America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 days ago by tailgater. 127 replies replies.
3 Pages123>
Good Lord... I understand now...
DrafterX Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 74,132
Why Dems hate Trump so much.... Just watched some CBS News.. Made Trump look like this huge flip-flopper without even a hint of explanation on about half a dozen topics or more... then they go into the Texas voter ID law and say Iit was created to keep blacks from voting.. no pproof of course but that didn't stop them from saying it a dozen times... talk about brainwashing.. d'oh! .
elRopo Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 02-17-2014
Posts: 849
C = Communist

B = Broadcasting B/S

S = System
delta1 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 10,063
So you haven't seen any of the videos of the legislators/sponsors of voter restriction laws admitting the laws were written to keep a) Dems, b) poor people, c) minorities, from voting. Several have been ruled unconstitutional because they are, in fact, discriminatory, having a disproportionate impact on blacks...

Trump has flip-flopped on almost every thing he has said...the man has no clear core values, shapes his world view moment by moment and is shameless about saying one thing today and the opposite tomorrow. His followers accept his inconsistency and his explanations for why he changed his mind and trust that since he's a rich guy, he must know what he's doing...the reality is that he's an uninformed blowhard who says stuff without thinking...the same followers who believe Trump's contortions would not tolerate shifts on much smaller scale from Dems...
gummy jones Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 4,634
Blacks are too dumb to get an id I guess? Speaking of racist things...
SmokeMonkey Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Keep in mind that here in Alabama they tried a couple of years ago to shut down license offices in several majority black counties, meaning in some cases people would need to travel across two counties to get a new state-issued ID. While there were a few ways with limited availability to get a voter-only ID, it did seem to put an undue burden on citizens. Whether we like
It or not, these things happen.

The funny thing is, as red as this state is, I don't think it would impact election results, at least at the state and national level.
SteveS Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 01-13-2002
Posts: 8,180
delta1 wrote:
Several (voter restriction laws) have been ruled unconstitutional because they are, in fact, discriminatory, having a disproportionate impact on blacks ...


I'm at a complete loss to understand how having to present ID at the polls is construed as having ANY discriminatory effect on anyone and why the impact on blacks is somehow "disproportionate" ....
tailgater Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
SteveS wrote:
I'm at a complete loss to understand how having to present ID at the polls is construed as having ANY discriminatory effect on anyone and why the impact on blacks is somehow "disproportionate" ....


The liberals have no other way to stuff their ballot box, so they pull out the race card.
It's libertardism 101.

SteveS Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 01-13-2002
Posts: 8,180
In other words, pure bullsh*t
Brewha Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 7,836
LOL LOL LOL

Sorry Drafter. I read the OP title and saw your name and the scotch came out my nose......






I'll read your thread in the morrow.....
SmokeMonkey Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
SteveS wrote:
I'm at a complete loss to understand how having to present ID at the polls is construed as having ANY discriminatory effect on anyone and why the impact on blacks is somehow "disproportionate" ....


Well, in Alabama counties that are 80% black with 60% unemployment and a high percentage living under the poverty line where someone would need to make a 100 mile round trip to get an ID, I would say that impacts people. And not just black folks, just more black folks in some of the few counties that might go Democrat. YMMV.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
I forgot that the GOP can do no wrong, nor takes actions that benefit only their party. Only Dems do that. Silly me. That's why Alabama is a conservative paradise.
delta1 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 10,063
Have to hand it to the GOP...they are masters of American politics and twisting the rules to benefit their party...voter restrictions (not just ID) and practices: including cutbacks on mail-in ballots and absentee votes, reducing the numbers of polling places, numbers of clerks at polling places, hours for voting, week-end voting, number of days the polls are open...GOP believes the fewer people who vote, the better they do...and the statistics bear that out...

But their most adept power retention tool is gerrymandering...they are masters at designing voting districts that carve up blocs of Dems and turn majorities into minorities...

Guess it's all legal, except those rare instances of over-reach that are challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional...and as long as those states with small cities and large rural populations remain solid red, the GOP will continue to rule, at least Congress...the minority (in total population) ruling a majority...
frankj1 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 15,156
SmokeMonkey wrote:
Well, in Alabama counties that are 80% black with 60% unemployment and a high percentage living under the poverty line where someone would need to make a 100 mile round trip to get an ID, I would say that impacts people. And not just black folks, just more black folks in some of the few counties that might go Democrat. YMMV.

this is being ignored and minimized here. Responses simply ignore these factors because ignoring the breakdown of voters affected leaves the simplistic "just get an ID".

