|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
158 members (GKM, Ben Downs, CNC, Brownitsdown, ECO25, Jay512, hayman, mdavis, AU67Skeeter, Ryano, jprice, football1957, Backwards cowboy, hue, auman, WEMOhunter, 7PTSPREAD, Driveby, Irishguy, twaldrop4, GeauxRed, cmontgomery, deerman24, MarkAlan, Mike32, leroycnbucks, NVM1031, DoubleNickel, jtillery, DEADorALIVE, crocker, fillmore, Claims Rep., jacannon, Obsession, toothdoc, MountainTopHunter, CeeHawk37, Bowfish, Cuz-Pat, BibbCo, Marengo hunter, sw1002, Dubie, HHSyelper, CAL, Jwoods32, jhardy, Hunting-231, quailman, Turkeyneck78, Stevenattsu, Spotchaser8, 000buck, RockFarmer, HBWALKER14, JohnG, desertdog, Catbird, jmj120, Skillet, Sendero558, cullbuck, hunter84, Mdees, klay, Meatn3, mcninja, Shane99, Bigwhitey, BhamFred, outdoorguy88, Coosa1, Sgiles, Red Fox, Double Creek2, BearBranch, Narrow Gap, sj22, Turberville, Bustinbeards, trlrdrdave, Shotts, Sixpointholler, mauvilla, timberwolfe, AHolcomb, mopar, pkcole, StateLine, Beer Belly, Parker243, CAM, GomerPyle, ultratec00, gregnbc, murf205, billrv, BACK40, 700ltr308, SC53, buzzard, Mulcher, GHTiger10, Antelope08, courseup, BPI, Livintohunt19, deadeye48, wk2hnt, Mennen34, Morris, oldforester, Fishbones, Kennnn, coldtrail, m97, Cynical, mayberry51, Dragfan66, KnightRyder, Chiller, cch, ParrotHead89, TideWJO, PourIron12, CKyleC, janiemae, walt4dun, Vernon Tull, Spec, green river 123, Solothurn, WDE, Peach, Okalona, NotsoBright, thayerp81, DuckDown11, Hoytdad10, hippi, Tall Dog, 16 invisible),
722
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 4,830 Likes: 117
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 4,830 Likes: 117 |
Yeah but the constitution prohibits a “poll tax” and Supreme Court precedent leans against it as well. From google ..
“ In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections that poll taxes are unconstitutional at all levels of government. The Court determined that conditioning the right to vote on a person's ability to pay a fee violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” It's apparent that you want elections to be held with no ID presented. State issued ID's are generally free, especially to the very low income/minority LEGAL CITIZENS of this country who are the ones the Left cries about when it comes to voter ID. I guess that's just too much of a burden though. Brother you aren’t following along. A STATE ID ISNT ENOUGH UNDER THE SAVE ACT. That might be what you present at the poll but to register you need.. again.. a passport, a birth certificate and ID with name matching, or naturalization papers. Don’t get all uppity with me when you’re too dumb to know the requirements the SAVE act demands when I already just spelled them out for you. Do you really think you need a passport to vote or did you mean to put or? I would not come on here calling everyone dumb. Might get fact check your own self
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 4,830 Likes: 117
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 4,830 Likes: 117 |
I about decided I had rather read ever word cnc ever wrote on doe killing then read one of this guys posts
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote
|
|
3 members like this:
rhino21, T-hatchie, Boathand |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 4,830 Likes: 117
12 point
|
|
12 point
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 4,830 Likes: 117 |
|
|
1 member likes this:
jmj120 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 25,782 Likes: 66
Freak of Nature
|
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 25,782 Likes: 66 |
I’m not opposed to showing ID to vote because I already have to. I’ve never not shown my ID when I vote. But some of the language of one of the SAVE Act iterations was pretty arduous, requiring a passport ($160 min), certified birth certificate ($10-$50) and the name on the birth certificate had to match the name on the photo ID (so married women have to jump through even more hoops), replacement naturalization papers if lost is over $1000, troops abroad not meeting the requirements to vote, and more.. all for a problem that I think is over-exaggerated. Some states have done audits and found like .. ONE wrongly registered non-citizen.
I’d be more concerned with actual tampering. Biased poll workers tossing ballets, Elon tampering with the voting machines as Trump so nicely bragged about, and more. Can you provide credible links to what you posted. Not just democrats propaganda.
Proud Army and ALNG veteran
God Bless America!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 343 Likes: 1
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 343 Likes: 1 |
As soon as they attached things to the save act I knew it was dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 12,678 Likes: 116
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 12,678 Likes: 116 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening
When I need expert advice I tend to talk to myself
The older I get the better I used to be
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,162 Likes: 196
Doing the best I can.
|
|
Doing the best I can.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,162 Likes: 196 |
On the marriage license issue.........the state of Alabama is not in the marriage business anymore and a license to marry is no longer required. There would be no marriage license to present for those married after that change went into affect.
