PDA

View Full Version : THE STUPID!!! IT BURNS!!!!



Hubie
09-23-2012, 02:02 AM
I've been arguing voter ID with a liberal boob on Twitter. I argued that people need ID for a multitude of things in life. I pointed to buying beer as an example and stated beer was less important than voting.

This moron actually responded by stating that voting is in the Constitution, but buying beer isn't and that I need to start reading the Constitution beyond the 2nd Amendment.

My facepalm was epic.

txradioguy
09-23-2012, 06:32 AM
I've been arguing voter ID with a liberal boob on Twitter. I argued that people need ID for a multitude of things in life. I pointed to buying beer as an example and stated beer was less important than voting.

This moron actually responded by stating that voting is in the Constitution, but buying beer isn't and that I need to start reading the Constitution beyond the 2nd Amendment.

My facepalm was epic.

I don't recall anything about voting being in there (I could be wrong)...but in any case what does it have to do with providing proof you are who you say you are?

That would be a good return question to this Libtard.

FlaGator
09-23-2012, 07:55 AM
I've been arguing voter ID with a liberal boob on Twitter. I argued that people need ID for a multitude of things in life. I pointed to buying beer as an example and stated beer was less important than voting.

This moron actually responded by stating that voting is in the Constitution, but buying beer isn't and that I need to start reading the Constitution beyond the 2nd Amendment.

My facepalm was epic.

Point out that you can't by a gun without an ID as well.

Gina
09-23-2012, 08:43 AM
Point out that you can't by a gun without an ID as well.

BAM!

Apocalypse
09-23-2012, 10:25 AM
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/424748_489119694432320_533375785_n.jpg

How many on that list do you think you can use?

SarasotaRepub
09-23-2012, 10:35 AM
If you don't agree with the kook left on this issue you are a racist.

I won't waste my time on this anymore. You'd do better talking to a brick wall.

AmPat
09-23-2012, 12:41 PM
ID was REQUIRED to get into the Godless DNC this year. Racists!

Unreconstructed Reb
09-23-2012, 01:33 PM
I've been arguing voter ID with a liberal boob on Twitter. I argued that people need ID for a multitude of things in life. I pointed to buying beer as an example and stated beer was less important than voting.

This moron actually responded by stating that voting is in the Constitution, but buying beer isn't and that I need to start reading the Constitution beyond the 2nd Amendment.

My facepalm was epic.

Article 1, Section 4: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

However, Article 2, Section 1 describes presidential elections which would blow the mind of the average voter who actually thinks that it's the popular vote that elects the president. In the beginning it was the state legislators that chose the Electors who chose the president, but that soon switched to a popular vote for choosing the Electors who still has the responsibility of choosing the president via the Electoral College. (The relevance of the Electoral College is another subject.) However, each state is still responsible for setting up times, places and manner of holding elections including requirements to provide proper voter identification if a state so chooses.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has ruled that voter ID laws are constitutional. In 2008, the court upheld Indiana's voter-ID law, which is substantially similar to the Texas law. Writing for the court, Justice John Paul Stevens explained that "the application of the statute to the vast majority of Indiana voters is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.' "

Hubie
09-23-2012, 09:00 PM
Thanks guys. It was very late last night and I didn't immediately realize the irony of that guy referring to the 2nd Amendment. He knows now. I told him that when people can start buying firearms without having to produce IDs, then I would cease my support of voter ID laws. :evil-grin:

Hubie
09-23-2012, 09:08 PM
However, Article 2, Section 1 describes presidential elections which would blow the mind of the average voter who actually thinks that it's the popular vote that elects the president.

Indeed. When a candidate gets the popular vote in each state, he gets that state's electoral college votes (if the electoral colleges assign those votes to him, that is). All he needs is a one vote majority in the state. Any more votes than that do not matter to the electoral college. If you get more votes than needed, they don't give you any more electoral college votes, so they're technically little more than surplus votes. And there-in lies the rub. A person could conceivably win the popular vote -- even by a wide margin -- but still lose the electoral college and not become president. Ignorant liberals hate that idea and that's why they have tried changing the way we elect presidents. Didn't one state even succeed in changing their election law so that the winner of the nationwide popular vote gets the state's electoral college votes even though that person might have lost the state's popular vote?

Retread
09-23-2012, 10:34 PM
................. Didn't one state even succeed in changing their election law so that the winner of the nationwide popular vote gets the state's electoral college votes even though that person might have lost the state's popular vote?

More than one state has passed this ignorant rule. (http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/)

Hubie
09-23-2012, 10:37 PM
More than one state has passed this ignorant rule. (http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/)

F***!

Apocalypse
09-23-2012, 10:46 PM
More than one state has passed this ignorant rule. (http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/)


F***!

If memory serves, none of those states new laws on that rule change take effect unless a majority of states follow as well. Other wise they use the old way. It was more to make the libs happy after Al Gore lost to President Bush.

Hubie
09-23-2012, 11:44 PM
If memory serves, none of those states new laws on that rule change take effect unless a majority of states follow as well. Other wise they use the old way. It was more to make the libs happy after Al Gore lost to President Bush.

Ah, I remember that stipulation now. Still...


F***!

Retread
09-24-2012, 06:41 PM
It can get much more complicated (http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/resources/bills/CA-AB459-20110413-amended-v97.pdf) and in the end, the sum total is not befitting the constitution.