The 2024 US Presidential election

[bver_hunter]

There have been numbers that range from 8 million to 20 million. Is 8 million an insignificant number to you even if that were it? Stop distracting.

You haven't answered anything. You just keep repeating the same bs over and over again.

here...let me prove it to you:

Why don't you support every voter having to show photo ID when casting their vote?

What nonsense are you now waffling. That 8 million was before all the votes were counted and it is now less than that number....yes around 4 million. Obviously, your 20 million is something that you pulled out of your you know what!! Can you not comprehend that numerous voters stayed away due to the choice of these two candidates as I previously explained? More than 159 million voted in 2020, whereas there were just over 155 million in 2024!! But you still cannot explain what that "20 million discrepancy" was supposed to have meant!!

I have answered the voter ID several times. Why the hell should I have an opinion on something that has been part of their elections ever since their inception? It has worked and what needs a bigger overhaul is their Electoral College system that favours The Republicans by a mile, especially as there is just a 1.68% difference in the voter count that does not reflect the number of Electoral Votes assigned. After all Trump got less than 50% of the votes, that is much less than what Biden achieved in 2020!!

Donald Trump Has NOT Won a Majority of the Votes Cast for President

Donald Trump’s popular vote total has fallen below 50 percent, and his margin over Kamala Harris has narrowed considerably as all the votes are counted.

www.thenation.com

 

[bver_hunter]

Nope. I'm not.

But you are Happy with how the Electoral College works when Trump gets just about 1.6% more votes but takes 58% of the Electoral votes.
Why should this not be reformed to reflect the voters mandates. After all the Voter ID on the other hand whether implemented or not will not make a difference that is as significant as this Electoral College!!

 

[bver_hunter]

No you didn't. Your answer was the rules are the rules. That's not an answer.

What is wrong with Mandatory I.D.?

What difference is that going to make to the voter counts if it is mandatory, can you explain it?
It has worked all along, and instead tell me if the Electoral College makes any sense with how it does not reflect the voter counts?

 

[bver_hunter]

Are you really that fucking stupid? It's bver arguing WE DON'T NEED voter I.D and me saying we do.

Wait, sorry, yes you are actually that devoid reading comprehension. I forgot. You are usually struggling with actual sentences all the time.

And as to the rest, student I.D is NOT GOVT ISSUED I.D. Gun permits are. So that was a really bad Strawman on your part. Like really bad, stupid and you need to do much better.

Also, a student at a school needs to change their voter registry. All the weird state rules and all that. It's all about residency. No different Than in Canada when they ask my address and proof of it it's to ensure I am voting in the correct riding.

It really isn't complicated. Or really that political. It's basic common sense.

Might want to try to get yourself s ome

Listen butler, do not make any fake allegations of what I stated. Where did I say that "WE DON"T NEED voter I.D??
You and that skoob are keeping on bullshitting with him also parroting the "20 Million votes difference". Goodness knows when you two are going to go with the facts for once!!
I stated that Voter I.D is up to the various States that have implemented it from the time that the Voting was established in their Constitution. Show me where it states that it is Federal mandate??

But just be more professional in your debates and stop throwing your personal abuses as this is not what this Board is meant to be!!

 

[bver_hunter]

He won't answer that question.
He would rather deflect than come to terms with his own hypocrisy.

You are the one that is deflecting when you came up with the fake conspiracy theorist nonsense regarding this "20 million votes" hypocrisy in the first place and still cannot explain how you pulled out that number and what it is supposed to prove?

 

[Butler1000]

But you are Happy with how the Electoral College works when Trump gets just about 1.6% more votes but takes 58% of the Electoral votes.
Why should this not be reformed to reflect the voters mandates. After all the Voter ID on the other hand whether implemented or not will not make a difference that is as significant as this Electoral College!!

Deflection.

 

[bver_hunter]

Deflection.

Obviously, you hate the facts!!

 

[Butler1000]

Listen butler, do not make any fake allegations of what I stated. Where did I say that "WE DON"T NEED voter I.D??
You and that skoob are keeping on bullshitting with him also parroting the "20 Million votes difference". Goodness knows when you two are going to go with the facts for once!!
I stated that Voter I.D is up to the various States that have implemented it from the time that the Voting was established in their Constitution. Show me where it states that it is Federal mandate??

But just be more professional in your debates and stop throwing your personal abuses as this is not what this Board is meant to be!!

You stated you thought vouching for a voter was good enough without I.D.

I never mentioned vote counts, federal mandates. All I stated was I believed a voter should be required to produce photo I.D and proof of address to be eligible to vote. That's it.

Once again ypu are scatterbrained and going off on weird tangents.

 

[bver_hunter]

You stated you thought vouching for a voter was good enough without I.D.

I never mentioned vote counts, federal mandates. All I stated was I believed a voter should be required to produce photo I.D and proof of address to be eligible to vote. That's it.

Once again ypu are scatterbrained and going off on weird tangents.

Now you keep on changing what I said. So once again stop lying as I stated that in the States that do not require voter ID is how it was implemented from the time that Voting was written into their Constitution. It is up to those States whether they want to change their Protocols or not as it is not mandated. It has not been proven in 60 plus Court cases that it resulted in "voter fraud", so what is your issue? The Electoral college to me is a much bigger issue than Voter ID, okay, as it does not reflect the margin of victory by the present incumbent as he is one of the few presidents that has not received the 50% majority that he boasts about!! You and scoob are bringing up some innocuous voter ID conspiracy theories when the less democratic Electoral College needs a real reform. Of course a "deflection" to only the alt righties!!