Yeah, no problem for all of us, but we actually never read posts from those these hindrances do affect...rendering them invisible.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
delta1 wrote:
Have to hand it to the GOP...they are masters of American politics and twisting the rules to benefit their party...voter restrictions (not just ID) and practices: including cutbacks on mail-in ballots and absentee votes, reducing the numbers of polling places, numbers of clerks at polling places, hours for voting, week-end voting, number of days the polls are open...GOP believes the fewer people who vote, the better they do...and the statistics bear that out...

But their most adept power retention tool is gerrymandering...they are masters at designing voting districts that carve up blocs of Dems and turn majorities into minorities...

Guess it's all legal, except those rare instances of over-reach that are challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional...and as long as those states with small cities and large rural populations remain solid red, the GOP will continue to rule, at least Congress...the minority (in total population) ruling a majority...


Let's be fair, though, Al. Dems perfected gerrymandering during the middle of the last century. The GOP learned from the left.
delta1 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 10,063
Yes, both have done it and the GOP has taken it to the 21st century...I'd be OK with independent commissions doing the re-districting after the census every decade...
DrafterX Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 74,132
Ok.. let's start with California... and keep the DC lobbyists at home this time.. ThumpUp
tailgater Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
SmokeMonkey wrote:
I forgot that the GOP can do no wrong, nor takes actions that benefit only their party. Only Dems do that. Silly me. That's why Alabama is a conservative paradise.


Nice deflection.

I'm just glad there are no poor white conservatives without ID.

DrafterX Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 74,132
I thought it was interesting on the Trump Bashing show they used a elderly black veteran in a wheelchair who claimed he was turned away because his military didn't have a photo.... this was early in the story.. at the end of the story they just happen to mention briefly that the dude did land a photo ID and is good to go now... so if this black elderly veteran in a wheelchair can land a photo ID what is everyone's else excuse..?? Think
tailgater Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
frankj1 wrote:
this is being ignored and minimized here. Responses simply ignore these factors because ignoring the breakdown of voters affected leaves the simplistic "just get an ID".

Yeah, no problem for all of us, but we actually never read posts from those these hindrances do affect...rendering them invisible.


We ignore things that are misleading, or perhaps even disingenuous in nature.

Requiring an ID to vote doesn't disenfranchise one race or even one social status more than another. We hear about the poor unemployed? Well it's likely they're on social assistance and would require a form of ID.
But more to the point: If I personally provided an ID to each and every one of them, how many would vote anyhow? I'll give you a hint. the number is VERY low.

So we allow for fraud and abuse because of some manufactured potential obstacle that makes a racial point where none actually exists.
Poor people vote all the time, and requiring an ID isn't the mammoth roadblock that some would lead us to believe.

Hell, I bet illiteracy and foreign language are bigger barriers but we don't hear about it because we can't blame it on the GOP.
tailgater Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
SmokeMonkey wrote:
Let's be fair, though, Al. Dems perfected gerrymandering during the middle of the last century. The GOP learned from the left.


Massachusetts born and bred.

SmokeMonkey Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
tailgater wrote:
Nice deflection.

I'm just glad there are no poor white conservatives without ID.



I think your confused about deflection. I think if you'll go back and not that I did not indicate it only impacted blacks, but that the counties targeted, by default, were majority black. The full scope was covered, either explicitly or by implication.
Stinkdyr Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2009
Posts: 9,705
delta1 wrote:
..... (insert your favorite scumbag Pollytishian here) has flip-flopped on almost every thing she has said...the scumsucker has no clear core values, shapes her world view moment by moment and is shameless about saying one thing today and the opposite tomorrow. Her followers accept her inconsistency and explanations for why she changed her mind and trust that since she has not yet been convicted, she must know what she's doing...the reality is that she's a corrupt dirtbag blowhard who says stuff designed to pander to the ignorant masses...the same followers who believe her contortions would not tolerate shifts on much smaller scale from Oprah...



FIFY

Beer
SmokeMonkey Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
tailgater wrote:
Massachusetts born and bred.



