At least 30 shot in Texas

[Beebs52]

I don't understand what you're asking. --Bob

Your problem with proof of citizenship re voting.

Beebs, I'm sorry, but I'm still not understanding. May I ask you to collect your thoughts into a full-sentence question? --Bob

My post just up above my additional post is fully functional. Put your lookers on and collect whatever wisps you have to answer.

[Bob78164]

Your problem with proof of citizenship re voting.

Beebs, I'm sorry, but I'm still not understanding. May I ask you to collect your thoughts into a full-sentence question? --Bob

My post just up above my additional post is fully functional. Put your lookers on and collect whatever wisps you have to answer.

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

[Beebs52]

Beebs, I'm sorry, but I'm still not understanding. May I ask you to collect your thoughts into a full-sentence question? --Bob

My post just up above my additional post is fully functional. Put your lookers on and collect whatever wisps you have to answer.

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

Like I said, states....

[Bob78164]

My post just up above my additional post is fully functional. Put your lookers on and collect whatever wisps you have to answer.

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

Like I said, states....

This is why I'm asking you to collect your question into a single full-sentence question. I don't know whether or not I've responded to what you're asking. --Bob

[Beebs52]

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

Like I said, states....

This is why I'm asking you to collect your question into a single full-sentence question. I don't know whether or not I've responded to what you're asking. --Bob

Bob, congeal your thoughts into something solid. Are not states given the responsibility to request whatever proof they deem necessary. Or, get an enema.

[Bob78164]

Like I said, states....

This is why I'm asking you to collect your question into a single full-sentence question. I don't know whether or not I've responded to what you're asking. --Bob

Bob, congeal your thoughts into something solid. Are not states given the responsibility to request whatever proof they deem necessary. Or, get an enema.

No, they're not. Congress has authority to regulate federal elections. In addition to the limitations imposed by the Voting Rights Act (states can't select methods with the intent to discriminate on racial grounds, among other limitations) and the 24th Amendment (states can't impose requirements that amount to a poll tax), states also must comply (at least for federal elections) with the federal Motor Voter Act.

Since the Supreme Court eviscerated the Voting Rights Act, it's been quite clear that states have been abusing the authority they have to impose regulations designed to have a disparate impact on voters of color. All in the name of trying to solve an alleged "problem" that does not in fact exist. I expect findings to that effect (which Congress is expressly authorized to make by the Civil War Amendments) and a reinvigorated Voting Rights Act (also expressly authorized by the Civil War Amendments) the next time Democrats control Congress and the White House. --Bob

[BackInTex]

Beebs, I'm sorry, but I'm still not understanding. May I ask you to collect your thoughts into a full-sentence question? --Bob

My post just up above my additional post is fully functional. Put your lookers on and collect whatever wisps you have to answer.

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

Gun licenses are issued by state governmental entities while most college IDs are not issued by a state governmental entity. Big difference and you know it.

[Bob78164]

My post just up above my additional post is fully functional. Put your lookers on and collect whatever wisps you have to answer.

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

Gun licenses are issued by state governmental entities while most college IDs are not issued by a state governmental entity. Big difference and you know it.

I think the much more relevant distinction to state legislatures is that gun licenses are more likely than college IDs to be held by people who are likely to vote Republican. And many states (including Texas) have fairly large public colleges that are, in fact, governmental entities. --Bob

[Beebs52]

https://constitutioncenter.org/interact ... ley-tolson

[Beebs52]

This is why I'm asking you to collect your question into a single full-sentence question. I don't know whether or not I've responded to what you're asking. --Bob

Bob, congeal your thoughts into something solid. Are not states given the responsibility to request whatever proof they deem necessary. Or, get an enema.

No, they're not. Congress has authority to regulate federal elections. In addition to the limitations imposed by the Voting Rights Act (states can't select methods with the intent to discriminate on racial grounds, among other limitations) and the 24th Amendment (states can't impose requirements that amount to a poll tax), states also must comply (at least for federal elections) with the federal Motor Voter Act.

