The Queen to announce electoral reform

I saw a few American posts like this: Queen Elizabeth to announce steps to defend electoral integrity in UK. They must think the UK is still ruled by the royal family. No notion of who writes The Speech from the Throne or how policy is made in a Parliamentary democracy. At least Donald Trump gets it right:

The Government of the United Kingdom is proposing that anyone who wants to vote in a British election should show photo ID to eliminate any corruption and fraud and “ensure the integrity of elections.” This is exactly what we should do in the United States, unlike the Democrats who want to abolish Voter ID laws with passing their horrible HR 1 Bill. All States should pass Voter ID laws along with many other fair and comprehensive election reforms, like eliminating mass mail-in voting and ballot harvesting, so we never again have an election rigged and stolen from us. The people are demanding real reform!

The “Australian” system of vote rigging I learned ever before I came here. The first person goes into vote and then brings out his unmarked ballot for which he is paid a certain sum of money. After that, each person takes in a pre-marked ballot and brings back the blank one they had received which is then appropriately marked and given to the next person who goes into vote, and so on and so forth. Of course, in the US you just have to hack the voting machines, or stick around until the official close of counting on the night and then pull out the new ballots you have had pre-marked.

LET ME ADD: Having said that, I should have added that elections here are about as accurate a reflection of voter sentiment as you might find. The great scandal is the American Presidential election last year which ought to be a warming to everyone about ensuring that the ballot is a truly accurate reflection of the views of the community as it is possible to have. I only told the story of the “Australian” system since I thought it was quite novel and clever, and was new to me at the time, but is not a serious matter for concern in Australia.

Still, the question is worth raising whether the present system is as secure as it could be since there is no requirement to show identification, and it is possible to vote at a number of polling booths if one should wish to do so. I don’t know how we ensure that no one votes more than a single time in any election. Maybe we have such a system but I don’t know what it is.

This entry was posted in American politics, Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

70 Responses to The Queen to announce electoral reform

  1. Ed Case says:

    Paper Ballots were known in America as The Australian Ballot.
    Sure, that can happen, but you’re not going to steal a National Election that way.
    Paper ballots are the best system ever devised, everything else is an invitation to corruption.

  2. Lee says:

    Of course it goes without saying why the Democrats and their supporters are opposed to voter ID at elections.
    The Dems’ idea that IDs are “racist” to blacks and minorities, but only when it comes to elections is a furphy, but says a lot about the left’s low expectations of those groups.

  3. Sunbird says:

    Your an idiot Kates

  4. Crossie says:

    Rigging the election in Australia is not as easy as in the US. Here all elections are conducted by the Australian Electoral Commission and provides for observers from all candidates.

    In the US every state has their own system with just the very bare bones outlined in the constitution. 50 opportunities for corruption.

  5. FelixKruell says:

    Lee:

    When they combine the demand for voter photo ID with policies that make it hard for poor people or black people to get the required ID, it’s clear what the intent is. And it’s not election integrity.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/getting-a-photo-id-so-you-can-vote-is-easy-unless-youre-poor-black-latino-or-elderly/2016/05/23/8d5474ec-20f0-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html

  6. Baa Humbug says:

    I don’t know how we ensure that no one votes more than a single time in any election. Maybe we have such a system but I don’t know what it is.

    First step in ensuring (near enough to) fair elections is COMPULSORY VOTING.
    A I said years ago on this site, American elections are rife with fraud because you can’t tell how many will turn out on the day. 55%? 60%? 70%?
    That 15% difference between 55 and 70 can and does make all the difference.

    In a compulsory system, a very small % don’t show up and this number is fairly consistent across the electorates. If any group tried a fraud (like voting many times and enough to change results), this would show up in total turn out and can easily be audited and results overturned.

  7. Baa Humbug says:

    oops that first para in my comment above is a quote from the post.

  8. Howard Hill says:

    Voter ID. Clever way to surreptitiously get people of the world to accept a universal id card.
    I wouldn’t normally be this conspiratorial, though it’s interesting that multiple countries are all looking at this at the same time – just after the American election that had “NO” fraud! Just like they’re all mandating face diapers at the same time even though the true science has shown them to be absolutely sickening!
    And lets not forget: Zero emissions, wind.. err, bird choppers, solar dust collectors, Scalextric cars, big – not so cheap, Duracells, build back better.
    YOU’LL OWN NOTHING AND BE happy!

