Quantcast

a question for 91% of blacks

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
b/c under his term black unemployment has almost doubled?

so by their 'logic', i was disenfranchised when i moved from VA. after all, i didn't meet the criteria to cast a ballot, according to election law. shall we also say the law disenfranchises those convicted of a felony? or those who change citizenship? pure piffle.

do i *really* have to throw up yet another Project Veritas link demonstrating numerous holes in our voting system? wouldn't you rather close the door on voter fraud by republicans and in republican strong-holds?
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,815
8
looking for classic NE singletrack
b/c under his term black unemployment has almost doubled?

so by their 'logic', i was disenfranchised when i moved from VA. after all, i didn't meet the criteria to cast a ballot, according to election law. shall we also say the law disenfranchises those convicted of a felony? or those who change citizenship? pure piffle.

do i *really* have to throw up yet another Project Veritas link demonstrating numerous holes in our voting system? wouldn't you rather close the door on voter fraud by republicans and in republican strong-holds?
Blacks voting against Obama due to high unemployment caused by the Bush Recession would be like Jews in the 1930s getting fed up with the lack of social progress and voting for that guy with the funny mustache in protest... Regardless as to whether you think Obama has benefited your situation or not, Romney and the Republicans haven't put forward a single proposal that would make things better for them: Cuts to social services - nope. Slashing taxes on the rich - nope. Ending "Obamacare" - nope. Making it harder for them to vote - nope.

This election doesn't have Obama's name with a Yes/No question after it, no matter how much Republicans wished that that were the case. Unless the GOP can find someone who has changed his name to Generic Republican Candidate, it's still a choice between Obama and Romney.

By the way with regards to election fraud, can you point to all of the cases of election fraud that would have been avoided if we'd had voter ID in place at the time? Because here in WI (just passed voter ID, on hold by the courts) that number is..... zero. Yup, in recent memory there is NOT A SINGLE CASE of someone showing up to vote and finding out that someone already had voted for them. The tiny amount of voter fraud cases that we do have all revolve around felons on parole voting (illegal) or people voting twice (in person and absentee), NEITHER of which would be prevented by voter ID. So to prevent zero crimes, Republicans want to disenfranchise ~%10 of the population (at least in PA), the vast majority of whom are poor or minority or both.

As for "Project Veritas", if it was so easy for dead people to vote, why haven't hey just examined voter rolls (lists of who voted in the election are public knowledge) and seen how many dead people *actually* voted? You know, actual research instead of committing voter fraud themselves? If it was so prevalent, surely they could have found AT LEAST ONE dead person who voted, right?
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
Blacks voting against Obama due to high unemployment caused by the Bush Recession would be like Jews in the 1930s getting fed up with the lack of social progress and voting for that guy with the funny mustache in protest... Regardless as to whether you think Obama has benefited your situation or not, Romney and the Republicans haven't put forward a single proposal that would make things better for them: Cuts to social services - nope. Slashing taxes on the rich - nope. Ending "Obamacare" - nope. Making it harder for them to vote - nope.
taking godwin's name in vain aside, i'd like to observe a larger problem here: the lack of economic mobility of blacks. i hardly see pumping more [borrowed] money into ever increasing "safety net" programs as empowering blacks. in fact, it is a form of slavery. can't protect you if you stray from the plantation, boy.
By the way with regards to election fraud, can you point to all of the cases of election fraud that would have been avoided if we'd had voter ID in place at the time? Because here in WI (just passed voter ID, on hold by the courts) that number is..... zero. Yup, in recent memory there is NOT A SINGLE CASE of someone showing up to vote and finding out that someone already had voted for them. The tiny amount of voter fraud cases that we do have all revolve around felons on parole voting (illegal) or people voting twice (in person and absentee), NEITHER of which would be prevented by voter ID.
could
won't change your mind, so why waste my breath on high-hanging fruit?
So to prevent zero crimes, Republicans want to disenfranchise ~%10 of the population (at least in PA), the vast majority of whom are poor or minority or both.
yes, you've uncovered the master GOP plan
now kindly uncover your head from the tin foil
As for "Project Veritas", if it was so easy for dead people to vote, why haven't hey just examined voter rolls (lists of who voted in the election are public knowledge) and seen how many dead people *actually* voted? You know, actual research instead of committing voter fraud themselves? If it was so prevalent, surely they could have found AT LEAST ONE dead person who voted, right?
this is evidence of just that, but as stated, you won't change your mind. your stubbornness is only matched by the stubbornness of facts.