The true mark of a man is not how he conducts himself during times of prosperity, but how he conducts himself during times of adversity.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,162 Likes: 196
Doing the best I can.
|
|
Doing the best I can.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,162 Likes: 196 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening I can't agree with either of you on this one. I do understand your thought on this and it does sound good on the surface but, a young married couple who is having to rent an apartment or house to start out would be denied the right to vote if this were the case.
The true mark of a man is not how he conducts himself during times of prosperity, but how he conducts himself during times of adversity.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening I believe that was put forward at some point. I agree with it
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening I can't agree with either of you on this one. I do understand your thought on this and it does sound good on the surface but, a young married couple who is having to rent an apartment or house to start out would be denied the right to vote if this were the case. Yes. I understand that also
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 4,064 Likes: 68
Management Spike
|
|
Management Spike
Joined: Oct 2022
Posts: 4,064 Likes: 68 |
AIPAC strikes again... 🚨🇺🇸The Senate just killed the SAVE Act, 48-50.
Voter ID and proof of citizenship, supported by over 80% of Americans, dead.
Four Republicans voted no: Tillis, Murkowski, McConnell, Collins.
The uniparty showed its face today...
https://x.com/MarioNawfal/status/2062675262429393005Our govt is a joke and has been for a loooong time. Their goal is to loot the treasury. Period.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 12,678 Likes: 116
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 12,678 Likes: 116 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening I can't agree with either of you on this one. I do understand your thought on this and it does sound good on the surface but, a young married couple who is having to rent an apartment or house to start out would be denied the right to vote if this were the case. The point being made is that people would vote more sensibly if they had skin in the game instead of voting for programs that require more of our tax dollars for their benefit keeping them in the same cycle of dependency and property ownership requirement is one of the few things that can prevent US from paying for a lifetime supply of ho-ho cakes
When I need expert advice I tend to talk to myself
The older I get the better I used to be
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,276 Likes: 23
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 8,276 Likes: 23 |
You guys really have selective hearing. I specifically mentioned about how that affects married women and how they have to jump thru hoops, in at least some of the iterations of the bill. It would require them to go thru processes of getting new birth certificates at least, because your birth cert has her maiden name and not her married name. If that costs money, it’s still a poll tax. I just looked it up to be sure, but all a married woman would have had to do was present a marriage license, along with her birth certificate, and her ID to register. She would not have had to go thru any additional “processes.” I thought you said you read the bill? This. My wife has voted since she was 18. Now all of a sudden, she has to requalify. This is BS. Voters didn't care about showing id, it was the new requirements, mostly for married women or those with state id's that were honored past elections. My wife called it the "Save White Christian Nationalists" Act. I don't think she is too far off in her assessment. If Tubbernuts is not charged for fraudulently voting in Florida while declaring he was an Alabama resident, then stop whining about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,162 Likes: 196
Doing the best I can.
|
|
Doing the best I can.
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 13,162 Likes: 196 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening I can't agree with either of you on this one. I do understand your thought on this and it does sound good on the surface but, a young married couple who is having to rent an apartment or house to start out would be denied the right to vote if this were the case. The point being made is that people would vote more sensibly if they had skin in the game instead of voting for programs that require more of our tax dollars for their benefit keeping them in the same cycle of dependency and property ownership requirement is one of the few things that can prevent US from paying for a lifetime supply of ho-ho cakes Thus being the reason I included the statement, "I do understand your thought on this and it does sound good on the surface", in my response. The point I'm making is this would be totally unconstitutional. My wife and I bought our first home at the age of 23 so by that standard, we would not have been eligible to vote until that age. We had an entire thread about how young people were not able to afford homes and the average first time homebuyer's age being significantly higher now. A lot of that has to do with inflation vs wage increase now. Look at how many decent thinking people that would vote the way you and I would you would be knocking out of the right to vote simply because they were trying to just get their feet under them. Also, following the same logic of having skin in the game, it would perfect sense that those with more skin in the game should have more say in things. Therefore, the votes of the people who owned the most would carry more weight than say the vote of you and I. You're opening a whole other can of worms there.