    Voter ID is not a panacea to election fraud – no more than bird choppers can ruin run a major city.
    Remember! Dead people, sheep, goats, budgies, dogs, llamas can have voter id’s as well. Even photo id’s – I have a 4 colour Xerox at my disposal.

    Oh, and the Demoncrats are only opposed to it unless you’re trying to recall a Demoncrat state governor, then they’re all for it!

    As the saying goes: Be careful what you wish for!

    Just saying!

  9. gary says:

    The COVID safe app is needed to enter clubs/pubs/some shops. It is simply not true that showing ID is too onerous a task to identify yourself at voting time.

    If someone doesn’t have ID, then put their vote in an envelope with their id, and the vote/id can be checked after the election. People (especially old people) must have a medicare card so that is one form of ID.

    To prevent multiple voting have a central database, and as someone votes have their name checked off the computerised list (which could include photos etc). If their name is already checked off (say by error) then put their vote in an envelope and have the vote/id checked after the election.

  10. Rebel with cause says:

    1. Smuggle out blank ballot paper.
    2. ?????
    3. Profit

  11. Rabbi Putin says:

    I would say the dark side would try to pack the electoral commission with members of the cult of Dan.

    Honestly I don’t think Australia’s system is impregnable. We have a higher degree of trust and fair-play than the Americans do at this time, and that helps keep the Australian system credible. This too is droppping ever since the Turnbull-Shorten reform pact. Ever since Turnbull himself really…

  12. Herodotus says:

    The left leaning media do more to “rig” elections than any other factor.

  13. Helen says:

    In India (I think) the index finger or next finger if index is missing is dipped in no that lasts for many days. Except for pre poll, no reason why that would not work here.

  14. Shy Ted says:

    Every section of every ballot paper needs 1 extra box – “none of the above”. No candidate or party gets funded for that vote and it is also part of the total as though it was an actual candidate or party. Cuts out “least worst” voting and following to it’ logical conclusion – now new laws.
    Maybe a second box, state and federal – “no politician gets paid anything unless the budget is balanced”.

  15. Rabbi Putin says:

    Let’s restrict voting to male taxpaying citizens and military only. If you don’t have money or blood in the game I don’t want your opinion. Women we also don’t want your opinion.

  16. jo says:

    Rabbi the ladies on this blog consistently show an intellect far above the average male on this blog. Maybe because they are Conservative women. I would support only net taxpayers get a vote. Anyone receiving a cent of taxpayer’s money, no vote.

  17. Simon says:

    Whenever i vote in Oz I start by handing over my drivers license. Always gets a positive response and I don’t have to spell everything for them!

    My wife was a scrutineer a few years back. Manned a booth all day. Overheard ALP/Greens people bragging about how many times they’d voted.

    I like the idea of being inked when voted.

    Promoted idea of additional box “none of the above” which, if more than 10% votes, local election declare null and void, parties told to put up fresh candidates, and election reheld in 3 months. Might help stop party candidates be staffers and hacks.

  18. Amortiser says:

    The big window of opportunity for fraud in Australian elections is the period after the announcement of an election and the closing of voter registrations. Large numbers of new registrations and changes in registration occur in this period and the AEC has no chance of checking the validity of these registrations.

    Australian elections are decided in the marginal seats many of which have very thin margins. Salting such seats with a thousand votes could easily swing an election.

    Prepoll and postal voting then provides an easy mechanism to lodge these votes. An organised group on polling day could go from booth to booth to lodge although this may attract attention.

    Secure registration is essential for voting integrity at the front end and then voter ID production when the vote is lodge.

    Without these obvious controls the system is open for serious fraud.

  19. Andre Lewis says:

    In the US 2020 election more votes were recorded than registered voters, not all of whom would have turned up to vote on past records. About 4 million ‘extra’ votes in all so we can see why the walking corpse won.

  20. Riversutra says:

    Anyone receiving a cent of taxpayer’s money, no vote.

