SURPRISE! Totalitarian Liberals Want to Make it MANDATORY TO VOTE

[320 Years of History]

I agree that not enough people vote. I happen also to believe that most people -- regardless of political persuasion -- lack will to examine issues in sufficient detail to know what vote to cast. Accordingly, I think it best that they refrain from voting, for I don't like one bit that mental midgets might actually have a meaningful say in the future of the country in which I live.

 

[Rustic]

Same folks who supported the Obamacare debacle. Don't have health care, you will be punished. No one should ever think Communists/Progressives care about Freedom & Liberty. You either follow their agendas... Or else.

Don't have a mortgage? You will be punished.

Didn't buy the right kind of refrigerator? You will be punished.

Didn't buy the right kind of electricity? You will be punished.

It wasn't a leap to punish you for not having the right kind of health insurance.

Just one more reason to ban tax expenditures.

How is one punished by not having a mortgage?

You pay more taxes than someone with a mortgage who earns the same income you do.

You are punished for not having a mortgage.

This is exactly why the insurance mandate was found to be constitutional.

It's extortion

 

[g5000]

Dipshit OP writer has the uniform wrong. It was the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact which had compulsory voting, not Nazi Germany.

Just another historically ignorant dumb **** who thinks Nazis are left wing.


22 countries where voting is mandatory

They did start out as progressive socialists, but as always socialism turns into fascism.

Socialism always turns into fascism, eh?

Link?

I'm pretty sure Australia is not fascist. CATO doesn't seem to think so, either.

 

[g5000]

Same folks who supported the Obamacare debacle. Don't have health care, you will be punished. No one should ever think Communists/Progressives care about Freedom & Liberty. You either follow their agendas... Or else.

Don't have a mortgage? You will be punished.

Didn't buy the right kind of refrigerator? You will be punished.

Didn't buy the right kind of electricity? You will be punished.

It wasn't a leap to punish you for not having the right kind of health insurance.

Just one more reason to ban tax expenditures.

How is one punished by not having a mortgage?

You pay more taxes than someone with a mortgage who earns the same income you do.

You are punished for not having a mortgage.

This is exactly why the insurance mandate was found to be constitutional.

It's extortion

Absolutely. It's also a giant government behavioral control program.

Which is another reason why all tax expenditures should be banned.

 

[Katzndogz]

It's a wonder that demorats don't have default as demorat which the voter has to change by voting.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

^ Another absolutely retarded rejoinder.

YOU for example DO have a right to vote (unless you are convicted of a felony or happen to be a minor or not a citizen). But it is YOUR responsibility to have appropriate evidence at the polling place that you ARE a citizen or a resident of that community. it is YOUR responsibility to figure out where YOUR polling place is.

You have a RIGHT to vote, but you also have a right to be an ignorant dumb ass -- and if you do not bother going to the polling place for your district or if you have no way to verify that you ARE the person we call g5000, then how would the volunteer at the polling station know whether or not YOU are that person?

Why is it in ANY way "wrong" to demand enough ID to verify that? What if YOU happen to be a person (maybe an illegal alien even) who has zero right to vote in one of our elections? Why should the rest of us be compelled to tolerate such an effort to commit a criminal act?

Papers! Papers, please! Sieg Heil!

You tards have zero intelligence and limited imaginations.

Let's pretend someone showed up as me and voted. Oh noes!

That's as far as your TardLogic goes.

What never occurs to you idiots is that your master plan goes all kablooey two minutes later when I show up to vote!

^ Another in a long litany of very stale, unimaginative, petty and unpersuasive rhetorical crap from a liberal.

Imagine our utter lack of surprise that a twit liberal like g.5 is using the fallacious "nazi" reference on a topic which he cannot debate it, intelligently, on the merits.

Notice the gigantic Nazi reference in the OP on which you were completely silent.

IF you actually ARE stupid enough to claim that you shouldn't be called upon to provide proper evidence that you ARE who you claim to be, then what prevents somebody else from voting in YOUR name and place, thereby either preventing YOU from voting or diluting your actual vote?

