Elections Canada's Racist Elections

[Andy Capp]

The shining city on the hill definitely has some 3rd world shithole tendencies. Thinking that voter ID is racist is one of them.

You disappoint me again and again lately. Do you really believe that is what people are talking about when referring to racism in the process even after all this time? You're sure it's not the more subtle idea that the way certain voting laws are being implemented in the US is racist because they are for the purpose of making it more difficult for groups of mostly black people to vote?

Oh wait, I suppose you're just trolling again, right?

 

[Andy Capp]

Oh fuck, most Canadians live to tell other people how to live. Ontarip is the province of boring rules. If Trudeau gets in he's going to ban protesting at hospitals and make it a criminal offense cause there were a couple of recent protests and it's an election.

We have become such a country of pussies it's embarrassing and it is almost all Trudeau's fault. I mean he literally said he prefers the term "peoplekind" in place of the misogynistic "mankind" word. He also recently referred to the pandemic recession as "she-session" and we need a "she-covery" as we know women were the hardest hit by the pandemic. I'm dead serious too. City people in Canada eat this shit up.

You sound like you must be from Barrie.

 

[Andy Capp]

This has been explained many times. How difficult it is to get an ID isn't the point, it's the fact that it was determined black people were less likely to have one that makes this suppression of the black vote.

It's just one more obstacle put in place to suppress the vote. One of many, some of which are so obvious it's insane we even have to discuss this. Considering how hard it's been to get people to vote in the first place, every little obstacle matters, and this year has seen an avalanche of obstacles. Conservatives are a minority, and they're doing everything in their power to rig the game.

They haven't won a popular vote in two decades, and it's already almost a foregone conclusion there's going to be a power shift in the primaries. A democracy governed by the minority.

Nice touch with the "no, YOU guys are the racists". That's page one of the alt right playbook.

Preach brother. You have more patience than I.

 

[Andy Capp]

Since this thread is primarily Canadians thinking they know what’s best for the USA let me explain something.

Conservatives in this country used to believe in “States rights.” I believe in States rights. The principle is that states have the right to their own laws and customs and thus we should limit the overreach of federal laws. It’s a limit on federal power.

Many states have a requirement for photo ID to vote. This is more stringent than you have in Canada. Some states have ID requirements like you all do, that is to say non-photo ID is also accepted. Some states have no ID requirement. I think that’s kind of crazy but ok. That is the right of the state and if they want to change it they can vote among themselves to change it.

Again, the issue is not what they are changing--it's why and how. They cannot demonstrate a public good but there is plenty of evidence of harm to the democratic process. Surely, you aren't claiming states rights make that ok, are you?

 

[PrinceOfPain]

The shining city on the hill definitely has some 3rd world shithole tendencies. Thinking that voter ID is racist is one of them.

As a citizen of a moslty-third world shithole, I resent this remark.
Even we expect IDs from voters. It would be patently absurd not to. It would also be cruel - or, dare I say... racist! - to simply accept that a significant portion of your population doesn't have access to IDs based on their skin colour.
Such low expectations are a step or two below the average shithole.

(Also, I'm a minority; seems worthwhile adding that)

 

[gspieler]

Since this thread is primarily Canadians thinking they know what’s best for the USA let me explain something.

Conservatives in this country used to believe in “States rights.” I believe in States rights. The principle is that states have the right to their own laws and customs and thus we should limit the overreach of federal laws. It’s a limit on federal power.

Many states have a requirement for photo ID to vote. This is more stringent than you have in Canada. Some states have ID requirements like you all do, that is to say non-photo ID is also accepted. Some states have no ID requirement. I think that’s kind of crazy but ok. That is the right of the state and if they want to change it they can vote among themselves to change it.

I think it's reasonable that when voting for a federal office, i.e. POTUS, there would at least be an attempt at standardization of the process. Otherwise, the results can always be called into question.

The thing is, nobody can make a compelling argument that it's necessary.

Sure, it's more secure, but can anyone argue more voter security is needed?

Yeah, I mean it's not like there have ever been any controversial elections in the US. And there's also no reason to want to protect the legitimacy of election results, as a general principle. Nope, only irrefutable evidence of widespread, massive, election fraud should warrant taking any measures to support the legitimacy of the election process.

 

[Andy Capp]

As a citizen of a moslty-third world shithole, I resent this remark.
Even we expect IDs from voters. It would be patently absurd not to. It would also be cruel - or, dare I say... racist! - to simply accept that a significant portion of your population doesn't have access to IDs based on their skin colour.
Such low expectations are a step or two below the average shithole.

(Also, I'm a minority; seems worthwhile adding that)

Are you familiar with the term poll tax?

 

[rikibobby]

You sound like you must be from Barrie.

Little west of sudbury

 

[Loiosh]

Yeah, I mean it's not like there have ever been any controversial elections in the US. And there's also no reason to want to protect the legitimacy of election results, as a general principle. Nope, only irrefutable evidence of widespread, massive, election fraud should warrant taking any measures to support the legitimacy of the election process.

The GOP is using manufactured controversy to pass suppressive laws, conservatives have done this for a century in America. It always works because people are stupid.

You don't need massive fraud to take measures, any demonstrable fraud that could effect the outcome of an election would do. Have you taken a look at the studies that indicated how much fraud there is? Attempted fraud comes in at one hundredth of a percent.

