Your "average" is incredibly vague and ambiguous
It's a simple Google search. Anyone can do it.
You can get pajeet to shovel manure all day if the money is good enough and he can get a health card.
I can remember when they said the same thing about the Italians coming to Toronto. You're not Italian are you?
You can get in much, much quicker than that provided you take the right pathway.
Of course. You did see the word "average", right?
make some coin and get free healthcare
When do they see their mistake and realize they're living in "a fascist Progressive hellhole"?
Canada is a fascist Progressive hellhole.
Sure. That's why the wait list for emigrating to Canada averages 6 years long.
If you live in Canada I assume you're making plans to go somewhere better. Or maybe you've already left? Where did you go that was better?
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 did not answer whether you have even read the voting law in question.
Well, I asked you that question first, and you didn't answer it either. So I guess we're even there.
[ referring to the Georgia bill] I note that you cut out the part where it said that this applied 150 feet from the polling place. This is to prevent electioneering.
Speaking of unanswered questions I repeat: can you be arrested in Europe for giving water to someone standing in line to vote?
It's funny that you do not object to control by political local officials.
That is funny. I thought that was exactly what I was objecting to. Maybe we have a language problem.
Then why are you regurgitating all the propaganda you read in the American media, and from their president?
"Regurgitating" - interesting choice of words. Do you use it for yourself when you repeat an argument you agree with?
Yes, you can't answer any questions yourself, and are asking questions instead because you cannot defend your parroting claims by people who call the Georgia law 'Jim Crow on steroids', while admittedly having no clue at all about how voting takes place there or elsewhere.
Hmm. The regurgitating argument again. I won't repeat myself. And I've quoted part of the the Georgia bill to you, which is more than you've done.
I know of no one without a birth certificate, and neither do you.
Because you know of no one there is no one. Well that makes it simple.
You don't even live in America, let alone Georgia. It's yet more repetition of what you have heard. Congratulations, you are a parrot.
Right. Regurgitation again.
And how exactly is this 'Jim Crow on steroids'?
I don't recall ever saying that. You're the one that keeps saying it.
I suspect there are a lot of places where you can hand out water to people lined up to vote.
You suspect. I note that you did not any research.
Now you're being silly. Never mind anywhere else, Georgia stands alone in charging someone who gives water to people standing in line to vote. Perhaps you'd care to point out another democracy where this happens. I suppose you will deflect to "electioneering", but try not to please, because Georgia specifies giving water. Show me another jurisdiction that specifies that.
And how does your 'suspicion' square with calling this 'Jim Crow on steroids', eh?
I repeat: You keep saying that, not me.
Even if that means that people can vote illegally? People voting illegally means that people will not get their vote counter, as their vote will be canceled out by people who have no right to vote.
Georgia is willing to deny the franchise to legitimate voters. In my opinion that's worse.
You failed to answer how it is that you think that it's more important to ensure that people picking up tickets are the same people who ordered them, than it is to ensure that people voting are the people who are entitled to vote.
Actually, voting is more important than baseball, so restricting the rights of legitimate participants is a serious matter and the practice should be objected to most strenuously.
Over to you. This is fun :-)
Maybe you should figure out more about other countries before you start backing a campaign that brands near-universal voting standards as 'Jim Crow on stereoids'?
"Near universal voting standards" I'm beginning to suspect you know as much about voting in Georgia as I do about voting in Europe. In Georgia a person can now be arrested for giving water to someone who is standing in line to vote. Is that true in Europe? Question one.
For reference: "...nor shall any person give, offer to give, or participate in the giving of any money or gifts, including, but not limited to, food and drink, to an elector..." Lines 1813 - 1815, "AN ACT To comprehensively revise elections and voting; ...", https://www.legis.ga.gov/api/legislation/document/20212022/201121
The State Election Board is now less independent from the legislature. Do election boards in Europe operate at arms length, or are they subject to control by the political party in power? Question two.
Or is this a 'Little America' thing where you are too arrogant to pay attention to anything outside your borders? "NO, IT'S JIM CROW, EVEN IF THE REST OF THE WORLD DOES IT!"
I don't live in the United States or any of it's protectorates. I probably don't know what 'Little America' means to you. You keep saying the rest of the world does what Georgia is doing. I'm asking you questions about that.
Passport, European ID, driver's license.
If, in Georgia now, you have never worked for one of the five government bodies mentioned earlier, and you do not have a birth certificate, you cannot vote. Is that the case in Europe? Question three.
...standards that are absolutely universal elsewhere.
You keep saying that. "I don't think it means what you think it means". I suspect there are a lot of places where you can hand out water to people lined up to vote.
Anyway, I didn't get yes or no answers to the questions in my last comment. I'd like to hear answers to questions one, two, and three this time please.
It is normal in Europe.
As I said, I don't know anything about voting in Europe. Europe has laws like Georgia's? They are 98 pages long in your jurisdictions? You can, for instance, get arrested for giving water to someone standing in line to vote?
Have you read Georgia's 98 pages?
We have 3 acceptable IDs. So even on that score, Georgia is doing better from your perspective.
What are they?
Does Europe have areas like rural Georgia, where a birth certificate might be hard to come by? Can a person without one vote in Europe? They won't be able to in Georgia unless they've worked for one of those 5 sets of employers.
And how exactly do you want to ensure election integrity?
Election integrity is not my area of expertise. Is it yours? If it was mine my emphasis would be on making sure every citizen of age would have their vote counted. Hopefully that would not mean eliminating a lot of people I wasn't sure about because I had a poor system.
https://sos.ga.gov/index.php/elections/georgia_voter_identification_requirements2
I don't know anything about voting in Europe. Georgia has 6 acceptable IDs, five of which are obtainable by driving, working for government, preparing to travel outside the country, joining the Armed Forces, or being recognized as an Indian.
That leaves out a lot of citizens, but the sixth is a free voter ID card which requires all of these:
- A photo identity document or approved non-photo identity document that includes full legal name and date of birth
- Documentation showing the voter's date of birth
- Evidence that the applicant is a registered voter
- Documentation showing the applicant's name and residential address
If that all seems perfectly normal to you then we do not agree that these new regulations are giving every tax-paying citizen an equal opportunity to exercise their franchise.
This is the kind of nonsense you can get when a once-upon-a-time eye doctor starts talking about infectious diseases. Read up on "Zoonosis" to understand how silly that statement is.