will you now attempt to wiggle free by saying that just b/c it *can* happen is not proof of it *ever* happening, therefore it never happened. absence of evidence & all that

additionally, their bigger fish is when you show up trying to vote without being on the roll (rather useful for ballot stuffing), or claiming to be someone without verification of identity (the name 'eric holder' comes to mind)
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,815
8
looking for classic NE singletrack
So what you're saying is that you have zero proof of dead people *actually* voting, and zero evidence of any voter fraud that would have been prevented with Voter ID laws. Got it. Thanks for proving my point.

As for Voter ID laws disenfranchising demographic groups likely to vote Democratic, is it really that tin-foil-hatty? Seriously? Written by ALEC, introduced by Republicans in state legislatures, signed into law by Republican Governors and disproportionately affects voting groups that tend to vote Democratic (young people, minorities, poor, urban voters, etc). All must be one gigantic coincidence that the laws pushed through by Republicans primarily benefit Republican candidates? Are Republican politician candidates really that dumb to not realize what they're doing benefits them tremendously?

BTW, lol at "Project Veritas". It's sad that Conservatives won't even stoop to doing *actual* research and *actual* investigations instead of showing up with a hidden video camera. Like I said before, whether someone voted or not is public record. All you have to do to prove massive voter fraud is to go through the list and find a single person who is deceased that voted in ANY of the past elections. Surely with the hundreds of thousands of dead people voting, they could have found **ONE** instance, right?

But hey, thanks for linking to PV as your only *actual* source of (possible, supposed?) voter fraud. It makes me feel quite a bit better about my position...
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
So what you're saying is that you have zero proof of dead people *actually* voting, and zero evidence of any voter fraud that would have been prevented with Voter ID laws. Got it. Thanks for proving my point.
try it nao?


BTW, lol at "Project Veritas". It's sad that Conservatives won't even stoop to doing *actual* research and *actual* investigations instead of showing up with a hidden video camera. Like I said before, whether someone voted or not is public record. All you have to do to prove massive voter fraud is to go through the list and find a single person who is deceased that voted in ANY of the past elections. Surely with the hundreds of thousands of dead people voting, they could have found **ONE** instance, right?

But hey, thanks for linking to PV as your only *actual* source of (possible, supposed?) voter fraud. It makes me feel quite a bit better about my position...
try it agin?

b/c it's fauxnewz....

there's more if you go to youtube & poke around. i used the particularly clever phrase "dead people voting". perhaps i could find more inconvenient results, but i'll leave that as an exercise for you
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,815
8
looking for classic NE singletrack
About those "900 dead people voting"......

Although the state has not disclosed the names of the 900 zombies who allegedly showed up at the polls, Wilson did provide six names which he claims are on the list. Yet a preliminary review of these six by the South Carolina State Election Commission reveals six far more innocent explanations:

One was an absentee ballot cast by a voter who then died before election day;

Another was the result of an error by a poll worker who mistakenly marked the voter as Samuel Ferguson, Jr. when the voter was in fact Samuel Ferguson, III;

Two were the result of stray marks on the voter registration list detected by the scanner – again, a clerical error;

The final two were the result of poll managers incorrectly marking the name of the voter in question instead of the voter listed either above or below on the list.
So the list of 6 names that the AG provided as an example of the "OMFG 900 dead peoples voted!!", zero were *actual* cases of voter fraud.

Full report by the SC SEC.

With the presidential primary looming on January 21, the SEC was compelled to find out if any of the 37,000 voters identified by DMV as deceased had requested absentee ballots for the primary. This research found 10 voters in 8 different counties applied for absentee ballots. The SEC immediately asked local election officials to provide us with copies of the voter registration and absentee applications signed by these voters. In every case, the signatures on these forms were matched, and each of these ten voters was confirmed to be alive.
Oooops.

