Foxtrol wrote: » Do they also pay for their taxis across the city to the nice suburb to get their ID?
What you haven't dealt with is the angle of suppression when other forms of IDs that are tougher to get than the easiest level are not accepted but carry permits are.
Manic Moran wrote: » The above is incorrect. I am unaware of any State which requires a driver’s license to vote and does not accept a State ID. Data from 2015, but presumably not much changed since. 7 States charge more than $25 for a State ID. California, Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Florida. 10 States charge less than $10. Tennessee, Iowa, Maine, Ohio, North Dakota, South Carolina, Arkansas, Indiana, Wisconsin, Kansas. All other States charge between $10-25, the median being $16. Of the 50, for those who cannot afford the price of the ID card, which isn’t exactly exorbitant, 33 do hardship waivers. One does not need to learn to drive a car to vote.
Manic Moran wrote: » Absolutely not the same. There are two different discussions one can debate. 1. Should ID be required to vote? 1b. If yes, how difficult should it be to get such an ID? (That’s the voter suppression bit people argue over. The “easiest” ID to get is the standard by which such a requirement must be judged) 2. Where ID is required, should a carry permit issued by the state be accepted as proof of ID in the case that the person in question has neither a driver’s license or ID card, also issued by the State? Item 2 is not a voter suppression issue. If you cannot get the easiest level of ID required to vote, you certainly cannot get the tougher one, so the lack or otherwise of the tougher one is irrelevant.
Quin_Dub wrote: » A student or work ID isn't accepted so in order for you to vote you potentially have to shell out anything up to $200 to get a drivers license , when you don't drive and don't have a car , just so you can vote..
FrostyJack wrote: » Why are people poor, why don't they just pull themselves up by their bootstraps? That is the same as your argument. The legislation isn't to stop you or I voting.
Foxtrol wrote: » GOP states make it much more difficult for poor minority areas for both voting and access to IDs. There are examples of DMVs to get IDs open once a month and no public transport to get to others.
Manic Moran wrote: » That's a daft argument. The State issues ID cards which are easier to get than a firearms permit. If you can get a firearms permit, you can damned well get a state ID card. I got my Kentucky State ID card in fifteen minutes from walking into the county office to leaving with it in my pocket. The reason I don't have a Texas State ID card is that I already have the harder-to-get drivers' license and firearms permit which do the ID functions and more. It may be that conservative folks are statistically more likely to seek to obtain a carry permit, but that has no relevance when it comes to the difficulty of seeking to obtain any form of accepted State ID for voting at all. If you're a conservative (or not) who wants to carry a gun, then jump through the extra hoops. If you're not a conservative (or not) who wants to carry a gun, don't jump through those extra hoops. Most people jump through the extra hoops of getting a driver's license. If you don't want a driver's license, don't jump through those hoops either. Aren't conservatives more likely to have a driver's license? After all, they are less likely to live in cities with good public transport like San Francisco or New York City. Texas State ID card requirements. https://www.dps.texas.gov/driverlicense/applyforid.htm Texas carry card requirements. https://www.dps.texas.gov/RSD/LTC/faqs/index.htm
Manic Moran wrote: » That's a daft argument. The State issues ID cards which are easier to get than a firearms permit. If you can get a firearms permit, you can damned well get a state ID card. I got my Kentucky State ID card in fifteen minutes from walking into the county office to leaving with it in my pocket. The reason I don't have a Texas State ID card is that I already have the harder-to-get drivers' license and firearms permit which do the ID functions and more. It may be that conservative folks are statistically more likely to seek to obtain a carry permit, but that has no relevance when it comes to the difficulty of seeking to obtain any form of accepted State ID for voting at all. Texas State ID card requirements. https://www.dps.texas.gov/driverlicense/applyforid.htm Texas carry card requirements. https://www.dps.texas.gov/RSD/LTC/faqs/index.htm
Manic Moran wrote: » Two things. 1) There is no federal license to carry, so the federal agencies aren't involved. 2) It does not promote gun ownership. It enables those who wish to carry their gun to so do in a regulated manner. As opposed to an unregulated manner in either legal areas (where no permit is required at all) or illegally where no permissions are granted at all.
