No, I read your replies. You obfuscated away from the valid ID requirement you asserted and expanded the qualification to include felonies and federal prohibitions. You argued that those requirements essentially made ID a requirement. It’s a poor argument. The fact is ID is not required in many instances to purchase a gun in this country because of private sales and you’ve shown no law or source to refute that. Now, I agree a quote from a politician is not an analysis but PolitiFact DID do the statistical analysis and rated the statement as TRUE. Are you telling me PolitiFact is wrong? And I don’t mean this to be offensive but your arguments are lame, as in weak. And all you’re showing is that the “conservative” ideals you espouse are weak and can’t atand up to factual challenges.
Sure, we can increase almost any behavior with a monetary incentive. I was in sales for a long time, bonuses increase production every time. Do you have any other brain busting insights or is money is a motivator the full extent of it?
No my point remains astonishingly simple. ie. what is often presented as an obstacle is really just a lack of motivation. You surely learned that from being in sales. Your ilk continually present big sorry-arse, cultural, and economic reasons as to why they could never come up with i.d. to vote. But those who are motivated will find very few obstacles. Their lack of motivation is the obstacle. Lack of i.d. can be a problem but all or almost all jurisdictions have a simple process in place for getting a non-drivers license type i.d. as a substitute. Since you like to keep things repetitive, I will say again. Contacting your municipality about getting that I.D. is an "obstacle" when it comes to voting. But if I had a free TV for you if you could just show me that substitute I.D your tires would be squealing out in the driveway or your cousin would be on his way over to help you. Don't at any point get me wrong though. The idea of providing incentives for people to vote is totally repugnant, whether it is Obama volunteers handing out cigarettes or LA handing out chances to win in a lottery. I come from a culture where if it is snowing on election day you are going to be standing in the line when it is snowing but you show up. The day will never come when I will be motivated by the same things that motivate your leftist trash.
Where do you live? You think standing in line in 30-35 degree temps with the wind blowing and snow in your face does not require motivation or you dont know? Lets just say that your ilk are already not motivated to vote and those conditions are not going to increase their motivation. It is well established that even if it rains it hurts the dem vote more than republican vote. Where do you live? Voter turnout by state: Maine = third highest rate in the nation. My point stands. It is not part of the culture to have an excuse. Although those ethics are collapsing as are all american ethics as the progressive movement expands.
Yes, your argument is astonishingly simple and absurd. Motivation is obviously not a problem on the left because democrats consistently have higher turnout in elections. I’m sorry for your weather conditions. I’ve always advocated for more polling places and a more efficient voting system. We should move toward that and making voting easy for everyone.
My circular logic? Look, it is illegal to sell someone ineligible, so people shouldn't do it, but they still do. We agree. Loopholes that allow people to do this should be closed, wherein ID is required for all gun purchases, private or otherwise. We agree. It is illegal to vote if ineligible, so people shouldn't do it. We agree! Where you stop is you don't agree people actually do it. You think voter fraud doesn't occur. I'm the one going further to say ID should be required to vote, just like it should be required in gun sales. You're the one saying ID should be required for one and not the other. And it's my circular logic, somehow. WTF. How convenient for you to look at it this way! Where is it established as a "right"?
No, as I said, you are technically correct in that ID is not required in all private sales because of a loophole. I also said it should be required. How this is obfuscation is beyond me. Politifact has been known to be wrong in the past. It is a left leaning, partisan organization. This is the only statement to have any source reference whatsoever in the link you posted: Voter fraud Election administration expert Justin Levitt, who has been tracking allegations of voter fraud since 2000, most recently wrote on the topic in the Washington Post in August 2014. Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said in the piece that dating back to 2000 he found around the country 31 "credible allegations of potential fraud that might have been prevented by a rule requiring ID at the polls" -- that is, possible fraud involving impersonation. Other election experts, including Lorraine Minnite of Rutgers University, also have used the lightning strike comparison. It’s fair to say, however, that impersonation cases can be hard to count in that they are hard to prove -- particularly when no photo ID requirement is in place and a voter can cast a ballot simply by stating the name of a registered voter. So the number of cases of in-person fraud by impersonation may be higher than that cited by Levitt, but no independent source suggests it is higher than the number of lightning strikes. The first source, Justin Levitt, said he only found 31 credible allegations of potential fraud that might have been prevented by requiring an ID. This is fantastic for Justin, but the Heritage investigation found more. The second person, Lorraine Minnite, "also used the lightning strike comparison", but the article shows absolutely no study, or any reference to anything she's ever done. Of course, one would expect such a statement from the author of the book Keeping Down the Black Vote: Race and the Demobilization of American Voters. On the sole basis of these two people, Politifact rated this "true". Well now, that's some extensive analysis and research! I'm convinced! Not.