Edit: By the way, this is why some of us on here prefer actual research as opposed to a highly-inflammatory video made by a partisan hack. But hey, if you're gullible enough to fall for it and prefer to remain blissfully ignorant, who am I to inject any type of reality?
 
Last edited:

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,815
8
looking for classic NE singletrack
And an update on the South Carolina Zombie Voters.

The agency went on to investigate more than 200 other names on the dead voter list and found zero cases of illegal activity.

Eventually, the attorney general’s office announced that the State Law Enforcement Division would handle the rest of the names on the list.

“No one in this state should issue any kind of clean bill of health in this matter until the professionals at SLED have finished with their work,” said an attorney general’s office spokesman at the time.

That was in February.

So, what is the status of the SLED’s zombie voter probe?

“The investigation is continuing,” is all SLED spokeswoman Kathryn Richardson would say about the matter.
So a Republican AG drops a bombshell that he KNOWS that 953 dead people voted in recent elections right about the time that SC was debating Voter ID, and it's dry-humped for weeks on end by Fox News. The SC SEC investigates ~206 of the 953 names and determines that not a single one of those claims of voter fraud is valid. Now it's ~7 months later and there's crickets coming from the State's AG office.... But hey, there's still a Fox News video out there on Youtube that people like yourself can point to and say "OMFG DEAD PEOPLES ARE VOTING!!!"
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
Edit: By the way, this is why some of us on here prefer actual research as opposed to a highly-inflammatory video made by a partisan hack. But hey, if you're gullible enough to fall for it and prefer to remain blissfully ignorant, who am I to inject any type of reality?
i don't know why you hang on so tightly to the claim that b/c there hasn't been a sufficient number of dead voters there's not significant vulnerabilities in our voting system, which was my original statement.

ex: in MS, you cannot purge voter rolls less than 90 days before a federal election. just stupid.

apart from the unindicted black panthers (thanks eric!), no one is for voter intimidation, suppression, or disenfranchisement. it just isn't so.

what *is* so is when you compare the 2 parties, one wants more voter accountability, the other, less
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,815
8
looking for classic NE singletrack
apart from the unindicted black panthers (thanks eric!), no one is for voter intimidation, suppression, or disenfranchisement. it just isn't so.

what *is* so is when you compare the 2 parties, one wants more voter accountability, the other, less
Really? Are you still clinging to your belief that it's all just one massive coincidence that the right-wing is pushing Voter ID bills that will make it harder for demographics that usually vote Democratic to vote at all?

Republicans just want voter integrity and the fact that it will help them disenfranchise almost 10% of Pennsylvania's (Democratic-leaning) voters is just a bonus, something that they never really thought about until it was brought up by the media?

Come on, you're not *that* dumb. Some Republican (voters) do care about voter integrity. However the Republican (politicians) who passed these laws care about one thing, disenfranchising the voters who are most likely to vote Democratic. It's why Republicans have focused on Voter ID, as opposed to finding ways to better update voter rolls. (And by "better" I mean more accurately, as opposed to Florida's attempt to kick off minorities....)

So tell me, $tinkle, if the Republicans just want voter integrity, why are they focusing on Voter ID laws that disenfranchise a huge portion of the population when there are other options that would achieve the same affect and NOT disenfranchise 10% of PA's population?

By the way, thanks for admitting that there aren't huge numbers of dead people voting. I could've sworn that was your position previously.
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
Republicans just want voter integrity and the fact that it will help them disenfranchise almost 10% of Pennsylvania's (Democratic-leaning) voters is just a bonus, something that they never really thought about until it was brought up by the media?
did this happen, or is this feared to potentially happen in future elections? are you fear-mongering in the way you accuse me of? sure seems that way.
It's why Republicans have focused on Voter ID, as opposed to finding ways to better update voter rolls.
could it have something to do with the fact there *is no* mechanism in place to verify voter identity in states that have newly enacted voter ID laws, but *there is* a mechanism in place to update voter rolls (antiquated & misapplied as it may be)?

of course, the answer is yes.
So tell me, $tinkle, if the Republicans just want voter integrity, why are they focusing on Voter ID laws that disenfranchise a huge portion of the population when there are other options that would achieve the same affect and NOT disenfranchise 10% of PA's population?
you seem to very passionate about voter [dis]enfranchisement, with a singular focus on presumed democrat voters. do you equally assail efforts by those who would suppress active duty military members' votes? you know, the ones who fight for *everyone's* right to vote? of particular note: black voters, who are represented in all branches of the military by greater proportion than the general population.

