If Mastriano wants to zero out school property taxes- (Columbia: sales, daycare)

[jtab4994]

Originally Posted by Tweb66

Also, when it comes to voter ID, its not that people can't "figure it out", its that its not free. Requiring something that costs money to vote=poll tax. My opinion on the matter is, you are an adult, get your **** together and get an ID, but lets make the ID free and supporting documents needed to get and ID free as well.

You are spreading misinformation. Anyone can get an ID in Pennsylvania for free. Even for the homeless, a new law was passed in 2020 so they can get free state ID's. That law was passed by the Republican legislature and signed by the Democrat governor, FWIW.

https://www.vote.pa.gov/Register-to-...me-Voters.aspx

I wish I had a nickel for every person I've corrected on this issue over the last few years. You don't need a driver's license or a passport. Voting is free.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by Tweb66

No you aren't, please stop. You think "the Jews" are to blame. Your antisemitism isn't hidden by your "wondering", in fact it is amplified. And for those playing at home, Wells5 has already had one thread deleted because his "wondering" was viciously antisemitic, and who knows how many more threads and comments were deleted that I don't know about.

It’s funny. I was thinking this thread was a breath of fresh air because Wells found a way to state his opinions about the gubernatorial race without stooping to anti-Semitic tropes. So much for that theory.

As a proud Jewish Pennsylvanian descended from four Pennsylvania-born Jewish grandparents, I’d almost respect him more if he were brave enough to just admit that he hates Jews.

[NewtownBucks]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

You are spreading misinformation. Anyone can get an ID in Pennsylvania for free. Even for the homeless, a new law was passed in 2020 so they can get free state ID's. That law was passed by the Republican legislature and signed by the Democrat governor, FWIW.

https://www.vote.pa.gov/Register-to-...me-Voters.aspx

I wish I had a nickel for every person I've corrected on this issue over the last few years. You don't need a driver's license or a passport. Voting is free.

And you also already need an ID to vote in PA (the first time you go to a polling station to sign the voter log after which the signature match becomes the ID).

[Tweb66]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

You are spreading misinformation. Anyone can get an ID in Pennsylvania for free. Even for the homeless, a new law was passed in 2020 so they can get free state ID's. That law was passed by the Republican legislature and signed by the Democrat governor, FWIW.

https://www.vote.pa.gov/Register-to-...me-Voters.aspx

I wish I had a nickel for every person I've corrected on this issue over the last few years. You don't need a driver's license or a passport. Voting is free.

I didn't say anything specific about Pennsylvania laws, below is a quote from you. You are wrong, and I don't know every state works but there are legitimate concerns surrounding the costs of getting the ID. So when you say "we're told", who told you? Because you clearly don't understand what the issue is for many.





"We're told poor people can't figure out how to get an ID card"

[jtab4994]

Originally Posted by Tweb66

I didn't say anything specific about Pennsylvania laws, below is a quote from you. You are wrong, and I don't know every state works but there are legitimate concerns surrounding the costs of getting the ID. So when you say "we're told", who told you? Because you clearly don't understand what the issue is for many.

Find me a state where that's true. During the "Jim Crow on Steroids" nonsense I looked up the Georgia ID law, and I found that it was pretty similar to Pennsylvania, meaning that you can use a utility bill, bank statement, or government check addressed to you as a form of ID.

"We're told poor people can't figure out how to get an ID card"

Yes, we are told that by Left Wing activists. Given that ID cards are free and that activist groups will give you a free ride to go get one, the only objection can be that it's "too hard to figure out".

[Muinteoir]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

If you want to change something, you need to provide the reason to do it. It's not the other way around.



All you've said is that is that you didn't like the candidates of the two major parties in the last two Presidential election, but that's not reason enough to change the system. From what I've seen you are pretty enthusiastic about your candidates in 2022. Just because two other states (plus New York City) use Rank choice does not mean we should. Heck, there are plenty of other systems in use by other states including "open primary" and so-called "jungle primary". Are we supposed to just pick a new system out of a hat? What if bad candidates get vomited up by that new system, then what? Democracy ain't pretty.

P.S. I can't tell who you mean by "Con-man", the Orange one or the doddering stumblebum.

Actually, I did. But for some reason, as you so often do, you did not reply to the reasons I listed before. Why should I re-list what I already wrote about. You've gotta respond to the reasons I've already gave. You are inaccurate in saying, "All you've said is that is that you didn't like the candidates of the two major parties in the last two Presidential election." Look back at my former post.

