their responsibilities. If I was hazarding a guess, I'd suggest that poor people find their economic responsibilities more burdensome, ceteris paribus, than do wealthy people - and I'd hypothesize that their social burdens are commensurately relatively lighter thereby. For instance, I'd think your average poor person has more trouble keeping up with a car payment, and is more likely than his rich counterpart to skip a payment, duck collection calls, or in extreme instances torch the thing as an insurance write-off. I'd think your average rich person has more trouble staying faithful to his life partner and treating the serving staff in his local Starbucks with the respect they deserve. But both of those are really stereotypes, caricatures grounded in a species of psephological reality but not fundamentally applicable to any real person who might or might not belong to either population.
If you tell me you're "rich," or "poor," I don't really know anything more about you. It doesn't really change what I know of you at all, and it certainly doesn't help me decide which way you'll vote next year or how you feel about deforestation in Brazil or the humanitarian crisis of immigrant children under the Obama administration.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 2, 2014 22:41:49 GMT -5
Dubby,
I'm just yanking your chain. Chill thyself.
Gosh golly LizKing. After a round of golf in 94 degree heat and a couple IPA's at the pub I was quite "chill" at 11:30 last night. I sincerely hope this post doesn't "inhibit dialogue" again.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,404
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 2, 2014 22:58:45 GMT -5
I mean "some" Republican circles. Not all Republicans everywhere are clamoring for voter ID laws. Those Republicans are not being referred to here. I thought that was clear from context. no, you misinterpreted me. what Republican circles think that this is an issue about Democrats registering dead people? that is what i was asking. specify.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 16, 2024 11:46:35 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2014 23:36:51 GMT -5
I usually vote for the Republican candidate because their views on most things are usually closest to my own. Most things and closest are about as good as it's going to get and still often far from my ideal candidate.
|
|
bean29
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 10,008
|
Post by bean29 on Jul 3, 2014 1:24:12 GMT -5
You kind of answered your own question there, hoix.
By the way, the Georgia law is that everyone has to have a valid ID. I'm pretty sure the State Supreme Court wouldn't have upheld it if it was called the "Special Negro Voting Card Law," or if that was either its intent or its effect.
It's interesting that you seem to suggest that Republicans - legendary for their turn-out-the-vote and microtargeting operations as they are - could align all their ducks and get all their voters savvy to the extremely basic requirements of voting...
While those shambling Democrats, with their archaic ideas of electoral strategy, presumably just offer up secular prayers for their voters and hope for the best. That makes sense to me. The party that will go knocking on people's doors to encourage them to register (not for the Democrats necessarily, oh no, a recruitment drive like that would be illegal - it's bipartisan don'chaknow), that will pick them up at their door and bus them to the polling place on the big day... nah, they wouldn't make sure those folks had picture ID. Sure they wouldn't.
Can you think of a cogent reason why they wouldn't? Biased much? The better off you are the more likely you have a flexible work schedule and or the ability to take time off without pay. DMV around here is not open later than my normal work/commuting hours. When I went to renew my license I was mighty glad my employer has PTO-it prob took 2.5 hours. Also people in the inner city often drive before they have a license and then get tickets they need to clear before they have a license. In WI the republicans basically outlawed extended voting hours- helps keep the poor from reaching the polls.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 9:42:05 GMT -5
Dubby,
I'm just yanking your chain. Chill thyself.
Gosh golly LizKing. After a round of golf in 94 degree heat and a couple IPA's at the pub I was quite "chill" at 11:30 last night. I sincerely hope this post doesn't "inhibit dialogue" again. Quite the reverse. See, another response.
It's not exactly the Federalist Papers, but then neither of us is James Madison. We do what we can with what we have.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 9:44:01 GMT -5
I mean "some" Republican circles. Not all Republicans everywhere are clamoring for voter ID laws. Those Republicans are not being referred to here. I thought that was clear from context. no, you misinterpreted me. what Republican circles think that this is an issue about Democrats registering dead people? that is what i was asking. specify. As usual, you're asking me to specify what were already redundant to specify.
Those Republican circles clamoring for voter ID laws are doing so because they believe Democrats are abusing the registration process to illegally register voters and artificially bolster the Democratic vote.
Am I going to have to start rearranging the word order to find the magic combination for you?
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 9:50:02 GMT -5
Time is one of the few luxuries that "the poor" is more likely to have, if not enjoy, than "the rich." In my state at least, employers are actually obligated to give their staff reasonable accommodation to go and vote. The same is true in Wisconsin, as it happens.
In my state - again, since as usual people respond to me without reading what I've said - you don't have to go to the DMV to get a voter ID. In Wisconsin, you don't currently need an ID to vote, pending a decision before the State Supreme Court. Given Indiana's precedent, and without being familiar with the details of Wisconsin's law, I'll be interested to see how that shakes out.
As for the people who drive unlicensed... I'm trying to follow the logic of that bit to the moral high ground, and I'm struggling.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 3, 2014 11:20:47 GMT -5
Those Republican circles clamoring for voter ID laws are doing so because they believe Democrats are abusing the registration process to illegally register voters and artificially bolster the Democratic vote.