FrostyJack wrote: » The reason people don't like it is because it is mild form of voter suppression, it is seen as mainly right wing folks love the 2A so they are more likely to have a permit hence easier for them to vote so it is advantageous to Republicans not Democrats. If there was Mensa permit or licence that allowed you to vote, the Republicans would be up in arms saying it was advantageous to Democrats. Things that make it easier for Republicans to vote is easier in some states, things that would make it easier for Dems to vote are ruled out, making turn out lower. Lower turn out in most states is what gets GOP elected.
listermint wrote: » Probably because it promotes gun ownership. Something federal agencies shouldn't be doing
Manic Moran wrote: » I never understood why people complain about that. I didn't have to go through a background check for my driver's license, I did for my carry permit. Both are issued by Texas Dept of Public Safety, they look similar, they even are linked in the database (to the point that they use the same photograph). If one is going to accept a state ID card or driver's license, a state carry permit certainly should be accepted (and, indeed, here in TX, they are). Compare https://woocommerce-262453-958953.cloudwaysapps.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/License-to-Carry-Texas.jpg vs https://www.kxan.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/2019/06/Drivers-license.jpg?w=1920&h=1080&crop=1
Manic Moran wrote: » I never understood why people complain about that. I didn't have to go through a background check for my driver's license, I did for my carry permit. Both are issued by Texas Dept of Public Safety, they look similar, they even are linked in the database (to the point that they use the same photograph). If one is going to accept a state ID card or driver's license, a state carry permit certainly should be accepted (and, indeed, here in TX, they are).
aloyisious wrote: » States do require you to carry an I/D when you're voting. That said, a carry-gun permit will suffice as I/D in some states.
StringerBell wrote: » Remember when he was gonna sue all the women who accused him of sexual harassment and assault sure once the campaign was over, and how many did he actually sue? Not one.
Quin_Dub wrote: » Exactly - A bit like the ratio of "People Trump has threatened to sue" vs. "People Trump has actually sued" ?22 Times Trump threatened to sue people during the 2016 election. 22 Threats of legal action over the course of about 18 months... He actually sued only 2 of them - One was settled out of court so we don't know if he won or not (The Univision case) , the other was thrown out for not being valid (The Hotel workers union one). So - Trump threatens a lot of people for a lot of things , but he rarely follows through and when he does , his success rate isn't all that great..
wassie wrote: » Hong Kong is part of China's territories, so they can do what they want unimpeded in reality. Taiwan would be where you want to see real action by the US if called for.
kowloonkev wrote: » Actually it is exactly the definition of standing up for someone. He has threatened China yesterday because of HK to back off.
Leaving the White House for a trip to Michigan on Thursday, he told reporters that he did not know “what it is,” but added, “If it happens, we’ll address that issue very strongly.”
“The communist regime in Beijing would like nothing more than to extinguish the autonomy of Hong Kong and the rights of its people,” Mr. Toomey said in a statement. “In many ways, Hong Kong is the canary in the coal mine for Asia. Beijing’s growing interference could have a chilling effect on other nations struggling for freedom in China’s shadow.”
“The USA cannot let this stand,” Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri and a staunch Trump ally and China hawk, wrote on Twitter. Mr. Hawley said he would introduce a Senate resolution “condemning this attempted crackdown” and calling on “all free nations to stand with” Hong Kong.
“This proposed legislation is a sign of Beijing’s weakness, not its strength,” said Representative Eliot L. Engel, Democrat of New York and the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “Hong Kong’s special status is a benefit to China and the world. I don’t understand why Beijing continues to imperil that status with proposals such as this.”
spacecoyote wrote: » If he actually follows through and does anything, then I'd accept that statement. But, as has been the case with Trump in every such scenario to date, a vague angry amount of bluster doesn't actually add up to any meaningful action without backing up his words
hetuzozaho wrote: » He's not very nice is he?https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1263669433366728704 Wacky. Do nothing. Not their fault he didn't wear a mask? He did wear a mask? He's frustrating to listen to. And implying that this is a reason motor companies might leave michigan. Ugh.
sydthebeat wrote: » he tweets like a council estate pyjama wearing hag giving out about "De Gubberment Do Nuttin For Me, Ginvn Dem Foreigners Everything"
Leroy42 wrote: » That seems quite a bit different to your claim he stood up for them and stood up to China. Did he call Xi to adhere to international human rights? To demand democracy be allowed to continue in HK? Did he threaten sanctions?
PropJoe10 wrote: » Good grief! He won't like that. Tweetstorm about "never Trumpers" incoming.