The true mark of a man is not how he conducts himself during times of prosperity, but how he conducts himself during times of adversity.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113
14 point
|
|
14 point
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8,192 Likes: 113 |
You guys really have selective hearing. I specifically mentioned about how that affects married women and how they have to jump thru hoops, in at least some of the iterations of the bill. It would require them to go thru processes of getting new birth certificates at least, because your birth cert has her maiden name and not her married name. If that costs money, it’s still a poll tax. I just looked it up to be sure, but all a married woman would have had to do was present a marriage license, along with her birth certificate, and her ID to register. She would not have had to go thru any additional “processes.” I thought you said you read the bill? This. My wife has voted since she was 18. Now all of a sudden, she has to requalify. This is BS. Voters didn't care about showing id, it was the new requirements, mostly for married women or those with state id's that were honored past elections. My wife called it the "Save White Christian Nationalists" Act. I don't think she is too far off in her assessment. If Tubbernuts is not charged for fraudulently voting in Florida while declaring he was an Alabama resident, then stop whining about it. True about Tubbs
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,897 Likes: 92
Booner
|
|
Booner
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 14,897 Likes: 92 |
I think someone should have to provide proof of property ownership to be able to vote If I’m not mistaken that has been proposed at one time or another and I agree with it A person voting that has no skin in the game can vote to live on our tax dollars for generations….oh wait that’s already happening I can't agree with either of you on this one. I do understand your thought on this and it does sound good on the surface but, a young married couple who is having to rent an apartment or house to start out would be denied the right to vote if this were the case. The point being made is that people would vote more sensibly if they had skin in the game instead of voting for programs that require more of our tax dollars for their benefit keeping them in the same cycle of dependency and property ownership requirement is one of the few things that can prevent US from paying for a lifetime supply of ho-ho cakes Never happen or worth debate; 46 million Americans rent with an average age of 41. They pay taxes and rent to property owners. They certainly deserve representation. 66% of military households rent. How about people that have jobs that require them to move frequently; like travel nurses, etc.
Last edited by wew3006; 06/05/26 08:45 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 81,844 Likes: 513
GUVNER
|
|
GUVNER
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 81,844 Likes: 513 |
The SAVE act may still get past the Senate, some procedural crap was done overnight. They still have to nuke the filibuster which Thune is against doing.
"Never Trust Government" -- Smart people.
"The Great thing we should Fear and the Weird Thing we Trust is Elon Musk" -- Me
"You can be broke but you cant be poor." -- Ruthie-May Webster
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2025
Posts: 269 Likes: 8
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: May 2025
Posts: 269 Likes: 8 |
You guys really have selective hearing. I specifically mentioned about how that affects married women and how they have to jump thru hoops, in at least some of the iterations of the bill. It would require them to go thru processes of getting new birth certificates at least, because your birth cert has her maiden name and not her married name. If that costs money, it’s still a poll tax. I just looked it up to be sure, but all a married woman would have had to do was present a marriage license, along with her birth certificate, and her ID to register. She would not have had to go thru any additional “processes.” I thought you said you read the bill? This. My wife has voted since she was 18. Now all of a sudden, she has to requalify. This is BS. Voters didn't care about showing id, it was the new requirements, mostly for married women or those with state id's that were honored past elections. My wife called it the "Save White Christian Nationalists" Act. I don't think she is too far off in her assessment. If Tubbernuts is not charged for fraudulently voting in Florida while declaring he was an Alabama resident, then stop whining about it. Exactly. CD is hung up on the only mistake in my argument (made during the pauses on my late night Taco Bell run) and he’s hanging on to it like it’s all that’s stopping him from falling off a cliff. Boathead doesn’t realize non-citizens can get REAL ID’s too so that doesn’t work either or only works in some states. Getting a REAL ID is more arduous in some areas than a regular license. Now others are proving my point about voter suppression by saying we should take away 40% of the populations right to vote on the arbitrary grounds that they don’t own their house, but yet somehow all their income and state taxes don’t count for anything. “no taxation without representation.” Just an example but MAGA loves the 2nd amendment. You can’t even ban illegal Glock switches without being hit with “shall not be infringed” and think everyone should be able to have an RPG in the truck, and an Abrams tank in the garage, but it’s clear the whole rest of the constitution is “pick and choose what you like” (kinda like the Bible).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2025
Posts: 269 Likes: 8
4 point
|
|
4 point
Joined: May 2025
Posts: 269 Likes: 8 |
Yeah but the constitution prohibits a “poll tax” and Supreme Court precedent leans against it as well. From google ..
“ In 1966, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections that poll taxes are unconstitutional at all levels of government. The Court determined that conditioning the right to vote on a person's ability to pay a fee violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” It's apparent that you want elections to be held with no ID presented. State issued ID's are generally free, especially to the very low income/minority LEGAL CITIZENS of this country who are the ones the Left cries about when it comes to voter ID. I guess that's just too much of a burden though. Brother you aren’t following along. A STATE ID ISNT ENOUGH UNDER THE SAVE ACT. That might be what you present at the poll but to register you need.. again.. a passport, a birth certificate and ID with name matching, or naturalization papers. Don’t get all uppity with me when you’re too dumb to know the requirements the SAVE act demands when I already just spelled them out for you. Do you really think you need a passport to vote or did you mean to put or? I would not come on here calling everyone dumb. Might get fact check your own self Really man. That’s the best you got. It’s clearly an “or” list. One of the three options. Nowhere did I say “and” If I asked you good calibers for deer hunting would you say “308, 30-06, 270Win, or 30-30” or would you say “308 or, 30-06 or, 270Win or, 30-30”
|
|
|
|
|