    The problem is not vote fraud.
    The problem is when the majority of voters vote to receive more than they give.
    When the Leaners outnumber/outvote the Lifters, democracy just doesn’t cut it anymore.
    Anyway, don’t listen to me, I believe Feudalism is the natural order for society.

  21. max says:

    Voting is an aspect of exercising citizenship, an office of judge.

    In New England, citizenship was officially based on religious confession and local church membership,

    No Protestant (Catholic) church member who refuses to tithe to the local church should be allowed to vote in that church, any more than a person who does not pay taxes should be allowed to vote for politicians who will collect and spend taxes.

    Marx wrote that whenever capitalists accept the right of propertyless men to vote, private property is in theory abolished. “Is not private property abolished in idea if the non-property owner has become legislator for the property owner? The property qualification for the suffrage is the last political form of giving recognition to private property.”

    Chancellor James Kent:
    The tendency of universal suffrage, is to jeopardize the rights of property, and the principles of liberty. There is a constant tendency in human society, and the history of every age proves it; there is a tendency in the poor to covet and to share the plunder of the rich; in the debtor to relax or avoid the obligation of contracts; in the majority to tyrannize over the minority, and trample down their rights; in the indolent and the profligate, to cast the whole burthens of society upon the industrious and the virtuous; and there is a tendency in ambitious and wicked men, to inflame these combustible materials.
    The notion that every man that works a day on the road, or serves an idle hour in the militia, is entitled as of right to an equal participation in the whole power of the government, is most unreasonable, and has no foundation in justice.

    the individual who contributes only one cent to the common stock, ought not to have the same power and influence in directing the property concerns of the partnership, as he who contributes his thousands. He will not have the same inducements to care, and diligence, and fidelity. His inducements and his temptation would be to divide the whole capital.

  22. Adelagado says:

    “The “Australian” system of vote rigging I learned ever before I came here. The first person goes into vote and then brings out his unmarked ballot for which he is paid a certain sum of money. ….. and so forth.”

    That sounds like BS to me. It sounds like something a Democrat would say whilst arguing against voter ID and paper ballots. I doubt you’d get away with that for 10 seconds at any polling booth I’ve been to.

  23. Mother Lode says:

    Is Sunbird saying he is Kate’s “an idiot”?

    Why would he want an idiot?

    Dare to aspire, Sunbird.

    You can be your own idiot!

  24. notafan says:

    Me neither.

    That would require a conspiracy involving every single poll worker.

    I know quite a few who work casually for the AEC on polls, zero chances a single one would do such a thing.

  25. The BigBlueCat says:

    No system is perfect, but I would have thought the AEC and the methods used to register voters is prone to much less variation than some form of unregulated system (as is being proposed by the Democrats in the US). At least here your name gets checked off, and so “duplicate” voting has a chance of being detected (albeit after the election). If there’s enough duplication or fraud going on, then the vote for that electorate can be nullified and a by-election occur.

    I cannot recall any circumstance in Australia’s history of elections where there has been demonstrable fraud to the extent that the “wrong” candidate got elected (according to the rules).

    Unfortunately, our preferential voting system results in that eventuality anyway – candidates with a clear lead before preferences (albeit under 50%) losing to the preference allocation. Certainly, at local government elections, candidate stacking in wards is rife so a relative unpopular candidate gets up because they have a cohort of “dummy” candidates who have no desire to be on the local council, and are there only to allocate their preferences.

  26. Baa Humbug says:

    Unfortunately, our preferential voting system results in that eventuality anyway – candidates with a clear lead before preferences (albeit under 50%) losing to the preference allocation.

    Preferential voting is no different to having election after election to finally get someone to 50% +1.
    Lots of places in the World have run off elections before settling on a winner. Farg that for a joke.
    Your 1st preference is the first election. Your 2nd preference is a second run off election and so on.

    It’s either preferential voting with 50% +1 as the winner, or it’s first past the post with no preferences. I prefer the former.

  27. Richard says:

    The first person goes into vote and then brings out his unmarked ballot for which he is paid a certain sum of money. After that, each person takes in a pre-marked ballot and brings back the blank one they had received which is then appropriately marked and given to the next person who goes into vote, and so on and so forth.

