Well, I asked you that question first, and you didn't answer it either. So I guess we're even there.
You're making claims about it without even having read it, namely screaming about the Voter ID requirement, when this is universal.
Not only did you have no idea at all about the law, you had no idea about what kind of requirements are common or universal. You just parrotted what you had heard, because apparently, you think that having an opinion that you copied from others makes you smart.
Speaking of unanswered questions I repeat: can you be arrested in Europe for giving water to someone standing in line to vote?
Repeating the lie, when this is not the case. So you were either lying, or you're just repeating what you hear. Which is it? I assume the latter.
That is funny. I thought that was exactly what I was objecting to. Maybe we have a language problem.
Prior to this law, control was with local officials. Now it's more centralized. Either way, control is in the hands of political officers.
It appears that once again, you had absolutely no idea what propaganda you were repeating. Quite typical. Often wrong, but never in doubt. But one would not expect a parrot to be right.
"Regurgitating" - interesting choice of words. Do you use it for yourself when you repeat an argument you agree with?
I think for myself, which I can unfortunately not say for you.
You started out whining about Voter ID, but when you discovered that this was universal in Europe, started deflecting to... the great crime of preventing electioneering near polling places. You definitely don't think for yourself.
And I've quoted part of the the Georgia bill to you, which is more than you've done.
Yes, leaving out relevant parts in order to deceive. For example, you left out that this only applied withint 150 feet of the polling place. So either you're ignorant, or you're a liar. In either case, it does not speak well for you.
Because you know of no one there is no one. Well that makes it simple.
No, and pay careful attention, I said that I don't know anyone, and neither do you. I did not draw the conclusion that there are none in Europe.
Though this is just your attempt to grasp at straws.
Right. Regurgitation again.
What is it then?
I don't recall ever saying that. You're the one that keeps saying it.
It's the claim of the people whose propaganda you keep parroting. I note that you didn't even reject this claim, you merely stated that you have not made it yourself. So you reject that claim, or not?
Now you're being silly
The silliness is all yours, that you started out screaming about Voter ID, and then started deflecting to "giving water", because you didn't even know that Voter ID requirements are universal.
Georgia is willing to deny the franchise to legitimate voters. In my opinion that's worse.
Actually, you're denying the franchise to legitimate voters, whose votes are canceled out by your opposition to election security, so candidates that you can like will win.
Actually, voting is more important than baseball
Agreed, it is therefore more justified to ensure the security of voting as opposed to baseball.
You're making claims about it without even having read it, namely screaming about the Voter ID requirement, when this is universal.
It's not voter ID that's the subject here. It's Georgia's voter suppression. The relevant part of my original comment (sorry for the typo): "Georgia thinks a lot of the poor mail-in people who vote Democrat.don't have picture ID or can't easily copy it."
You keep talking about voter ID in general and avoiding discussing Georgia.
Not only did you have no idea at all about the law, [etc.]
I repeat: you are avoiding discussing the specific Georgia measures I have mentioned.
Speaking of unanswered questions I repeat: can you be arrested in Europe for giving water to someone standing in line to vote?
Repeating the lie, when this is not the case. So you were either lying, or you're just repeating what you hear. Which is it? I assume the latter.
Earlier in this discussion I quoted Georgia's legislation to you where it said exactly that, and gave you a link to it. You deflected to the general case and refused to address the question. I'm not sure how you can characterize Georgia's public document as a lie, but I see that doing that does allow you to duck the question once again. Clever, but we may not have much more to talk about if you're going to ignore what Georgia has put in black and white while simultaneously claiming it's a universal practice.
Prior to this law, control was with local officials. Now it's more centralized. Either way, control is in the hands of political officers.
Prior: bureaucrats following a script that's fair to both parties. Now: politicians able to influence the outcome of an election if they think they won't like the results.
Often wrong, but never in doubt.
Very good. I like that, and am looking forward to an opportunity to use it myself. Along with "they will follow a principle right over a cliff".
I think for myself, which I can unfortunately not say for you.
Ah yes, well, as Lao Tzu says: "Care about people’s approval, and you will always be their prisoner."
You started out whining about Voter ID,
Nope. Go back and read it again. If you still believe that then we really do have a language problem.
but when you discovered that this was universal in Europe, started deflecting to... the great crime of preventing electioneering near polling places.
You really do need to supply some documentation. You keep using the word "universal" but have not provided a single instance of another jurisdiction where it is specified that it is illegal to give food and water to a person standing inline to vote.
And I've quoted part of the the Georgia bill to you
Yes, leaving out relevant parts in order to deceive. For example, you left out that this only applied withint 150 feet of the polling place.
Still waiting for examples of the universal aspect of this restriction from you. That is, legislation / regulations / rules from those other jurisdictions that specifically forbid and penalize food and water. A handful will do.
It's the claim of the people whose propaganda you keep parroting.
Since I never said it you'll have to take that up with them.
