That's utter bull*** again Como. Students were talking about the most deprived neighbourhoods and struggling immigrants. The interviews were clearly with well educated comfortable affluent black guys. Fox News is not a balanced source of information or 'journalism' and is dangerous, especially for racist people as it deliberately perpetuates myths in those tiny brains.You are on the web
The alcohol laws are racist.That's utter bull*** again Como. Students were talking about the most deprived neighbourhoods and struggling immigrants. The interviews were clearly with well educated comfortable affluent black guys. Fox News is not a balanced source of information or 'journalism' and is dangerous, especially for racist people as it deliberately perpetuates myths in those tiny brains.
The alcohol laws are racist.
The smoking laws are racist.
Having a bank account is racist.
Needing ID to buy paracetamol is racism and anything that requires ID is basically Nazi.
It’s a “Call anyone you disagree with a racist” game and it no longer works.
The follow up “tiny brain” comment is also a dead giveaway.
“Struggling immigrants” can’t get ID to vote. Why is that? Should be easy, get a green card or prove refugee status, get ID. Pay into the system instead of working undocumented / without tax.
“No taxation without representation”.
Anyone without a “tiny brain” will understand that and can deduce:
“no representation without the right to apply taxation”
If you follow the above then no further explanation is necessary. If you can’t understand that then no further explanation is possible.
Are you sure you are being rational?You’ve invented the working undocumented bit. And that’s why you’re talking bollocks. Ignoring the fact that illegal immigrants arent likely to pop into a polling booth, it’s not illegal immigrants Charlie is referring to.
Intentionally or not you guys do this a lot, switch between legal and illegal immigration as it suits the argument. And this is why people say you’ve just got a problem with foreigners. Because even is they arrive perfectly legally and pay in more and all the other tropes you still see them as fundamentally worse.
Are you sure you are being rational?
Legal immigrants, will, almost by absolute definition, have ID.
Where’s your point caller?
Did you really just say that you’re not sure why immigrants are voting at all?TBH I’m not sure why immigrants are voting at all as you have to be a UK citizen don’t you?
But poorer people have less access to info and ID and old/young/disabled/EAL/BAME/etc people are disproportionately poor.
Did you really just say that you’re not sure why immigrants are voting at all?
That’s racist with a shiny badge.
Legal immigrants, of course, should be able to vote.
And then something which is dog-whistle “BAME people not capable of getting ID”.
Used to think you were ok, Shmmeee, disappointed tbh.
I’ll lighten the mood:
Perhaps reflect:
And you've made it solely about race. I was also including the young and the poor, who are much less likely to vote Tory but also less likely to have ID.The alcohol laws are racist.
The smoking laws are racist.
Having a bank account is racist.
Needing ID to buy paracetamol is racism and anything that requires ID is basically Nazi.
It’s a “Call anyone you disagree with a racist” game and it no longer works.
The follow up “tiny brain” comment is also a dead giveaway.
“Struggling immigrants” can’t get ID to vote. Why is that? Should be easy, get a green card or prove refugee status, get ID. Pay into the system instead of working undocumented / without tax.
“No taxation without representation”.
Anyone without a “tiny brain” will understand that and can deduce:
“no representation without the right to apply taxation”
If you follow the above then no further explanation is necessary. If you can’t understand that then no further explanation is possible.
That's utter bull*** again Como. Students were talking about the most deprived neighbourhoods and struggling immigrants. The interviews were clearly with well educated comfortable affluent black guys. Fox News is not a balanced source of information or 'journalism' and is dangerous, especially for racist people as it deliberately perpetuates myths in those tiny brains.
Any thoughts on the Lampard appointment?Nave you lived in Berkeley?
You have to be a USC to vote, suggest you rewatch.
It just showed who the teal racists are.
This is something I agree with you. If a person is resident, working and paying taxes in a country, they should be allowed to vote.Legal immigrants, of course, should be able to vote.
I have a decent radar for sniffing out difference between false and balanced independent journalism, and that was clearly not that.Nave you lived in Berkeley?
You have to be a USC to vote, suggest you rewatch.
It just showed who the teal racists are.
Is there any data on this point specifically? This point gets parroted a lot without any data backing it up.TBH I’m not sure why immigrants are voting at all as you have to be a UK citizen don’t you?
But poorer people have less access to info and ID and old/young/disabled/EAL/BAME/etc people are disproportionately poor.
Is there any data on this point specifically? This point gets parroted a lot without any data backing it up.
In the US there’s a real issue with election integrity and California banning the use of ID is a massive red flag. As a basic principle, you need ID to buy certain goods, drive a car, open bank accounts and much more, so why not for voting? No one makes the argument that the requirement for a driving license is classist/racist.
In short, most people are going to have a form of ID and making a requirement for voting is reasonable - people will just need to adapt. Personally, the argument that poorer people are going to have less access to ID seems patronising.
Is there any data on this point specifically? This point gets parroted a lot without any data backing it up.
In the US there’s a real issue with election integrity and California banning the use of ID is a massive red flag. As a basic principle, you need ID to buy certain goods, drive a car, open bank accounts and much more, so why not for voting? No one makes the argument that the requirement for a driving license is classist/racist.
In short, most people are going to have a form of ID and making a requirement for voting is reasonable - people will just need to adapt. Personally, the argument that poorer people are going to have less access to ID seems patronising.