    I may be dumb, but how is this voter fraud? I don’t understand how this would skew an election at all. How would the result be any different than if such people just went in and voted for the same candidate that their ‘fraud’ was trying to get up? I could understand if a photocopier was used or something and multiple ballots were snuck in, but in the absence of it this seems like unnecessary busywork resulting in the same outcome?

  28. RJH says:

    Interesting to note from Fox News’s Tucker Carlson that in Biden’s home State of Delaware they have compulsory ID voting, plus no Ballot harvesting Drop Boxes and no early voting facilities? Lie’n Biden & the Left MSM are definitely not keen to inform the US populace that these voting measures in Delaware are much more onerous than the new State of Georgia Voting Laws?

  29. TBH says:

    Mrs TBH has worked the last few Federal (and some state) elections for the AEC as a contractor. From what she describes, the process (registration, voting itself, counting and scrutineering) is pretty robust. There will always be the opportunity for fraud if orchestrated effectively, but the chances are a fair bit lower here. I don’t really have any concerns about irregularities with how we do things right now. I think our paper system is superior to what the US does.

    My biggest issue is the undemocratic way that upper house candidates can end up in parliament on the basis of so few votes. There is a guy here in WA (Wilson Tucker – ironic name for a WA pollie) who got into the legislative council on the basis of 98 primary votes. WTF? It’s not the first time this kind of stuff has happened either.

  30. Lee says:

    When they combine the demand for voter photo ID with policies that make it hard for poor people or black people to get the required ID, it’s clear what the intent is. And it’s not election integrity.

    Rubbish.
    Personal ID is required for many aspects of daily life, including driver’s licences.
    The personal lowly financial status of individuals doesn’t mean they are excused from being required to have the ID when necessary.
    It’s all about perpetuating voter fraud and everyone knows it.

  31. L.B.Loveday says:

    Apart from the well-published rorts such as voting multiple times and, or, under another’s name – one can go to a polling booth at opening time, give one’s neighbour’s name and address and vote under his name, with or without his knowledge, before he arrives; one can go to each polling booth in one’s electorate, voting at each, up to 60, under one’s name, one’s neighbour’s, or someone else’s, provided one is prepared to answer “no” to the inane question “Have you voted elsewhere today?” – and enrolling under multiple names prior to the 16 April 2007 requirement to provide ID on enrollment, the events in the 1980 Norwood, SA, by-election made me determined to not take part in such a corrupt system no matter what the cost.
    .
    The Norwood, SA, 1979 state election result (won by Frank Webster, Liberal) was overturned by a court decision, and a by-election held 16/2/1980. In the few months between the general election and the by-election, the Norwood electoral roll numbers increased by 10%. The vast majority were not newly turned 18yos, new residents, or people who had omitted to enroll by the previous cut-off date, they were election riggers – people from outside Norwood, typically Left-wing UofA students, who had voted in another electorate in the general election and who changed their enrolled, but not physical, address to vote again.
    .
    There were up to 22 people enrolled at the one address, but the Electoral Commission did nothing. So my neighbour, Greg Crafter, ALP, romped in, and I was shortly after removed from the electoral roll, never to return.
    .
    More recently, as reported in “The Advertiser”, a SA family claimed to have voted 159 times, including 31 times by a 17 year old, in a recent election. Even the AEC, which in the past has buried its head in the sand conceded it is possible, and if it’s possible, it is done, with only the extent being in question.

  32. Lee says:

    Is Sunbird saying he is Kate’s “an idiot”?
    Why would he want an idiot?
    Dare to aspire, Sunbird.
    You can be your own idiot!

    The irony is, Sunbird wrote: “your an idiot Kates”.
    It should be “you’re an idiot, Kates”.
    Who’s the idiot?

  33. Boambee John says:

    It’s either preferential voting with 50% +1 as the winner, or it’s first past the post with no preferences. I prefer the former.

    Optional preferential is better. It tends to nullify some of the dubious horse trading, and prevents an absolute dud/crook sneaking in.

  34. PeterW says:

    You don’t have to vote in Australia. You just have to turn up and put a ballot paper in a box. How you mark it is up to you. I hold that if you want the benefits of living in a democracy, then you have a duty to inform yourself and vote.