What prevents someone voting as me is me. When I show up to vote, then the fraud is immediately exposed. Which is why in-person fraud is so rare.

I splained this once to you already, retard. Why you making me repeat myself?

Voter ID has been demonstrated to be completely ineffective. In those states where Voter ID is in force, the ACTUAL types of voter fraud which occur are still occurring.

So there's a giant clue you Voter ID tards are missing.

No one has ever been able to provide a single example of actual voter fraud which could only have been stopped or prevented by Voter ID.


So the push for national identity papers must have an altogether different motive.

Papers! Papers, please!

For the record, I have read the Constitution and I see several very specific references to the right to vote. It Is true that it is often stated in terms of denying particular kinds of restrictions ON that right. But if it is denying the validity of certain kinds of restrictions (age, race, gender, poll tax, etc.), then it is also and simultaneously affirming the right itself.

The Constitution (which includes its ratified Amendments) therefore DOES specifically address the RIGHT to VOTE.

If others dispute the existence of that right, then I just disagree with them.

Still, it is a right (at least in FEDERAL elections for FEDERAL offices like Members of the House of Representatives, and the Senate and the President) that is VALIDLY limited to U.S. citizens. As it should be.

And for state and local elections, it is a right that is properly restricted to the state residents OF such respective states and the local residents of the various localities.

If I live in Suffolk County, on Long Island (I don't), I SHOULDN'T have any say in the budget questions of NASSAU county on Long Island. And vice versa. So, why shouldn't the volunteers at the polling stations be properly allowed to verify that I AM a resident of that county or that locality that state and so forth?

Hey, dumbshit.

Your name does not appear on the voter registration list anywhere in the country except where you are registered to vote.

You aren't on the voter list in Nassau county. So you cannot vote there. No Voter ID necessary.

Have you ever actually voted? You would know these things if you did.

I see that argument by analogy eludes you, you ******* abject pathetic imbecile.

That was my point of course. Unless I LIVE in Nassau county, my name would NOT appear on its voter list. But if the polling place volunteer is not allowed to make me prove WHO the **** I am when I go there all the same to vote it might be difficult to prevent me from casting my illegal vote.

Can you truly BE as ******* stupid as that?

Wow.

A person with your brain power must find the whole breathing thing to be very difficult.

Again, if you voted as Joe Bob Smith, the Nassau citizen, your fraud would be exposed as soon as Joe Bob Smith showed up to vote.

This is why in-person fraud is so rare, even during the two centuries we voted without Voter ID.

Now I have explained this to you THREE times, retard. Let's hope it sticks this time.

Perhaps you could nail it into your thick skull by finding real world examples of in-person fraud. Good luck with that.

We have low voter turnout. So the odds of having the true person known as voter Joe Bob whatever being AT tthe polling place at the same time as you, perpetrating your criminal fraud, is quite low.

And you DO know, don't you, that there HAVE been prosecutions in our fair land for voter fraud in the past? Right?

And lots of your fellow idiot uber liberals (or are you a lib who pretends to be a "progressive" as though there were any meaningful distinction?) INSIST that there should be NO voter ID verification made at all.

You ask LOTs of truly meaningless questions to deflect.

But the truth is, the last big election cycle, I took the trouble of citing some examples of voter fraud cases. Didn't make a dent in your stupid contentions as liberals. You nitwits cannot even intelligently respond to the concept that ONE instance of voter fraud DILUTES the votes of everyone else. One Man ONE Vote are pretty hollow words to you dishonest hack bitches.

 

[Rustic]

Dipshit OP writer has the uniform wrong. It was the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact which had compulsory voting, not Nazi Germany.

Just another historically ignorant dumb **** who thinks Nazis are left wing.


22 countries where voting is mandatory

They did start out as progressive socialists, but as always socialism turns into fascism.

Socialism always turns into fascism, eh?

Link?

I'm pretty sure Australia is not fascist. CATO doesn't seem to think so, either.

