Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which is worse
Letting noncitizens vote 12 30.00%
Restricting citizens access to vote 17 42.50%
They’re equally unacceptable. 11 27.50%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-06-2018, 12:50 PM
 
8,090 posts, read 6,959,050 times
Reputation: 9226

Advertisements

Let’s assume, for a second, that there are an equal number of noncitizens who vote as there are citizens who have their ability to vote infringed upon (this clearly isn’t true, but whatever). What’s worse letting a noncitizen vote or depriving a citizen of their constitutional right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Central Ohio
10,834 posts, read 14,931,891 times
Reputation: 16587
How could we possibly restrict a citizen from voting? Requiring a form of ID? And what else, a poll tax perhaps?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:02 PM
 
8,090 posts, read 6,959,050 times
Reputation: 9226
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4 View Post
How could we possibly restrict a citizen from voting? Requiring a form of ID? And what else, a poll tax perhaps?
It’s interesting how many 2nd Ammendment absolutists are willing to restrict someone’s voting rights, if their papers aren’t in order.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Chicago, IL
9,701 posts, read 5,110,938 times
Reputation: 4270
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4 View Post
How could we possibly restrict a citizen from voting? Requiring a form of ID? And what else, a poll tax perhaps?
Using that reasoning, how could someone who's not allowed to vote possibly vote? It's illegal...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:04 PM
 
Location: United States
12,390 posts, read 7,094,688 times
Reputation: 6135
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
Let’s assume, for a second, that there are an equal number of noncitizens who vote as there are citizens who have their ability to vote infringed upon (this clearly isn’t true, but whatever). What’s worse letting a noncitizen vote or depriving a citizen of their constitutional right?
Can you give an example of depriving a citizen of their constitutional right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Denver CO
24,202 posts, read 19,199,670 times
Reputation: 38267
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
Can you give an example of depriving a citizen of their constitutional right?
Using a program like CrossCheck and disenrolling people just because someone in another state has the same name, like Jose Rodriguez, but somehow, people like Thomas Wilson aren't flagged.

Requiring a state issued ID but then closing the agency that issues those IDs in counties with large minority populations, while leaving them open in counties where most people are not minority.

Refusing to accept photo college IDs yet accepting gun permits.

How many more examples would you like? Those are just the top of my head but I could google more for you if you need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:20 PM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,353 posts, read 60,534,984 times
Reputation: 60936
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
It’s interesting how many 2nd Ammendment absolutists are willing to restrict someone’s voting rights, if their papers aren’t in order.
And it's interesting how many free speech absolutists are willing to restrict, or even remove, people's 2nd Amendment rights as well as a couple contained in the 1st, including said free speech if it's not the "right" speech.

To answer your question in a way. You live in Pennsylvania, historically considered one of the most corrupt states, along with Maryland and New Jersey, for voter fraud.

Constitutional scholars differ on whether the right to vote is guaranteed. Some say it is, based on the 15th Amendment guaranteeing that the right to vote can't be denied due to race or previous conditions of servitude. The other side avers that it says what it means, that you can't be denied the vote for those reasons but that there is no umbrella right guaranteeing anyone the right to vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:27 PM
 
Location: Pacific NW
9,437 posts, read 7,366,892 times
Reputation: 7979
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
It’s interesting how many 2nd Ammendment absolutists are willing to restrict someone’s voting rights, if their papers aren’t in order.
So you're in favor of the same restrictions on voting as there are on the 2nd? ID, background checks, no voting for felons, no voting for someone accused of domestic violence, no voting for the mentally ill, no voting for drug users, no voting under age 21.

It's interesting how many 'voter rights' supporters see a simple ID check as violating someones rights, but have no problem restricting someones 2nd amendment rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:28 PM
 
15,526 posts, read 10,495,101 times
Reputation: 15810
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
Let’s assume, for a second, that there are an equal number of noncitizens who vote as there are citizens who have their ability to vote infringed upon (this clearly isn’t true, but whatever). What’s worse letting a noncitizen vote or depriving a citizen of their constitutional right?
Both are illegal, so what's your point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2018, 01:29 PM
 
Location: Denver CO
24,202 posts, read 19,199,670 times
Reputation: 38267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
So you're in favor of the same restrictions on voting as there are on the 2nd? ID, background checks, no voting for felons, no voting for someone accused of domestic violence, no voting for the mentally ill, no voting for drug users, no voting under age 21.

It's interesting how many 'voter rights' supporters see a simple ID check as violating someones rights, but have no problem restricting someones 2nd amendment rights.
It's interesting how many people are killed by another person's vote. Oh, right, no one is directly killed by the vote of a person even if they might have a mental illness, a history of domestic violence, a criminal record, etc.

False equivalency remains false.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top