    Preferential voting is a system of electing the least worst candidate. It allows voters to “vote against” the candidates that they like least.
    Those who mourn the fact that someone can get elected on a minority of the primary vote, are claiming that voters should not have the right to do that.

    As a hypothetical, if two strongly Conservative candidates poll 32% and 33% while the Socialist polls 35%, should we assume that the Socialist wins when 65% of the voters want a Conservative candidate? First Past The Post supporters think that we should. The alternative is to have a run-off election.

    But the big error is imagining that there is some kind of perfect system. No system will compensate adequately for ignorant and selfish voters.

  35. Xenophon says:

    The electoral fraud thing is as fake as Bitcoin. No evidence at all in Australia. US courts are about to test the issue with extremely large damages claims in court which the people promoting the fraud meme will need to provide evidence in. Zip so far. Better things to get upset about IMO.

  36. Kneel says:

    “When they combine the demand for voter photo ID with policies that make it hard for poor people or black people to get the required ID…”

    You think black people don’t have a drivers license, or know where the local DMV office is?

    You need to show photo ID to buy Sudafed, FFS!

    Nikki Haley, when governor of SC, passed photo ID laws and they all said the same crap, so she said “If you have issues, let us know, we’ll pick you up, take you to the DMV where you can get a zero cost photo ID, then take you home – for free”. Of the “thousands” that didn’t have a photo ID, less than 30 took up the offer of a lift to and from the DMV to get such in ID.

    To say that such a requirement is “racist” is itself the soft racism of low expectations – you are essentially saying Black people don’t have a drivers license, don’t know where the local DMV office is, and don’t know they can get a photo ID from the DMV at no cost. Patently ridiculous.

    By the way, in Joe Biden’s home state, such voter ID laws have been on the books for years – funny it’s not “racist” there, is it?

  37. Paul says:

    When the left get tired of losing, and their rhetoric starts with blaming democracy or the voters, that’s when you need to watch for cheating.
    I’m sure it will come here.
    The US election cheats showed you only need to change up to 3 to 5% of votes in marginal seats, their way to win, giving it a semblance of plausibility.
    No one believes a near 100% vote win.

  38. Neil says:

    The US election cheats showed you only need to change up to 3 to 5% of votes in marginal seats, their way to win, giving it a semblance of plausibility.

    That reminds me of something that Bob Hawke once said about his wife Hazel.

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-good-wife-who-paid-a-high-price-20130524-2k6p1.html

    In 1976 Bob started an affair with d’Alpuget. Two years later, he proposed. The relationship stalled and Bob stayed with Hazel apparently for the good of his prime ministerial aspirations.

    ”’Divorce could cost Labor 3 per cent,’ he had fretted several times, back when this was an issue for us,” d’Alpuget wrote years later. ‘

  39. Adelagado says:

    L.B.Loveday says:
    May 13, 2021 at 11:46 am

    So my neighbour, Greg Crafter, ALP, romped in, and I was shortly after removed from the electoral roll, never to return.

    Can you explain what you mean by that?

  40. Gavin R Putland says:

    The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is Mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with Me. — Leviticus 25:23.

  41. FelixKruell says:

    Lee:

    Rubbish.
    Personal ID is required for many aspects of daily life, including driver’s licences.
    The personal lowly financial status of individuals doesn’t mean they are excused from being required to have the ID when necessary.

    Rubbish. They’ve done studies. For example:

    Minorities and poor populations are the most likely to have drivers license problems. Less than half (47 percent) of Milwaukee County African American adults and 43 percent of Hispanic adults have a valid drivers license compared to 85 percent of white adults in the Balance of State (BOS, i.e., outside Milwaukee County). The situation for young adults ages 18-24 is even worse — with only 26 percent of African Americans and 34 percent of Hispanics in Milwaukee County with a valid license compared to 71 percent of young white adults in the Balance of State.

    Having an ID isn’t mandatory in US. They actually make it hard to get, as that article I linked explained.

  42. FelixKruell says:

    Kneel:

    To say that such a requirement is “racist” is itself the soft racism of low expectations – you are essentially saying Black people don’t have a drivers license, don’t know where the local DMV office is, and don’t know they can get a photo ID from the DMV at no cost. Patently ridiculous.

