Comments by "Cinderball" (@cinderball1135) on "" video.

Ever since I heard about American Republicans toying with Voter ID, I've been waiting for it to show up here. It's like a flipping contagion. Whatever they can get away with there, you can be sure our Conservatives will want to have a go.
89
As I said to the last guy, the operative word is "everybody." If the state provides it free of charge, that eliminates the problem - but here in the UK, that isn't how it works. If you want to obtain Photo ID, you will need to pay up, at one stage or another.
2
The operative word here is "everybody". If a country provides everybody with photo ID, free of charge, that eliminates the problem. But here in the UK, we don't.
2
What do you know? A crap policy borrowed from the United States - and a crap talking point also borrowed from the United States.
2
@kid-vf4lu It is an exact response to what you said. The "Oh, you're calling poor people stupid" argument is exactly what far-right American Republicans use, to justify making it more difficult for poor people to vote. Nobody - NOBODY - said that poor people were stupid.
2
@kid-vf4lu Please stop. You're digging your hole even deeper.
1
G C I'm working under the impression that 123 supports voter suppression. If I'm wrong about that, I'm happy to apologise and retract my comments - but this looks exactly like the American Republican playbook: first suppress the votes of poor people by introducing a new level of bureaucracy - and then if anybody complains, frame the criticism as condescension towards poor people.
1
@kid-vf4lu But that's the thing. Voter ID is not necessary. Make no mistake - Voter ID is voter suppression. This is an open secret. This isn't a matter of opinion, it's glaringly obvious. There is no debate to be had. There is no, and I mean no voter fraud going on to start with. We are talking about maybe a dozen falsified ballots being cast in a nation of millions. Why are we so eager to solve a problem that doesn't exist? Contrast that to the number of people who will immediately lose their right to vote under this proposed law. Hundreds of thousands. And this is good for democracy how? Voter ID laws are a colossal hammer, where the problem is a splinter. The tool is completely inappropriate to the task in hand, and it looks rather like the doctor doesn't give a damn about the splinter - he just wants to break your wrist. Is it coincidental that a Conservative policy will serve to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of non-Conservative voters, while utterly failing to address the non-issue it claims to address? I think not.
1
@kid-vf4lu There is no lack of confidence in our system. There is no problem. This is a solution in search of a problem which will create a mountain of other problems. What is so difficult about this concept?
1
@kid-vf4lu If not malice, then dangerous ignorance of the topic in hand. Nothing you've said in any way counters the central thrust of my argument - that voter ID is essentially voter suppression. It's an answer to a problem that doesn't exist. Whether or not you have ID isn't the point - there are thousands of other people who may not have. They'll lose their vote overnight, potentially without ever realising what's just happened. Do you have faith in a Johnson government to keep people properly informed about their voting rights?
1
@kid-vf4lu And now I think I have to go ahead and assume malice on your part. You have to realise how ridiculous it is of you to accuse me of being a white supremacist: I'm the one arguing that minorities' right to vote should be defended. You are the one defending a policy which would lose them that right. I refuse to believe you are so stupid that you didn't understand my comment. You know I didn't accuse you of not knowing your heritage. The only reason you'd make a risible comment like that is because you're trying to confuse the issue at hand. Right wing propaganda at its finest. Now, seeing as I am fairly sure you're a troll, I'm not going to reply any further. If you want to claim victory, go right ahead, for all the good it may do you.
1
@chinaisasshoe9378 Voter ID is voter suppression, make no mistake. And there is no voter fraud to counter. How many times must this be restated? It just. Doesn't. Happen.
1
@chinaisasshoe9378 Without UFO insurance, you're wide open to having your house levelled by space aliens, and there would be no way for you to reclaim your lost property. What, you don't want UFO insurance? You must not like your house very much then. This is exactly how you sound.
1
@chinaisasshoe9378 THERE. IS. NO. FRAUD. I'm exhausted with this roundabout argument. You're not listening, and you clearly don't actually care about the facts, or about understanding me. You just want to throw mud at me, to make me look silly. You don't want to engage with the substance of my argument, because you have no answer to it. The fact is, that it's your position which is unreasonable and needs better justification. Voter fraud is a problem that is so miniscule that it might as well not exist. In the hypothetical situation that millions of fraudulent ballots were being cast, we still wouldn't need voter ID laws - because that's what we have electoral watchdogs and official observers for. Any irregularities will be caught during the counting process. We don't need voter ID to fix that. Demanding voters supply ID to vote, while refusing to provide free IDs to everybody, is blatantly a voter suppression tactic. It will have the immediate consequence of tens of thousands of people losing their ability to go to a polling station, overnight. Instantly. If you care so much about democracy, and the integrity of the voting process, how are you okay with denying people their right to vote? Now, you might tell me you have no confidence in the existing system, that you're worried about the potential for fraud in the future. You don't believe existing countermeasures are enough. Well, if that opinion is valid and has to be respected, then I could equally well state the opinion that I have no confidence your argument was made in good faith. So basically, you have three options: 1) Find a better argument 2) Accept your position is flawed 3) Submit yourself to accusations of bad faith And that's all I have to say on the subject. I'm done responding to you.
1