Here's some info on ranked choice voting you can explore. It's not just picked out of a hat. There is a real movement behind this, and two states have already adopted it: https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/

Yeah, Trump is the con - man (CD censor), Biden is just kind out of it. But at least he kind of tries to be a good person, whereas Trump proved himself disinterested in doing good by his country.

I feel like you're being stubborn on this one because "the libs" of the Pennsylvania Forum are in favor of this reform. But many are in fact not liberal. Again, it's a pretty cross-political ideology reform.

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by Muinteoir

Actually, I did. But for some reason, as you so often do, you did not reply to the reasons I listed before. Why should I re-list what I already wrote about. You've gotta respond to the reasons I've already gave. You are inaccurate in saying, "All you've said is that is that you didn't like the candidates of the two major parties in the last two Presidential election." Look back at my former post.

Here's some info on ranked choice voting you can explore. It's not just picked out of a hat. There is a real movement behind this, and two states have already adopted it: https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/

Yeah, Trump is the con - man (CD censor), Biden is just kind out of it. But at least he kind of tries to be a good person, whereas Trump proved himself disinterested in doing good by his country.

I feel like you're being stubborn on this one because "the libs" of the Pennsylvania Forum are in favor of this reform. But many are in fact not liberal. Again, it's a pretty cross-political ideology reform.

My years in elective office taught me to always look at who's behind massive changes in policy. Ranked choice is one such change as is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Strangely enough the same people are advocating for both.

[Muinteoir]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

My years in elective office taught me to always look at who's behind massive changes in policy. Ranked choice is one such change as is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Strangely enough the same people are advocating for both.

Please expand upon what you're talking about. "Who's behind" RCV is many everyday citizens, like me.

[jtab4994]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

If you want to change something, you need to provide the reason to do it. It's not the other way around.

Originally Posted by Muinteoir

Actually, I did. But for some reason, as you so often do, you did not reply to the reasons I listed before. Why should I re-list what I already wrote about. You've gotta respond to the reasons I've already gave. You are inaccurate in saying, "All you've said is that is that you didn't like the candidates of the two major parties in the last two Presidential election." Look back at my former post.

Well, I don't agree with your reasons. Just because you didn't like the nominees in a couple of recent elections, and because you think it would be cool to give third and fourth party candidates a chance, aren't good enough reasons in my opinion.

And BTW rank choice voting in Alaska may yet yield an Orange-backed Senator while sending an anti-Orange incumbent Senator packing.

The Alaska at-large House seat is up for grabs between a Democrat and two Republicans. By splitting the Republican vote in a Republican state, that's one seat the Democrats may "steal" (using the baseball sense -- don't freak out). Before you fall off your chair laughing, consider that rank choice voting could set up the same scenario in majority-Blue states and give the Red people a chance at stealing seats. All of this with the winner receiving far less than 50% of the vote.

Respectfully, I think you're suffering from Recency Syndrome, trying to fix a problem you discovered in elections in 2016 and 2020, and when you never thought it was a problem in all the elections before that.

[Muinteoir]

Originally Posted by jtab4994

Well, I don't agree with your reasons. Just because you didn't like the nominees in a couple of recent elections, and because you think it would be cool to give third and fourth party candidates a chance, aren't good enough reasons in my opinion.

And BTW rank choice voting in Alaska may yet yield an Orange-backed Senator while sending an anti-Orange incumbent Senator packing.

The Alaska at-large House seat is up for grabs between a Democrat and two Republicans. By splitting the Republican vote in a Republican state, that's one seat the Democrats may "steal" (using the baseball sense -- don't freak out). Before you fall off your chair laughing, consider that rank choice voting could set up the same scenario in majority-Blue states and give the Red people a chance at stealing seats. All of this with the winner receiving far less than 50% of the vote.

Respectfully, I think you're suffering from Recency Syndrome, trying to fix a problem you discovered in elections in 2016 and 2020, and when you never thought it was a problem in all the elections before that.

So I did provide reasons. You are entitled to your opinion, but I did give you reasons. I certainly am very happy with my reasons, and my close friends and family have enjoyed talking with me about RCV. Many of them have formed new opinions, as they understand their opinions should not be static throughout their lifetime.

Whatever the results are in Alaska, I respect the will of the people. I certainly hope they stick with Murkowski, but it is their choice.

That doesn't sound respectful, but cute attempt at a quip. Believe it or not, our opinions change over time as we process new information and new problems present themselves. Many people form new opinions over the course of their lifetime, and it is totally appropriate to have new opinions for new information. I certainly hope you have changed some of your opinions since you were 22, which was my age during the 2012 presidential election.

That is one of the wisdoms of the founding fathers: constitutional amendments. Amendments that can address changing times, changing needs, and yes, changing opinions!