    As the article I linked to explains, some states make it harder to get ID. You can’t just show up at the DMV and get one. When they do that, and make photo id compulsory for voting, it usually has a racist intent. Much like the gerrymandering that just happens to put 99% of African Americans in a single seat, despite them being geographically dispersed.

  43. ProEng says:

    I have been at voting site handing out cards and been a scrutineer. I have seen bus loads of union people go in to vote absentee. That is cheating but in most seats a few hundred or so duplicate votes do not matter. I used to have a very similar fax number as Albersleezy. I had a fax which showed he organized union people to vote in a Port Macquarie election. Unfortunately, as a honest person I did not keep the faxes which were meant to go to Albersleezy. As a scrutineer, I found it was difficult for any electioneer official to mess with the ballot papers. We could challenge any wrongly filled ballot or any ballots that did not have the initials of the official marking off voters from the roll. Spoilt papers were something like 2%. Double voting through absentees is where the cheating occurs. The fines are too small and many get away with claiming they only voted once and it must have been someone else. I would say cheating in Australia is between 1/2 and 1% and is mainly done by unions but also Greens were it counts.

  44. Lee says:

    Having an ID isn’t mandatory in US.

    It absolutely is, if you want to drive (legally) and a legal requirement for certain other aspects of everyday life, as Kneel wrote.
    Poor educational standards is no excuse.

  45. FelixKruell says:

    Lee:

    It absolutely is, if you want to drive (legally) and a legal requirement for certain other aspects of everyday life, as Kneel wrote.

    Yet I just showed you studies showing a large minority don’t have ID. Maybe they don’t drive. So not quite so absolute, eh?

  46. JC says:

    Kruell

    You dickhead, if people were really really concerned about the lack of ID, they would make allowances in some way so people would be able to obtain something official. Fuck off with that hollow talking point, you leftist grub.

  47. PeterW says:

    Kneel:

    To say that such a requirement is “racist” is itself the soft racism of low expectations – you are essentially saying Black people don’t have a drivers license, don’t know where the local DMV office is, and don’t know they can get a photo ID from the DMV at no cost. Patently ridiculous

    I agree.

    Felix likes to pretend that socio-economic factors, like who chooses to live in areas that have adequate public transport and very few parking spaces, are all due to “racism”.

    The biggest hurdles to having a driver’s licence are passing the competence test and paying for the vehicle that makes owning such a licence worthwhile. But the loony left always trot out one of their generic excuses whenever people don’t stay in the nice little categories that their “betters” on the Left, choose for them.

  48. FelixKruell says:

    JC:

    You dickhead, if people were really really concerned about the lack of ID, they would make allowances in some way so people would be able to obtain something official. Fuck off with that hollow talking point, you leftist grub.

    Yes they would. But they don’t. What does that tell you?

  49. FelixKruell says:

    Peter:

    Felix likes to pretend that socio-economic factors, like who chooses to live in areas that have adequate public transport and very few parking spaces, are all due to “racism”.

    I do? News to me.

    The biggest hurdles to having a driver’s licence are passing the competence test and paying for the vehicle that makes owning such a licence worthwhile.

    Confirming my point that it acts as a barrier to voting, especially for poor people. Which just happens to cover a lot of African Americans. What a coincidence.

  50. Lee says:

    Yet I just showed you studies showing a large minority don’t have ID. Maybe they don’t drive. So not quite so absolute, eh?

    Doesn’t mitigate the point that producing ID of some sort or another is quite often mandatory in the U.S., like here.
    Even in the U.S. you would have to produce some sort of ID to open a bank account, get a credit card, social security, prescription medicine, a passport, etc., etc., but apparently it is somehow “racist” or unjust to require it for voting, according to the Democrats.
    Heck, recently I had to produce a full birth certificate, driver’s license, and other ID just to receive an inheritance to which I was entitled – and if I couldn’t produce enough ID that would have been my problem, no one else’s. I wouldn’t be surprised if it is the same in the U.S.
    The only reason the Dems are opposed to voter ID is because it makes election fraud much harder to facilitate.

  51. Lee says:

    Confirming my point that it acts as a barrier to voting, especially for poor people. Which just happens to cover a lot of African Americans. What a coincidence.

    The soft bigotry of low expectations.