You say legitimacy of the elections, the GOP actually said "purity", a word they haven't dared to use since Jim Crow.

 

[Rand M Arthur]

Sorry, no.

This is some racist shit.

Who am I racist against?

 

[Loiosh]

Agree, different states shouldn't be allowed to make their own rules when it comes to federal elections. To be fair the Democrats were crying Russia for as long as trump was president and now all of a sudden when Biden won it was the most secure election ever. Both sides play the same game. If I was an American I would definitely focus on making the elections more secure. Make voting in person and voter id mandatory, but move the day of the election from Tuesday to Sunday and have more voting locations available.

Everyone cried Russia though, even Trump's own agencies.

America is known for military force across the globe, Russia is known for espionage. The accusation wasn't about fraud it was about propaganda.

 

[Wet Blanket]

Who am I racist against?

I can only guess, but you could provide a list to make it easier.

 

[Bald1]

You disappoint me again and again lately. Do you really believe that is what people are talking about when referring to racism in the process even after all this time? You're sure it's not the more subtle idea that the way certain voting laws are being implemented in the US is racist because they are for the purpose of making it more difficult for groups of mostly black people to vote?

Oh wait, I suppose you're just trolling again, right?

God forbid I disappoint a caustic asshole with a superiority complex.

 

[Deleted member 263856]

Everyone cried Russia though, even Trump's own agencies.

America is known for military force across the globe, Russia is known for espionage. The accusation wasn't about fraud it was about propaganda.

Don't paint it prettier than it was. Russian collusion was the term that was widely used and deemed completely false later on. They're not his own agencies. Intelligence agencies in the us will go after everyone they deem to be a threat to their power. And that is not tin foil hat stuff.

 

[gspieler]

The GOP is using manufactured controversy to pass suppressive laws, conservatives have done this for a century in America. It always works because people are stupid.

You don't need massive fraud to take measures, any demonstrable fraud that could effect the outcome of an election would do. Have you taken a look at the studies that indicated how much fraud there is? Attempted fraud comes in at one hundredth of a percent.

You say legitimacy of the elections, the GOP actually said "purity", a word they haven't dared to use since Jim Crow.

Whether or not the legitimacy of elections should be protected is independent of both (1) the GOP's intent for supporting such legislation, and (2) evidence to support fraud. Legitimacy should be protected on general principle, like it is in virtually every other incidence ID is required for something.

You speak as if elections just pop up spontaneously, and/or voters have the mental acumen of toddlers. The dates of them are known years in advance, the things needed to vote are easily attainable by any adult(outside of extreme cases). Any adult who wants to vote, has a clearly-defined path to do so.

 

[Rand M Arthur]

I can only guess, but you could provide a list to make it easier.

Hitchen's razor. The onus is on the one who makes the claim to provide proof.

 

[Andy Capp]

God forbid I disappoint a caustic asshole with a superiority complex.

Let me tell you, there nothing caustic about my asshole. I keep it tidy, like my logic. I have plenty of faults and I freely own up to them but here you point to an attribute of my comment as though it applies to me generally. My conclusion is superior because it is based on reality rather than a misstatement of the circumstances, and with over 15 years on Sherdog you should expect as much of yourself so yeah, that's pretty disappointing; I honestly want to be able to respect you. Apparently, you agree with me since you resorted to ad hominem instead of rebutting the point of my post. That you could not muster a more adult reaction in response is hardly a bad look for me, is it?

You seem like a relatively smart guy. What is your difficulty with this issue and my expectation that after 15 years here you aren't literally a knuckle dragging barbarian? If you want to cop to plain ol' trolling just let me know and I'll re-assess my expectations.

 

[Bald1]

Let me tell you, there nothing caustic about my asshole. I keep it tidy, like my logic. I have plenty of faults and I freely own up to them but here you point to an attribute of my comment as though it applies to me generally. My conclusion is superior because it is based on reality rather than a misstatement of the circumstances, and with over 15 years on Sherdog you should expect as much of yourself so yeah, that's pretty disappointing; I honestly want to be able to respect you. Apparently, you agree with me since you resorted to ad hominem instead of rebutting the point of my post. That you could not muster a more adult reaction in response is hardly a bad look for me, is it?

You seem like a relatively smart guy. What is your difficulty with this issue and my expectation that after 15 years here you aren't literally a knuckle dragging barbarian? If you want to cop to plain ol' trolling just let me know and I'll re-assess my expectations.

Did you read any of my other posts on this topic, or are you reflexively condemning a relevant position just because it doesn't align with your tribes stance?

 

[Andy Capp]

Did you read any of my other posts on this topic, or are you reflexively condemning a relevant position just because it doesn't align with your tribes stance?

Do these other posts appear ITT prior to the one to which I replied? Edit: if not then not that I would be able to recall. And tribe has nothing to do with you deliberately misstating the issue.

 

[Bald1]

Do these other posts appear ITT prior to the one to which I replied? Edit: if not then not that I would be able to recall. And tribe has nothing to do with you deliberately misstating the issue.

What issue did I deliberately misstate? The fact is some people have been brainwashed into thinking the push for voter ID is indeed rooted in racism. Sure, some people want to implement it while simultaneously working on making it harder for some demographic to get said ID, but that's a separate if connected issue that must be addressed. There's more than one valid problem at play here. And to dismiss the fact that only eligible people should be allowed to vote is to dismiss one, while myopically only focusing on your own concern.