Give them time, all the "great" dictators of history have socialism to thank for their rise.
It always starts out "for the greater good" and "redistribution of resources/wealth" and innocent, but always ends up with another genocide...

 

[g5000]

Dipshit OP writer has the uniform wrong. It was the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact which had compulsory voting, not Nazi Germany.

Just another historically ignorant dumb **** who thinks Nazis are left wing.


22 countries where voting is mandatory

They did start out as progressive socialists, but as always socialism turns into fascism.

Socialism always turns into fascism, eh?

Link?

I'm pretty sure Australia is not fascist. CATO doesn't seem to think so, either.

Give them time, all the "great" dictators of history have socialism to thank for their rise.
It always starts out "for the greater good" and "redistribution of resources/wealth" and innocent, but always ends up with another genocide...

So that's all you have for your bald assertion? "Give them time"?

 

[Rustic]

Dipshit OP writer has the uniform wrong. It was the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact which had compulsory voting, not Nazi Germany.

Just another historically ignorant dumb **** who thinks Nazis are left wing.


22 countries where voting is mandatory

They did start out as progressive socialists, but as always socialism turns into fascism.

Socialism always turns into fascism, eh?

Link?

I'm pretty sure Australia is not fascist. CATO doesn't seem to think so, either.

Give them time, all the "great" dictators of history have socialism to thank for their rise.
It always starts out "for the greater good" and "redistribution of resources/wealth" and innocent, but always ends up with another genocide...

So that's all you have for your bald assertion? "Give them time"?

When they run out of others money, we will see.

 

[g5000]

Papers! Papers, please! Sieg Heil!

You tards have zero intelligence and limited imaginations.

Let's pretend someone showed up as me and voted. Oh noes!

That's as far as your TardLogic goes.

What never occurs to you idiots is that your master plan goes all kablooey two minutes later when I show up to vote!

^ Another in a long litany of very stale, unimaginative, petty and unpersuasive rhetorical crap from a liberal.

Imagine our utter lack of surprise that a twit liberal like g.5 is using the fallacious "nazi" reference on a topic which he cannot debate it, intelligently, on the merits.

Notice the gigantic Nazi reference in the OP on which you were completely silent.

IF you actually ARE stupid enough to claim that you shouldn't be called upon to provide proper evidence that you ARE who you claim to be, then what prevents somebody else from voting in YOUR name and place, thereby either preventing YOU from voting or diluting your actual vote?

What prevents someone voting as me is me. When I show up to vote, then the fraud is immediately exposed. Which is why in-person fraud is so rare.

I splained this once to you already, retard. Why you making me repeat myself?

Voter ID has been demonstrated to be completely ineffective. In those states where Voter ID is in force, the ACTUAL types of voter fraud which occur are still occurring.

So there's a giant clue you Voter ID tards are missing.

No one has ever been able to provide a single example of actual voter fraud which could only have been stopped or prevented by Voter ID.


So the push for national identity papers must have an altogether different motive.

Papers! Papers, please!

For the record, I have read the Constitution and I see several very specific references to the right to vote. It Is true that it is often stated in terms of denying particular kinds of restrictions ON that right. But if it is denying the validity of certain kinds of restrictions (age, race, gender, poll tax, etc.), then it is also and simultaneously affirming the right itself.

The Constitution (which includes its ratified Amendments) therefore DOES specifically address the RIGHT to VOTE.

If others dispute the existence of that right, then I just disagree with them.

Still, it is a right (at least in FEDERAL elections for FEDERAL offices like Members of the House of Representatives, and the Senate and the President) that is VALIDLY limited to U.S. citizens. As it should be.

And for state and local elections, it is a right that is properly restricted to the state residents OF such respective states and the local residents of the various localities.

If I live in Suffolk County, on Long Island (I don't), I SHOULDN'T have any say in the budget questions of NASSAU county on Long Island. And vice versa. So, why shouldn't the volunteers at the polling stations be properly allowed to verify that I AM a resident of that county or that locality that state and so forth?

Hey, dumbshit.

Your name does not appear on the voter registration list anywhere in the country except where you are registered to vote.

