Supreme Court blocks Wisconsin's voter ID law

[Straw Man]

yes, thats totally what happened. Because 1 conservative judge and a couple shitbag republicans have an opiniom i should just totally flip my opinion because some shitheads whine about having to show ID to fucking vote.

Wah. Your argument has next to no logical backing, its basically

'eligable voters wont vote if they have to show ID and a conservative judge think its unfair, so you should too
 Oh, and a couple republicans hope that it DOES suppress votes so therefore is merits invalidated."

It makes no logical sense. If those people are too fckn lazy to get an ID or proof of identity then IMO they dont deserve to vote.

I couldnt care less if they were republicans refusing to vote if they hd to show ID, if you cant prove your identity you dont fucking vote. There is no logical argument against that. Ever other argument ive seen is just grasping at straws to justify why people shouldnt have to orove who they are to vote.

why don't you put your emotions aside and read the actual facts as cited by the judge

or you can just ignore the fact and not let them get in the way of your opinions which is what I suspect you will do

[Shockwave]

why don't you put your emotions aside and read the actual facts as cited by the judge

or you can just ignore the fact and not let them get in the way of your opinions which is what I suspect you will do

ironic because that's literallt what youve single handedly done for the entire thread.

You chose 2 arguments and discard everything else. I examined your argument, and you facts, and decided that its not in any way a logical justification for not having to prove who you are to vote in national elections.

[Straw Man]

ironic because that's literallt what youve single handedly done for the entire thread.

You chose 2 arguments and discard everything else. I examined your argument, and you facts, and decided that its not in any way a logical justification for not having to prove who you are to vote in national elections.

how about we try to agree on some facts

1. voter fraud does occur ......yes or no

can we both agree this is a yes?

2. voter fraud appears to be very rare (i.e. we have only isolated cases)

yes or no

if you say no then please provide your evidence

we can go on from there to more facts that we can try to agree on

[Shockwave]

how about we try to agree on some facts

1. voter fraud does occur ......yes or no

can we both agree this is a yes?

2. voter fraud appears to be very rare (i.e. we have only isolated cases)

yes or no

if you say no then please provide your evidence

we can go on from there to more facts that we can try to agree on

yes

And

No, in the sense that voter fraud is very difficult to identify, so we really dont know the extent or how widespread it is, because theres next to no checks or balances on the system. Youre going strictly on the stats, which doesnt tell the whole story as it IS extremely easy to commit voter fraud as has been shown multiple times, but its very rarely pursued or caught  so theres not a good  true stat for how widespread it is.

[Straw Man]

yes

And

No, in the sense that voter fraud is very difficult to identify, so we really dont know the extent or how widespread it is, because theres next to no checks or balances on the system. Youre going strictly on the stats, which doesnt tell the whole story as it IS extremely easy to commit voter fraud as has been shown multiple times, but its very rarely pursued or caught  so theres not a good  true stat for how widespread it is.

so you're saying that voter fraud is not very rare but you actually have zero proof to support that belief ?