you've been strangely silent on that group. i'm guessing it doesn't fit your narrative.

and yes, everyone would be best served if the GOP's efforts were broadly applied, agreed. and of course i acknowledge they are likely to be applying "more bang for buck" in their approach to so vigorously pursue voter ID laws
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
what's the +/- james o'keefe will get up in his best Medina in a few months for this (no way she'll make it to november):

105-year-old registers to vote in general election
FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) — Margaret Harris hasn't voted in an election in 84 years.But she intends to on Nov. 6.The 105-year-old Harrodsburg woman, who was born 14 years before women got the right to vote, registered as a Democrat last Friday.Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes helped Harris to register during a visit to her home on the oldest street in Kentucky's oldest city. Harris didn't say who she intends to vote for.Harris raised nine children and has more than 50 grandchildren and 50 great-grandchildren and 20 great-great-grandchildren.Grimes said she's hopeful that Harris' example inspires others to get involved in the political process.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,815
8
looking for classic NE singletrack
you seem to very passionate about voter [dis]enfranchisement, with a singular focus on presumed democrat voters. do you equally assail efforts by those who would suppress active duty military members' votes? you know, the ones who fight for *everyone's* right to vote? of particular note: black voters, who are represented in all branches of the military by greater proportion than the general population.
WTF are you babbling about? Last I checked states were moving up their primaries to ensure that there was adequate time for ballots to be mailed to servicemen and women.

That's kind of the exact opposite of laws that would disenfranchise 10% of PA's population... And no, it hasn't happened yet because the laws were just put into place (or are being fought in the courts). Are we just supposed to wait until AFTER the Republicans sweep in in a landslide due to massive voter disenfranchisement to complain? Can we pass a law that says no white males get to vote in the upcoming election, but nobody can sue for disenfranchisement because an election hasn't taken place yet?

Then again, I'm not the only person saying it's going to happen:

 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
For blacks, empathy trumps the economy
For the vast bulk of the African-American political class, the sense of identification and empathy with the nation’s first black president has almost always taken primacy over whatever disappointments they have with his record.
The disappointment is perhaps strongest on the economy, since black people are worse off now than they were when Obama first took office, according to virtually every major indicator.
They have fared worse than whites throughout Obama’s time in the White House. Their plight, therefore, cannot be pinned on the general malaise that has afflicted the nation since the financial crash.
In January 2009, the month Obama took office, black unemployment stood at 12.7 percent, outstripping white unemployment, which stood at 7.1 percent.
The national unemployment rate and the rate among whites have both ticked down since then, but African-American joblessness has actually worsened. It now stands at 13.7 percent, while the white rate is just 6.6 percent.
that's some shameful sheeeeiit right there
 
Last edited:

Cliff Racer

Chimp
Sep 21, 2012
12
2
The republican plan to fix the employment gap between black and whites by ending affirmative action policies in workplaces certainly leads me to question whether the choices of black voters are entirely rational when they fail to vote republican.
 

Cliff Racer

Chimp
Sep 21, 2012
12
2
Not too stupid to figure out what those policies mean when given context:

"You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”"
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
12,644
660
Front Range, dude...
Not too stupid to figure out what those policies mean when given context:

"You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”"
That is the context that you apply to it because you obviously approve of the way the GoP approaches race relations and domestic policy. There is an idiotic yet loud minority out there (Which you are apparently a member of...) that believes freedoms fought for and granted by law can be taken away and they will magically reappear because of mans good will and Buddha nature. This aint gonna happen. One of the small yet important roles government must fill now is to protect those who have little or nothing from being exploited by those who have much and who would exploit them for gain.
Rationalize much?
 

Cliff Racer

Chimp
Sep 21, 2012
12
2
That is the context that you apply to it because you obviously approve of the way the GoP approaches race relations and domestic policy. There is an idiotic yet loud minority out there (Which you are apparently a member of...)
Sorry, I don't agree with GoP race relations policy. The quote I used above is from Lee Atwater, and helps me understand their policies better.