You aren't on the voter list in Nassau county. So you cannot vote there. No Voter ID necessary.

Have you ever actually voted? You would know these things if you did.

I see that argument by analogy eludes you, you ******* abject pathetic imbecile.

That was my point of course. Unless I LIVE in Nassau county, my name would NOT appear on its voter list. But if the polling place volunteer is not allowed to make me prove WHO the **** I am when I go there all the same to vote it might be difficult to prevent me from casting my illegal vote.

Can you truly BE as ******* stupid as that?

Wow.

A person with your brain power must find the whole breathing thing to be very difficult.

Again, if you voted as Joe Bob Smith, the Nassau citizen, your fraud would be exposed as soon as Joe Bob Smith showed up to vote.

This is why in-person fraud is so rare, even during the two centuries we voted without Voter ID.

Now I have explained this to you THREE times, retard. Let's hope it sticks this time.

Perhaps you could nail it into your thick skull by finding real world examples of in-person fraud. Good luck with that.

We have low voter turnout. So the odds of having the true person known as voter Joe Bob whatever being AT tthe polling place at the same time as you, perpetrating your criminal fraud, is quite low.

How many in-person frauds would have to be committed to swing an election?

Quite a lot. So they would be caught, low voter turnout or no low voter turnout.

Which is why in-person fraud is so rare.

And you DO know, don't you, that there HAVE been prosecutions in our fair land for voter fraud in the past? Right?

Which is why I said you should go and search for cases of in-person fraud, and wished you luck.

So go ahead. Do it. Seriously.

You will find what I have said is true. The types of fraud which do occur cannot be stopped or prevented by Voter ID.

Please, please, please link to some actual recent fraud cases. This is always the best part.

 

[g5000]

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast

The proverbial "rare as hen's teeth" in-person fraud I keep pointing out.

31 over a 14 year period. I think it is safe to say none of those frauds swung an election.

That's FIVE times now.

 

[Rustic]

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast

The proverbial "rare as hen's teeth" in-person fraud I keep pointing out.

That's FIVE times now.

One is too many...

Just don't vote for progressives, that way most problems will just go away.

 

[g5000]

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast

The proverbial "rare as hen's teeth" in-person fraud I keep pointing out.

That's FIVE times now.

One is too many...

Just don't vote for progressives, that way most problems will just go away.

We get way more absentee ballot frauds than that.

We also get poll workers committing fraud.

And Voter ID is completely ineffective against them.

States which have Voter ID laws STILL have the same voter frauds occurring.

Voter ID is a gigantic waste of taxpayer money and an unjustified intrusion on our right to vote. I don't know how anyone calling themselves a conservative could support a wasteful government program that impinges on our rights.

There is clearly an entirely different motive behind Voter ID than keeping our ballots safe. This is blazingly obvious if you have more than two brain cells.

You are being snowed.

 

[nuhuh]

because, you know, assuring that people vote is "totalitarianism", but telling me what i can and can't do with my body isn't???

butt backwards. seriously.

Forcing people to vote under penalty of law is totalitarianism. What's butt backwards is someone with the education you claim to have being too dimwitted to understand that.

In any case, squabbling about this is a waste of time since it will never happen as a such a mandate would be unconstitutional.

again, your repeating the adjective does not make it applicable.

Correct, it's simply the truth.

you might disagree, but there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

It is brazenly unconstitutional as there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to force people to vote in elections.

Brazenly? we force people to jury duty, the 15th Amendment gave the right to vote regardless of race, the 17th Amendment changed the way we vote for Senators, the 19th granted suffrage, the 26th gave 18 year old citizens the right to vote, military service is an obligation at times and there are allowable excuses for opting out. I appreciate the argument, but I think that there are so many grandfathered clauses any decision by the Supreme Court would be an easy one.

 

[jillian]

because, you know, assuring that people vote is "totalitarianism", but telling me what i can and can't do with my body isn't???

butt backwards. seriously.

Forcing people to vote under penalty of law is totalitarianism. What's butt backwards is someone with the education you claim to have being too dimwitted to understand that.