I think I've said this to you before, but we live in politically polar opposite states, both of which would benefit dramatically from a more balanced partisan approach.

I'm not an apologist for either party. But, as my post above indicates, there are a lot of posters who are willfully ignorant of their party's faults. And that's what the smartass post addresses.
tailgater Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
But ignorance is bliss.
LOL
tailgater Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
SmokeMonkey wrote:
I think your confused about deflection. I think if you'll go back and not that I did not indicate it only impacted blacks, but that the counties targeted, by default, were majority black. The full scope was covered, either explicitly or by implication.


Your "deflection" was your sarcastic "GOP can do no wrong".

Either way, TW would consider your examples as anecdotal at best.

But in all seriousness, an ID requirement is not a race based limitation unless you think African Americans are predisposed to have a lower instance of proper ID or that any such minuscule exceptions could possibly impact an election. IT's not like they're predominantly Russian.

SmokeMonkey Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
tailgater wrote:
Your "deflection" was your sarcastic "GOP can do no wrong".

Either way, TW would consider your examples as anecdotal at best.

But in all seriousness, an ID requirement is not a race based limitation unless you think African Americans are predisposed to have a lower instance of proper ID or that any such minuscule exceptions could possibly impact an election. IT's not like they're predominantly Russian.



I haven't argued against an ID requirement, and I hope that's not what you read into my post. I'm actually fine with that. But you have to provide relatively easy access to get said ID. In some of the poorest counties in the county, a 100 mile round trip for a drivers license is not access. And when the state GOP passed the "budget cuts" largely targeting these areas, at best it looks suspect.

Tail, accept the fact that your party does things specifically to harm the other's chances and quit defending the indefensible. I recognize the left does the same thing, and I don't like one bit. I may not get on a cigar forum to bitch about it, but I damn sure won't get on one to defend it.

SmokeMonkey Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
And I'm not sure an example where a law was declared unconstitutional is really an anecdote.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
tailgater wrote:
But ignorance is bliss.
LOL


And this is absolute truth - lol

I have a feeling I'd be railing against the left (well, for at least a lot of their shenanigans), were I to live is MA. But y'all have winter and snow and stuff. And hockey. Prolly unlikely...

Herfing
Burner02 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 7,917
elRopo wrote:
C = Communist

B = Broadcasting B/S

S = System



Shame on you

Clinton Broadcasting System
delta1 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 10,063
Numerous videos of authors/supporters of voter suppression laws (not just ID, but all kinds of limitations on registration and voting) show them saying to their audiences or to the press that their purpose is to keep poor people (wink, nod...blacks and minorities) from voting. That's because a large percentage of them are Dems, and if they can be discouraged from voting, the GOP can win more elections. They are right, except that some courts have found some of the laws to be unconstitutional., and more are being challenged in court.

Who argued against the Voting Rights Act?

For the right to argue that it is not the purpose of these laws to keep people from voting is blatantly false and an affront to our democratic principle of the sanctity of each citizen's vote. But of course, there's Citizen's United, another landmark GOP victory to minimize the value of the individual's vote...
gummy jones Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 4,634
delta1 wrote:
Numerous videos of authors/supporters of voter suppression laws (not just ID, but all kinds of limitations on registration and voting) show them saying to their audiences or to the press that their purpose is to keep poor people (wink, nod...blacks and minorities) from voting. That's because a large percentage of them are Dems, and if they can be discouraged from voting, the GOP can win more elections.


you keep saying this...thats fine. but dont assume that that is the main reason for everyone who advocates for the rule of law. i would actually bet the majority of voter id law are not after suppression of legal voting by any means. it would be as stupid as assuming that sanctuary cities exist because the elites actually care about the well being of under educated illegal immigrants while gaining nothing.