Since the Supreme Court eviscerated the Voting Rights Act, it's been quite clear that states have been abusing the authority they have to impose regulations designed to have a disparate impact on voters of color. All in the name of trying to solve an alleged "problem" that does not in fact exist. I expect findings to that effect (which Congress is expressly authorized to make by the Civil War Amendments) and a reinvigorated Voting Rights Act (also expressly authorized by the Civil War Amendments) the next time Democrats control Congress and the White House. --Bob

All states have varying voting requirements. CA is one of few with no id required. Maine requires voter registration one day before, otherwise id. Tell me again how registration happens.

[Bob78164]

Bob, congeal your thoughts into something solid. Are not states given the responsibility to request whatever proof they deem necessary. Or, get an enema.

No, they're not. Congress has authority to regulate federal elections. In addition to the limitations imposed by the Voting Rights Act (states can't select methods with the intent to discriminate on racial grounds, among other limitations) and the 24th Amendment (states can't impose requirements that amount to a poll tax), states also must comply (at least for federal elections) with the federal Motor Voter Act.

Since the Supreme Court eviscerated the Voting Rights Act, it's been quite clear that states have been abusing the authority they have to impose regulations designed to have a disparate impact on voters of color. All in the name of trying to solve an alleged "problem" that does not in fact exist. I expect findings to that effect (which Congress is expressly authorized to make by the Civil War Amendments) and a reinvigorated Voting Rights Act (also expressly authorized by the Civil War Amendments) the next time Democrats control Congress and the White House. --Bob

All states have varying voting requirements. CA is one of few with no id required. Maine requires voter registration one day before, otherwise id. Tell me again how registration happens.

My son registered on line. I'm pretty sure that when I lived in Wisconsin I registered at the polling place. I think I used a postcard to register to vote in California when I returned here from Wisconsin.

And I can't imagine any state requiring voter ID for mail-in ballots. --Bob

[BackInTex]

Among other things, because Republicans "with almost surgical precision" pass laws that accept the types of IDs (such as gun licenses) that their voters are likely to possess but reject the types of IDs that voters who trend Democratic are likely to possess (such as college IDs). --Bob

Gun licenses are issued by state governmental entities while most college IDs are not issued by a state governmental entity. Big difference and you know it.

I think the much more relevant distinction to state legislatures is that gun licenses are more likely than college IDs to be held by people who are likely to vote Republican. And many states (including Texas) have fairly large public colleges that are, in fact, governmental entities. --Bob

Public can mean city, county, pseudo pubic, or state. One of the largest higher education entity in Texas is Lone Star College, not tied to any defined geographical authority.

[Beebs52]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

[Beebs52]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

And, to add, I would hope that you will be organizing bus transportation and your own personal vehicle to get sanctuary city sorts and "just say hi I can vote" sorts to polling places for the next election. As opposed to me, who won't be organizing white haired white supremacist limos, cause I think it will all fall out as it normally does, someone wins, someone loses.

[Bob78164]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

You mean beyond a statement under oath? Because it's a bureaucratic hurdle that's preventing tons of eligible voters from voting, and the rationale for requiring it (non-citizens voting) is a problem that either doesn't exist at all or has an utterly negligible impact. So in an effort to prevent a non-problem, we're creating a problem for a ton of voters who ought to be able to vote.

This would have included my great aunt, by the way, who died a few years ago at age 106. She was born in the United States but didn't have a birth certificate. Fortunately she lived in New York so this lack never affected her ability to cast a vote. --Bob

[Bob78164]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

And, to add, I would hope that you will be organizing bus transportation and your own personal vehicle to get sanctuary city sorts and "just say hi I can vote" sorts to polling places for the next election. As opposed to me, who won't be organizing white haired white supremacist limos, cause I think it will all fall out as it normally does, someone wins, someone loses.