In any case, squabbling about this is a waste of time since it will never happen as a such a mandate would be unconstitutional.

again, your repeating the adjective does not make it applicable.

Correct, it's simply the truth.

you might disagree, but there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

It is brazenly unconstitutional as there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to force people to vote in elections.

Brazenly? we force people to jury duty, the 15th Amendment gave the right to vote regardless of race, the 17th Amendment changed the way we vote for Senators, the 19th granted suffrage, the 26th gave 18 year old citizens the right to vote, military service is an obligation at times and there are allowable excuses for opting out. I appreciate the argument, but I think that there are so many grandfathered clauses any decision by the Supreme Court would be an easy one.

and applying the word "totalitarian" to voting requirements is bizarre.

 

[jillian]

because, you know, assuring that people vote is "totalitarianism", but telling me what i can and can't do with my body isn't???

butt backwards. seriously.

Forcing people to vote under penalty of law is totalitarianism. What's butt backwards is someone with the education you claim to have being too dimwitted to understand that.

In any case, squabbling about this is a waste of time since it will never happen as a such a mandate would be unconstitutional.

again, your repeating the adjective does not make it applicable.

Correct, it's simply the truth.

you might disagree, but there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

It is brazenly unconstitutional as there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to force people to vote in elections.

unconstitutional like the affordable care act?

unconstitutional like marriage equality?

you guys haven't really been very good at understanding what is constitutional and what isn't.

 

[Katzndogz]

Mandatory voting will never work in the United States. Not until the government goes totally North Korea and tells you who to vote for.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Again and again and again and again. The nitwit dishonest hack liberals ask the same tired faux questions.

As though endlessly answering their sophistry serves any purpose.

No matter how many CASES of voter fraud (prosecutions) are shown to them, their knee-jerk orchestrated pre-canned talking pointless is ALWAYS the same.

But what they are incapable of doing is addressing the point that ANY example of voter fraud is one too many.

If some shit hole liberal (let's call him "g point five") wishes to cast an illegal vote, by the "logic" of shit hole liberals, it would be an act of sheer nazi-ism to be able to demand a proper identification from him before he assumes the identity of the true voter. If he casts that illegal vote, there is essentially NO possible way to revoke it thereafter.

So his one illegal vote absolutely DOES dilute MY vote (should I happen to be in that district).

But it is SO easy to AVOID allowing a case of voter fraud (even one) to happen in the first place. The guys at he various polling stations should be able to DEMAND some appropriate form of ID. A drivers license. Any state issued id card. Not hard to get. Not a particular burden. But they all cry out in fake angst, "oh,but it's hard for the poor old shut-ins who have no car to go to the DMV to get some state issued alternative id card! Waaaahhhhh!"

In lib logic land the ONLY alternative is to permit NO voter ID laws at all.

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast

The proverbial "rare as hen's teeth" in-person fraud I keep pointing out.

31 over a 14 year period. I think it is safe to say none of those frauds swung an election.

That's FIVE times now.

The SAME predictable liberal "answer" to the problem ^ gets used time and time again. g.5 is of course not above using the stock canard of the left.

The numbers are VERY much disputed and quite variable.

Plus, one obvious problem you don't even perceive does exist.

The "cases" you point to are the ones that were CAUGHT.

The issue goes a bit further than that. The EFFORT is to prevent the voter fraud you DON'T know about because the offenders weren't caught.

for EXAMPLE:

EDITORIAL: Democrats deny voter fraud. Ask North Carolina - Washington Times

 

[bodecea]

It's a wonder that demorats don't have default as demorat which the voter has to change by voting.

Press 1 for English

 

[Seawytch]

Staying home on Election Day is the American way of voting for "None of the Above".

If you force Americans to vote, Snoopy is going to win by a landslide via write-in vote.

Sorry, but without write in certification, Mickey Mouse would be President and governor of CA already.

That does not stop people from voting for Snoopy. That just prevents Snoopy from actually winning the office.

That was my point. It's already true without compulsory voting. [emoji6]