Seriously, this is what you’re reduced to?
You can do better I think and with very little effort.
See that’s the thing, the goal here isn’t to do better or worse. It’s to admit that most of you want restrictions on voting, some of you want only land owners to vote, some of you still want in person voting only.
And some of you don’t care if a vote is legal or not as long as they vote for your side.
1 Like
Yes, we want to restrict it to legally eligible lawfully registered voters, what a horrible thing!
Some people want more restrictions on it than others but on those you will get universal agreement among republicans and conservatives or as near to universal as can be imagined.
Yes, you can do better. Don’t play dumb and don’t change the bar to then try and hurl a “gotcha”.
That’s very true and yes those done are for all illegal votes. It’s unfortunate. I wonder how big that number of some is compared to how big you think that number is
There is one fact that disputes the self righteousness dripping through your post - smaller turnout always benefits the gop.
When you guys cry about legitimate votes it’s hard to take it seriously
Turnout is always going to be lower if you exclude people voting illegally.
2 Likes
There is no evidence that illegal voting effects turnout.
See this is where you guys lose the plot.
How can illegal voting not effect (sic?) turnout? Every illegal vote is another “voter” turned out.
Well yes by definition it does. Everyone who votes illegally increases turnout.
Which means… democrats benefit from illegal voting.
1 Like
There is no evidence of this. Like none.
It’s a dream like guns kill people
Everyone. How many?
There is no evidence that it effects actual turnout. That’s what we were discussing
But yes on the esoteric level more illegal votes would effect turnout.
Well yes it’s basic math and definitions.
If even one person gets to vote illegally that would be an increase in turnout over an election they were prevented from voting in.
1 Like
On the exoteric level any illegal votes effect turnout. On the esoteric level, applying Democrat semantic newspeak, it could well not effect turnout.
I was trying to pre-empt where I thought your argument was going and short circuit it.
I could swear you were fishing for an admission that decreasing turnout by restricting illegal votes benefits republicans.
By extension that would mean that expanding turnout by not restricting illegal votes benefits democrats.
Reading back my post you are right i should have made it more clear.