likewise, dont assume dems oppose voter id laws because they are the defenders of the voiceless/weak (heck, 60million babies since roe v wade and many want to expand partial birth abortions) and turn a blind eye to the fact that they are the beneficiaries of the black/minority/illegal alien vote.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Gummy makes a good point. The "providing voice to the voiceless" thing is symbiotically self-serving. As are many things done by both sides - it's often a line between its right and I benefits my team vs it's right, but if I look hard enough there's some gray area I can justify not supporting it because it's either not good for my team or it helps the other team. IMO voter ID is good and reasonable. Making it in unreasonable burden to get said ID (as referenced above), not so much.
delta1 Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 10,063
Dems overwhelmingly support the Voting Rights Act, according to national polls. Are there some Dems who would support voter restriction laws to win an election? yes... more than GOP, who seem to be all in?...
Abrignac Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 12,710
SmokeMonkey wrote:
Well, in Alabama counties that are 80% black with 60% unemployment and a high percentage living under the poverty line where someone would need to make a 100 mile round trip to get an ID, I would say that impacts people. And not just black folks, just more black folks in some of the few counties that might go Democrat. YMMV.



I'm wondering why they don't file suite claiming under the voting rights act that having to travel so far is creates an unfair burden.

For the life of me I can't understand why they don't focus efforts that would force municipalities to provide ways to be compliant instead of throwing the baby out with the bath. It worked in Chicago where they tried to create an undue burden for people to get a concealed carry license. Legislating a requirement without a means to fill it backfired on the DEMs. They could use the same strategy to force states to provide local D/L offices.

That's assuming that they really want an ID. Of course doing so who make it harder to vote under someone else's name. Which would probably defeat the real purpose of the voter ID laws outrage.
Abrignac Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 12,710
delta1 wrote:
Dems overwhelmingly support the Voting Rights Act, according to national polls. Are there some Dems who would support voter restriction laws to win an election? yes... more than GOP, who seem to be all in?...



Going to toss out the bullchit flag on this one.

The advertised reasoning for the VRA is so that all voices can be heard. Corollary to that would be the need to insure the integrity of the vote so that all voices are heard equally. Requiring an ID ensures that a fradulent vote does not SUPPRESS a lawfully cast vote.

As stated above, there are ways to insure all legal voters have a valid ID. See my last post.
tailgater Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 19,127
SmokeMonkey wrote:
I haven't argued against an ID requirement, and I hope that's not what you read into my post. I'm actually fine with that. But you have to provide relatively easy access to get said ID. In some of the poorest counties in the county, a 100 mile round trip for a drivers license is not access. And when the state GOP passed the "budget cuts" largely targeting these areas, at best it looks suspect.

Tail, accept the fact that your party does things specifically to harm the other's chances and quit defending the indefensible. I recognize the left does the same thing, and I don't like one bit. I may not get on a cigar forum to bitch about it, but I damn sure won't get on one to defend it.



I'm saying the law isn't racist.

If you can show me the stats that prove most poor people that have no ID within 100 miles would likely vote and vote democrat, but would no longer be able to because of a new law requiring some form of ID, then I'm all ears.

Until then, it's conjecture and race baiting.
Which is very unbecoming.




SmokeMonkey Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Lol. If you think rights should be determined by whether someone is likely to use them, I can't be bothered to provide any additional information.

I'll try to be more becoming in the future.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Interestingly, I pointed out only that some of the counties were both majority black and Democratic. I think you insinuated the race baiting into my argument rather than I. But I'm the race baiter? That assertion seems unseemly.
delta1 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 10,063
I'm going to let state Supreme Courts settle this issue. They have more credibility than any of us: left or right. Several have ruled that voter restriction laws are unconstitutional. Like it or not, their decisions are the law, so all these other anecdolts are just lip flapping...

...who believes advertising anymore...just about all cigars are advertised as 90+...
SmokeMonkey Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Abrignac wrote:
I'm wondering why they don't file suite claiming under the voting rights act that having to travel so far is creates an unfair burden.

For the life of me I can't understand why they don't focus efforts that would force municipalities to provide ways to be compliant instead of throwing the baby out with the bath. It worked in Chicago where they tried to create an undue burden for people to get a concealed carry license. Legislating a requirement without a means to fill it backfired on the DEMs. They could use the same strategy to force states to provide local D/L offices.

That's assuming that they really want an ID. Of course doing so who make it harder to vote under someone else's name. Which would probably defeat the real purpose of the voter ID laws outrage.


Just saw this, sorry. I had previously stated there was court intervention. That was wrong. They reversed course voluntarily after a federal investigation.