I note that you didn't even reject this claim, you merely stated that you have not made it yourself. So you reject that claim, or not?
I'm not addressing statements I didn't make, and you need to read up on 'Logical Fallacies'.
The silliness is all yours, that you started out screaming about Voter ID,
As pointed out several times: it's Georgia voter ID restrictions. I repeat my statement: "Georgia stands alone in charging someone who gives water to people standing in line to vote" and invite you to provide any examples of this being a universal aspect of voting regulations elsewhere.
and then started deflecting to "giving water", because you didn't even know that Voter ID requirements are universal.
I'll just point out again that I'm in this conversation because I'm talking about Georgia, and you keep talking about voter ID in general.
Actually, you're denying the franchise to legitimate voters, whose votes are canceled out by your opposition to election security, so candidates that you can like will win.
My opposition is to Georgia's overly restrictive new regulations, of which I have provided a specific example.
In short, you say that Georgia is doing what everyone else does but have not provided examples of other jurisdictions doing the thing I have asked about.
You're making claims about it without even having read it, namely screaming about the Voter ID requirement, when this is universal.
Not only did you have no idea at all about the law, you had no idea about what kind of requirements are common or universal. You just parrotted what you had heard, because apparently, you think that having an opinion that you copied from others makes you smart.
Repeating the lie, when this is not the case. So you were either lying, or you're just repeating what you hear. Which is it? I assume the latter.
Prior to this law, control was with local officials. Now it's more centralized. Either way, control is in the hands of political officers.
It appears that once again, you had absolutely no idea what propaganda you were repeating. Quite typical. Often wrong, but never in doubt. But one would not expect a parrot to be right.
I think for myself, which I can unfortunately not say for you.
You started out whining about Voter ID, but when you discovered that this was universal in Europe, started deflecting to... the great crime of preventing electioneering near polling places. You definitely don't think for yourself.
Yes, leaving out relevant parts in order to deceive. For example, you left out that this only applied withint 150 feet of the polling place. So either you're ignorant, or you're a liar. In either case, it does not speak well for you.
No, and pay careful attention, I said that I don't know anyone, and neither do you. I did not draw the conclusion that there are none in Europe.
Though this is just your attempt to grasp at straws.
What is it then?
It's the claim of the people whose propaganda you keep parroting. I note that you didn't even reject this claim, you merely stated that you have not made it yourself. So you reject that claim, or not?
The silliness is all yours, that you started out screaming about Voter ID, and then started deflecting to "giving water", because you didn't even know that Voter ID requirements are universal.
Actually, you're denying the franchise to legitimate voters, whose votes are canceled out by your opposition to election security, so candidates that you can like will win.
Agreed, it is therefore more justified to ensure the security of voting as opposed to baseball.
It's not voter ID that's the subject here. It's Georgia's voter suppression. The relevant part of my original comment (sorry for the typo): "Georgia thinks a lot of the poor mail-in people who vote Democrat.don't have picture ID or can't easily copy it."
You keep talking about voter ID in general and avoiding discussing Georgia.
I repeat: you are avoiding discussing the specific Georgia measures I have mentioned.
Earlier in this discussion I quoted Georgia's legislation to you where it said exactly that, and gave you a link to it. You deflected to the general case and refused to address the question. I'm not sure how you can characterize Georgia's public document as a lie, but I see that doing that does allow you to duck the question once again. Clever, but we may not have much more to talk about if you're going to ignore what Georgia has put in black and white while simultaneously claiming it's a universal practice.
Prior: bureaucrats following a script that's fair to both parties. Now: politicians able to influence the outcome of an election if they think they won't like the results.
Very good. I like that, and am looking forward to an opportunity to use it myself. Along with "they will follow a principle right over a cliff".
Ah yes, well, as Lao Tzu says: "Care about people’s approval, and you will always be their prisoner."
Nope. Go back and read it again. If you still believe that then we really do have a language problem.
You really do need to supply some documentation. You keep using the word "universal" but have not provided a single instance of another jurisdiction where it is specified that it is illegal to give food and water to a person standing inline to vote.
Still waiting for examples of the universal aspect of this restriction from you. That is, legislation / regulations / rules from those other jurisdictions that specifically forbid and penalize food and water. A handful will do.
Since I never said it you'll have to take that up with them.
I'm not addressing statements I didn't make, and you need to read up on 'Logical Fallacies'.
As pointed out several times: it's Georgia voter ID restrictions. I repeat my statement: "Georgia stands alone in charging someone who gives water to people standing in line to vote" and invite you to provide any examples of this being a universal aspect of voting regulations elsewhere.
I'll just point out again that I'm in this conversation because I'm talking about Georgia, and you keep talking about voter ID in general.
My opposition is to Georgia's overly restrictive new regulations, of which I have provided a specific example.
In short, you say that Georgia is doing what everyone else does but have not provided examples of other jurisdictions doing the thing I have asked about.