If I have the time, it will be much better spent in states like Wisconsin helping people navigate the bureaucratic and logistical hurdles necessary to get their hands on an ID. Or maybe West Texas. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

You mean beyond a statement under oath? Because it's a bureaucratic hurdle that's preventing tons of eligible voters from voting, and the rationale for requiring it (non-citizens voting) is a problem that either doesn't exist at all or has an utterly negligible impact. So in an effort to prevent a non-problem, we're creating a problem for a ton of voters who ought to be able to vote.

This would have included my great aunt, by the way, who died a few years ago at age 106. She was born in the United States but didn't have a birth certificate. Fortunately she lived in New York so this lack never affected her ability to cast a vote. --Bob

She's probably still voting when they need her.

BWBJ, do you ever ask yourself how it is the republicans are guilty of every type of voter fraud that can be dreamed up, yet somehow the dems are pure of heart and nothing they have been caught at in the past or strange occurrences in the present exist at all or is of negligible effect?
Seems a little one sided to my mind. But that's my ol' BWBJ. Shallow as the original BJ but much more verbose.

[Bob78164]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

What makes you think that proof of citizenship is necessary to prevent non-citizens from voting? --Bob

[Bob78164]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

You mean beyond a statement under oath? Because it's a bureaucratic hurdle that's preventing tons of eligible voters from voting, and the rationale for requiring it (non-citizens voting) is a problem that either doesn't exist at all or has an utterly negligible impact. So in an effort to prevent a non-problem, we're creating a problem for a ton of voters who ought to be able to vote.

This would have included my great aunt, by the way, who died a few years ago at age 106. She was born in the United States but didn't have a birth certificate. Fortunately she lived in New York so this lack never affected her ability to cast a vote. --Bob

She's probably still voting when they need her.

BWBJ, do you ever ask yourself how it is the republicans are guilty of every type of voter fraud that can be dreamed up, yet somehow the dems are pure of heart and nothing they have been caught at in the past or strange occurrences in the present exist at all or is of negligible effect?
Seems a little one sided to my mind. But that's my ol' BWBJ. Shallow as the original BJ but much more verbose.

Shh. The adults are talking. It's rude to interrupt. --Bob

[silvercamaro]

Why do lawyers answer questions directed toward them with a different question to the questioner?

Is this a technique that actually is taught in law schools?

[Bob78164]

Why do lawyers answer questions directed toward them with a different question to the questioner?

Is this a technique that actually is taught in law schools?

I answered Beebs's question quite directly in an earlier post. Then I asked her one of my own. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

What makes you think that proof of citizenship is necessary to prevent non-citizens from voting? --Bob

Good question. I myself can't think of a good snswer to that. When they let me board an airplane if I swear I bought a ticket I might be able to give you an answer.

[Beebs52]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

What makes you think that proof of citizenship is necessary to prevent non-citizens from voting? --Bob

Just because some might slip through in the process does that mean we shouldn't try at all? Does that sound familiar?

[Bob78164]

Bob, why do you have a problem with proof of citizenship?

What makes you think that proof of citizenship is necessary to prevent non-citizens from voting? --Bob

Just because some might slip through in the process does that mean we shouldn't try at all? Does that sound familiar?

They've looked. Very hard. For evidence of non-citizens voting. They haven't found more than a small handful of examples across the country over many election cycles. And by a small handful I mean fewer than ten.

But the steps they're taking to solve this non-existent problem are demonstrably preventing tens of thousands of citizens who are entitled to vote from exercising their franchise. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

What makes you think that proof of citizenship is necessary to prevent non-citizens from voting? --Bob

Just because some might slip through in the process does that mean we shouldn't try at all? Does that sound familiar?

They've looked. Very hard. For evidence of non-citizens voting. They haven't found more than a small handful of examples across the country over many election cycles. And by a small handful I mean fewer than ten.

But the steps they're taking to solve this non-existent problem are demonstrably preventing tens of thousands of citizens who are entitled to vote from exercising their franchise. --Bob

Who are "they"?