I personally think ID laws are very reasonable, when so applied.
DrafterX Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 74,132
There are some documented cases where people have voted more than once.. sometimes for family members and thi think it's cool.. but the intent of the post was how bias the media is telling the story... children who don't know any better see these kind of reports have only one conclusion. .. and people who already hate Trump have fuel...
He flipped on China cause they quit manipulating the currency and have agreed to assist with NK... but they didn't mention that. . Just like everything else in the report. .. they didn't mention why he changed his mind.... Mellow
SmokeMonkey Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Meh. People hated Obama no matter what as well. It's our new political environment.

From a policy perspective, I'm largely neutral on the president at this point. Still hoping for the best, regardless. I do wish someone would lock him out of twitter, though.
Burner02 Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 7,917
SmokeMonkey wrote:
Keep in mind that here in Alabama they tried a couple of years ago to shut down license offices in several majority black counties, meaning in some cases people would need to travel across two counties to get a new state-issued ID. While there were a few ways with limited availability to get a voter-only ID, it did seem to put an undue burden on citizens. Whether we like
It or not, these things happen.

The funny thing is, as red as this state is, I don't think it would impact election results, at least at the state and national level.



Damn Smoke, if I didn't know better I would think you are speaking poorly of you adopted state. What you said above is true but you left out a few key facts. Initially this had nothing to do about voter ID as you would have others to believe.

The closure of the driver's license offices were a result of a battle between the former Gov Bentley and the State Legislator over his proposal to raise taxes to deal with a budget shortfall.

"Citing budget concerns, the state shuttered 31 part-time offices where examiners gave driving tests about once per week. The state said the closures were aimed at the offices that issued the fewest licenses each year, but the closures also came down hard on rural and heavily minority communities. It left more than a third of Alabama's 67 counties without a license office, including eight of the state's 11 counties with a majority African-American population."

"The rural offices, before they were closed, issued anywhere from a few dozen to a few hundred licenses each year. The 31 locations in 2014 collectively issued 5,000 learners permits and 3,149 driver's licenses, and gave 10,587 permit exams, according to numbers from the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency."

Not really something to whip the left into a frenzy over.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Honestly, I really like Alabama but it has its faults just like anywhere. I fully understand the claim as to why those were chosen and obviously did a poor job framing it above, but find it rather difficult to believe that it just didn't occur to anyone that it might be a poor idea. I think we both agree that this state could be run better (and worse).

Not really a frenzy, more a sigh and head shake.

On a side note, we should really get with Eric and put together a Bama herf at some point. I'm sure there are others around, as well.
SmokeMonkey Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
And not Bama as in the tide (being sensative to both sides).
DrafterX Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 74,132
I wanna go... Mellow
SmokeMonkey Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 04-05-2015
Posts: 2,891
Drafter you should definitely come. And bring Goldilocks.
frankj1 Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 15,156
DrafterX wrote:
I wanna go... Mellow

never gonna happen, but I'd love to attend too.
TMCTLT Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 18,507
SmokeMonkey wrote:
I haven't argued against an ID requirement, and I hope that's not what you read into my post. I'm actually fine with that. But you have to provide relatively easy access to get said ID. In some of the poorest counties in the county, a 100 mile round trip for a drivers license is not access. And when the state GOP passed the "budget cuts" largely targeting these areas, at best it looks suspect.

Tail, accept the fact that your party does things specifically to harm the other's chances and quit defending the indefensible. I recognize the left does the same thing, and I don't like one bit. I may not get on a cigar forum to bitch about it, but I damn sure won't get on one to defend it.





Seems to me if countless Illegals from S of our border can make the trek across their country...enter ours and travel hundreds if not thousands of miles to their destination....AND end up with a picture ID drivers license, so can these " poor poor people " you put forth as an example of unfair voting practices....
Burner02 Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 7,917
SmokeMonkey wrote:
Honestly, I really like Alabama but it has its faults just like anywhere. I fully understand the claim as to why those were chosen and obviously did a poor job framing it above, but find it rather difficult to believe that it just didn't occur to anyone that it might be a poor idea. I think we both agree that this state could be run better (and worse).

Not really a frenzy, more a sigh and head shake.

On a side note, we should really get with Eric and put together a Bama herf at some point. I'm sure there are others around, as well.



Will have to admit the former Gov Bentley was involved.


A Bama herf sounds like a great idea and maybe we can make it happen in the near future.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>