It's an excellent cover story with some sweet smelling smoke considering the actual lack of evidence of real voter fraud, except for Florida in 2000, which changed the world for the worse.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,404
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 3, 2014 11:44:47 GMT -5
no, you misinterpreted me. what Republican circles think that this is an issue about Democrats registering dead people? that is what i was asking. specify. As usual, you're asking me to specify what were already redundant to specify.
Those Republican circles clamoring for voter ID laws are doing so because they believe Democrats are abusing the registration process to illegally register voters and artificially bolster the Democratic vote.
Am I going to have to start rearranging the word order to find the magic combination for you?
actually, answering the question would work a lot better. but i give up, with this parting suggestion: voter ID laws have little, if anything, to do with voter fraud. consider that.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 12:44:32 GMT -5
dj, that's the opinion in YOUR circles.
If the whole world thought the way you do, we wouldn't need this board. Or a great many other things that we do, in fact, need.
If you think that there's something else involved, come out and say it. Have the courage of your conviction. I don't need to supply both sides of an argument, particularly when I don't believe one and I'm not invested in the other.
The question was asked, repeatedly, and answered, repeatedly. I'm sorry the answer you got wasn't the answer you wanted. Supply that answer yourself if you must, but don't demand it of me.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 12:45:12 GMT -5
Those Republican circles clamoring for voter ID laws are doing so because they believe Democrats are abusing the registration process to illegally register voters and artificially bolster the Democratic vote.
It's an excellent cover story with some sweet smelling smoke considering the actual lack of evidence of real voter fraud, except for Florida in 2000, which changed the world for the worse. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. And absence of reportage is not absence of evidence.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 3, 2014 13:16:49 GMT -5
Voter ID laws are evidence there is a desired absence.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 13:23:23 GMT -5
That was some clever wordplay there.
Except that the actual evidence, in my state for instance, not one that has covered itself in glory in the history of race relations, is markedly the reverse: arguably driven by fear of disenfranchisement, minority voters were a larger proportion of the 2010 electorate, after the voter ID law, than of the 2006 electorate before it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,404
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 3, 2014 13:44:56 GMT -5
dj, that's the opinion in YOUR circles.
what circles would those be, Jim?
If the whole world thought the way you do, we wouldn't need this board. Or a great many other things that we do, in fact, need.
we don't need this board. but that has neither here nor there.
If you think that there's something else involved, come out and say it. Have the courage of your conviction. i have probably stated it 20x on this board, jim. it doesn't take any courage to repeat myself again, only a higher pain threshold than i have at the moment.
I don't need to supply both sides of an argument, particularly when I don't believe one and I'm not invested in the other.
nah. i would rather just bury a bee in your bonnet, and let you ruminate. the fisher of men parable comes to mind.
The question was asked, repeatedly, and answered, repeatedly. I'm sorry the answer you got wasn't the answer you wanted. Supply that answer yourself if you must, but don't demand it of me. the question was not answered. so, i presume that you were doing an ass pull. here is another, equally valid: nobody actually believes that voter ID laws are designed to stop dead people from voting. you want me to say why? i am sure you do: because the dead voter problem has nothing (ok, 99.9% of nothing) to do with IN PERSON VOTING. the "dead person" issue has to do with absentee voting, which has about as much to do with voter ID laws as does your reply to my question.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,404
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 3, 2014 13:46:35 GMT -5
That was some clever wordplay there.
Except that the actual evidence, in my state for instance, not one that has covered itself in glory in the history of race relations, is markedly the reverse: arguably driven by fear of disenfranchisement, minority voters were a larger proportion of the 2010 electorate, after the voter ID law, than of the 2006 electorate before it. irrelevant. do you need me to tell you why, or can you exercise your somewhat intimidating logic to tell ME why?
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 13:50:16 GMT -5
Yes. I need you to tell me why an increase in the minority voter share is evidence of disenfranchisement of minorities.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,404
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 3, 2014 13:59:44 GMT -5
Yes. I need you to tell me why an increase in the minority voter share is evidence of disenfranchisement of minorities. that is the negative of the argument. i am not going to prove that. you're on your own. however, the evidence for the case i was making is as obvious as Romney's predictions about the 2012 race.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 14:02:14 GMT -5
How would I know? Feel free to pointlessly deny that you move in your own circles. Your circle could be a dot with just you in it, and the comment would still be valid. You define these things, not me.
There's this thing people do when they expect somebody to say something, and what that person actually says incorporates what they expected in some larger context. They tune out the unexpected bits and respond to what they were expecting to respond to. Look back at what I said, peel off the bits that your quoted response doesn't address, and you'll see what I mean.
|
|
Lizard King
Senior Member
It's an anagram, you know.
Joined: Nov 6, 2013 16:22:24 GMT -5
Posts: 2,589
Favorite Drink: La Fee Verte
|
Post by Lizard King on Jul 3, 2014 14:02:39 GMT -5
Yes. I need you to tell me why an increase in the minority voter share is evidence of disenfranchisement of minorities. that is the negative of the argument. i am not going to prove that. you're on your own. however, the evidence for the case i was making is as obvious as Romney's predictions about the 2012 race. I still need you to tell me.
|
|