  52. Rex Anger says:

    Confirming my point that it acts as a barrier to voting, especially for poor people. Which just happens to cover a lot of African Americans. What a coincidence.

    Wow… Soft bigotry of low expectations, go on.

    #It’sOKBecauseHe’sOnsideWithTheCause

  53. Rex Anger says:

    Snap, Lee!

  54. Rex Anger says:

    Flatus believes in racial voteherding…

    …It’s the only way to institute The Plan.

  55. FelixKruell says:

    Lee:

    Doesn’t mitigate the point that producing ID of some sort or another is quite often mandatory in the U.S., like here.

    Then how do millions manage without? It’s a simple fact that they are.

    Think of the inheritances they’re missing out on…

  56. FelixKruell says:

    Rex:

    Snap, Lee!

    Aww you made a friend. Go you.

    I’m all for having consistent expectations of people – as long as the government isn’t throwing barriers in the way of just some of them.

  57. Rex Anger says:

    I’m all for having consistent expectations of people – as long as the government isn’t throwing barriers in the way of just some of them

    Righto

    Just so long as they stay on the Plantation, eh?

  58. Rex Anger says:

    Then how do millions manage without? It’s a simple fact that they are.

    How freely and willingly it believes the Propaganda it is fed…

  59. JC says:

    Confirming my point that it acts as a barrier to voting, especially for poor people. Which just happens to cover a lot of African Americans. What a coincidence.

    Lol
    Dickhead has been reading up on DNC talking points and then comes here before he forgets what they were.

    States provide officially recognised ID that isn’t a license. It costs around 35 bucks. Dickhead thinks Americans are wacist because they simply haven’t thought of everything.

    There’s no discussion with such a dishonest leftwing arsewipe except abuse and mockery.

  60. JC says:

    Also, dickhead doesn’t seem to understand what a coincidence is.

  61. FelixKruell says:

    JC:

    States provide officially recognised ID that isn’t a license. It costs around 35 bucks. Dickhead thinks Americans are wacist because they simply haven’t thought of everything.

    And they also sometimes make that hard to get. Like the article mentioned.

    But you all seem to think everyone has enough ID to vote. Despite this constantly being an issue at US elections. Strange.

  62. JC says:

    And they also sometimes make that hard to get. Like the article mentioned.

    Everything is hard in the US related to this. Any interaction with the civil service is a fucking nightmare for the smallest things. It’s not wacism you disreputable imbecile.

    But you all seem to think everyone has enough ID to vote. Despite this constantly being an issue at US elections. Strange.

    No, I don’t “seem to think” anything about this subject. I’m only explaining you’re a fucking moron who needs to STFU.

  63. JC says:

    Everyone, here’s an example of what I mean about the complexity of the US civil service.

    This is the forms page for the Social Security Administration. Look how many there are, and a slight nuance could mean different forms.

    https://www.ssa.gov/forms/

  64. Rex Anger says:

    @ JC- Everyone has a Socoal Security number, right?

    Whoops, ID!

  65. JC says:

    Rex

    Every adult should have one, but I don’t think it’s mandatory.

  66. Rex Anger says:

    Rex

    Every adult should have one, but I don’t think it’s mandatory.

    OK. Still invalidates the troll point in defence of voteherding…

  67. 1735099 says:

    By the way, in Joe Biden’s home state, such voter ID laws have been on the books for years – funny it’s not “racist” there, is it?

    No, because the state is currently a Democratic stronghold and not contested.
    In Georgia, for example, it’s very different.
    When a power shift is in the offing (which has just occurred in Georgia) the African American voters largely responsible for it are targeted, and every strategy employed to suppress their vote.
    It has nothing to do with voter integrity, and everything to do with power politics,

  68. Rex Anger says:

    Aaayyyy, another leftwit stooge comes in to defend Democrat voteherding cos it would be racist and ‘voter-suppression’ to ensure that Americans have any degree of franchise and agency other than what the Comrades wish…

  69. Rex Anger says:

    By the way, in Joe Biden’s home state, such voter ID laws have been on the books for years – funny it’s not “racist” there, is it?

    No, because the state is currently a Democratic stronghold and not contested.

    Giving the game away there, aren’t we, Plantation Overseer Bob?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.