 

[Butler1000]

Now you keep on changing what I said. So once again stop lying as I stated that in the States that do not require voter ID is how it was implemented from the time that Voting was written into their Constitution. It is up to those States whether they want to change their Protocols or not as it is not mandated. It has not been proven in 60 plus Court cases that it resulted in "voter fraud", so what is your issue? The Electoral college to me is a much bigger issue than Voter ID, okay, as it does not reflect the margin of victory by the present incumbent as he is one of the few presidents that has not received the 50% majority that he boasts about!! You and scoob are bringing up some innocuous voter ID conspiracy theories when the less democratic Electoral College needs a real reform. Of course a "deflection" to only the alt righties!!

Yes. And they need to change the voter I.D laws in those states. It's that simple. The issue isn't about "following the rules". It's about changing flawed laws.

I know the last thing you want is to have voter I.D laws as it will affect votes you want to go to the Democratic Party.

As for the EC of course to should be gone. Don't be silly. But it has nothing to do with voter I.D. and btw it would be much easier to modify a State Constitution for I.D laws then to change the EC.

It's a distraction to discuss the EC. You lost. Move on.

 

[Skoob]

You are the one that is deflecting when you came up with the fake conspiracy theorist nonsense regarding this "20 million votes" hypocrisy in the first place and still cannot explain how you pulled out that number and what it is supposed to prove?

Says the guy who won't answer why he doesn't support proper voter ID for every election.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Rob Smith spitting facts

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMhWywV5J/

 

[Valcazar]

Are you really that fucking stupid? It's bver arguing WE DON'T NEED voter I.D and me saying we do.

No.
It's me answering your question about using voter ID laws to skew the results.
Try to follow the thread.

I even quoted what you said so that you wouldn't get lost.

And as to the rest, student I.D is NOT GOVT ISSUED I.D. Gun permits are. So that was a really bad Strawman on your part. Like really bad, stupid and you need to do much better.

Also, a student at a school needs to change their voter registry. All the weird state rules and all that. It's all about residency. No different Than in Canada when they ask my address and proof of it it's to ensure I am voting in the correct riding.

It really isn't complicated. Or really that political. It's basic common sense.

Might want to try to get yourself s ome

My reply wasn't about GOVT ISSUED ID.
It was about using Voter ID laws to skew the voting pool.
You know, the thing I quoted so you wouldn't get confused

I am not going to be around - (lots to do before the 21st, obviously) - so I'll walk you through it.

You mentioned the Canadian system and implied you thought it was good.

So when I vote in Canada I am required to bring photo I.D., my voter card, and proof of address. Why is this so onerous? It's a very simple thing to produce. They give you multiple options to use.

Why would only producing it once be sufficient? Do you think the poll workers remember every voter every 2 and 4 years?

That's ridiculous. Are you saying the basic requirements of pretty much every Western nation are to stringent for only the USA?

I responded that the Canadian system wasn't designed to try and use ID to skew the vote.

Canada isn't using Voter ID to try and skew the vote, though.
Try a simple thought exercise.
"They give you multiple options to use."
(They even let you vote without ID here in Canada. https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=index&lang=e)

What if they didn't?
What if they were very careful to restrict the options you could use?

I pointed out that one of the things you explicitly called out as a good thing in the Canadian system ("They give you multiple options to use") was at the heart of the issue.

You then feigned shock and ignorance about that being possible.

How does it skew the vote? Are you trying to say certain demographics are Incapable of presenting I.D? Other nations don't. Please explain.

I then explained that this is done by selectively targeting specific IDs.

Now, since then in the thread you have pointed out that you actually don't like the Canadian system, since it offers too many options to identify yourself, including non-government IDs.
So I freely admit that I was wrong to take your example of the Canadian system and its multiple options as praise and not criticism.

 

[Valcazar]

You Mean like proof of address? Photo I.D? You know, the shit Democrats are AGAINST?

Democrats aren't against these things.

 

[Butler1000]

No.
It's me answering your question about using voter ID laws to skew the results.
Try to follow the thread.

I even quoted what you said so that you wouldn't get lost.




My reply wasn't about GOVT ISSUED ID.
It was about using Voter ID laws to skew the voting pool.
You know, the thing I quoted so you wouldn't get confused

I am not going to be around - (lots to do before the 21st, obviously) - so I'll walk you through it.

You mentioned the Canadian system and implied you thought it was good.



I responded that the Canadian system wasn't designed to try and use ID to skew the vote.



I pointed out that one of the things you explicitly called out as a good thing in the Canadian system ("They give you multiple options to use") was at the heart of the issue.

You then feigned shock and ignorance about that being possible.



I then explained that this is done by selectively targeting specific IDs.

Now, since then in the thread you have pointed out that you actually don't like the Canadian system, since it offers too many options to identify yourself, including non-government IDs.
So I freely admit that I was wrong to take your example of the Canadian system and its multiple options as praise and not criticism.

God, what a word salad, wonder where you get that from......

 

[Butler1000]

Democrats aren't against these things.

Apparently against the use of Govt issued only I.D they are.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Democrats aren't against these things

Many Democrats are against it.
Why do you think California, NY, Oregon, Washington....etc still dont require ID to vote??

 

[Valcazar]

God, what a word salad, wonder where you get that from......

You're going to be so happy over the next month or two, with me not around.

You could have just waited for a day and ignored this instead of admitting you can't follow the thread of your own conversation.

 

[Valcazar]

Apparently against the use of Govt issued only I.D they are.

"Gov't issued only ID" - nice word salad.

But good, as always, to see you move the goalposts when I point out you're full of shit.
You can't even stick to your guns on something as simple as "proof of address? Photo I.D?".
So is your claim now that Democrats are against using government issued ID to vote?
Or are they against laws mandating using only government-issued ID to vote?

 

[Valcazar]

Many Democrats are against it.
Why do you think California, NY, Oregon, Washington....etc still dont require ID to vote??

Every single one of those states requires identification in order to register to vote.