The UK Electoral Commission studied this last year and found that voter ID laws have a “disproportionate effect on poorer people, those with disabilities and people from minority ethnic backgrounds”Is there any data on this point specifically? This point gets parroted a lot without any data backing it up.
In the US there’s a real issue with election integrity and California banning the use of ID is a massive red flag. As a basic principle, you need ID to buy certain goods, drive a car, open bank accounts and much more, so why not for voting? No one makes the argument that the requirement for a driving license is classist/racist.
In short, most people are going to have a form of ID and making a requirement for voting is reasonable - people will just need to adapt. Personally, the argument that poorer people are going to have less access to ID seems patronising.
Go on MMB, say that 2020 was stolen. You’re so close!Is there any data on this point specifically? This point gets parroted a lot without any data backing it up.
In the US there’s a real issue with election integrity and California banning the use of ID is a massive red flag. As a basic principle, you need ID to buy certain goods, drive a car, open bank accounts and much more, so why not for voting? No one makes the argument that the requirement for a driving license is classist/racist.
In short, most people are going to have a form of ID and making a requirement for voting is reasonable - people will just need to adapt. Personally, the argument that poorer people are going to have less access to ID seems patronising.
No, trust in the democratic process is so low in the USA, it’s clearly a problem. Not only did Trump claim the 2020 election was ‘stolen’, you had the Democrats call the legitimacy of the 2016 election into question too. Both parties are at it.Go on MMB, say that 2020 was stolen. You’re so close!
The UK Electoral Commission studied this last year and found that voter ID laws have a “disproportionate effect on poorer people, those with disabilities and people from minority ethnic backgrounds”
Hundreds of thousands face exclusion over voter ID laws, UK watchdog says
Warning policy could disproportionately affect poorer people, those with disabilities and those from minority ethnic backgroundswww.theguardian.com
There’s another study out literally yesterday which shows something similar: Who lacks voter identification? The electoral implications of the Elections Act 2022
My answer is the same as it was the other day - we do want to ensure that, but if the number of people incorrectly prevented from voting is greater than the number of illegal votes, we’re not doing it well.The Electoral Commission reported that only 0.25% of people who showed up to the polls were turned away due to voter ID laws.
If people really want to vote, there’s something like 22 forms of acceptable ID. In short, it’s a theoretical impact. Sure, there’s 4% of the electorate who won’t have photo ID, how likely are they to go out and vote? Probably not and again, if they really wanted to, there’s a specific election-ID card out there that the Electoral Commission reported had 57% awareness among those polled.
As a basic principle, why wouldn’t we want to ensure people voting are who say they are?
No leading questions in thereYou are on the web
My answer is the same as it was the other day - we do want to ensure that, but if the number of people incorrectly prevented from voting is greater than the number of illegal votes, we’re not doing it well.
Here’s another basic principle - why wouldn’t we want to ensure as many people who are eligible to vote do so?
Voter ID laws seek to tackle a problem that does not exist. The reason why, especially in US contexts, is to reduce turnout from traditionally left leaning voter blocs.In the same way that not everyone who is eligible to get a driving license gets one. We accept that to reduce risk, we put in certain controls. In this case,
Again, focusing on the people who actually were turned away from voting, there was probably a good reason they weren’t given their ballot.
I think the right to vote is slightly more universal than the right to drive.In the same way that not everyone who is eligible to get a driving license gets one. We accept that to reduce risk, we put in certain controls. In this case,
Again, focusing on the people who actually were turned away from voting, there was probably a good reason they weren’t given their ballot.
You can get an ID card which is basically a DL without driving privileges.
I do not get the old people comment, how have you lived your life without some form of ID.
What did amuse me was when Obama was in town, there was a rally and guess why you need to attend.
… and unlikely to vote in any case.ID expires. People lose shit. People don’t follow the news and know they need to apply or update something. Lots of people never drive or leave the country.
… and unlikely to vote in any case.
Ah nevermind then… and unlikely to vote in any case.
So the point is it’s not suppressing voters if the demographics don’t typically vote.So? You’re unlikely to get hit by a bus, doesn’t mean the NHS shouldn’t treat you.
Yeah, pretty much. Kicking up a fuss over 4% of voters without ID seems a drop in the ocean when voter turnout was 58.5% in the last election and in steady decline.Ah nevermind then
You said there were big question marks over election integrity in the US. Where from? What evidence has been put forward of manipulating the results aside from Trump trying to find extra votes in 2020?So the point is it’s not suppressing voters if the demographics don’t typically vote.
Seriously, to not have any form of ID in a modern society, you’re pretty checked out of society.
I’ve long stopped being ID’d for booze and in the summer was refused entry into a London pub (Challenge 25)… Instead crying about suppression, I just accepted they were the terms and conditions.
You’ll have to forgive me for kicking up a fuss over silly things like universal suffrage!Yeah, pretty much. Kicking up a fuss over 4% of voters without ID seems a drop in the ocean when voter turnout was 58.5% in the last election and in steady decline.
You’ll have to forgive me for kicking up a fuss over silly things like universal suffrage!
If you were genuinely concerned about voter turnout then an issue cited by 4% of non-voters which was only recently and arbitrarily introduced would surely also be an issue for you. But as you’ve just established, you “pretty much” only care about people who were going to vote anyway. We applaud your commitment to upholding democracy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?