Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

NC Republican/General Assembly Idiocy


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 23,139
  • Reputation: 2,954
  • LocationMontford
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:21 PM

If the govt had some empirical evidence where x# of voting fraud happened I kinda sorta could see the idea behind this but I'm with ireg on this. It totally appears to be making voting a big time hassle.
This is where if I was consulting Rep candidates I would say just blow others away with your track record and taking care of big issues so you won't sweat worrying getting votes.

The Reps are the guy who finally got the pretty girl to go out with him and he takes her to a place he wants to eat at and talks only about himself. Then is baffled when she doesn't answer the phone for a second date.

#22 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 17,910
  • Reputation: 6,257
  • LocationMatthews, NC
Administrators

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:22 PM

so obscure that the majority leader is a sponsor


fine, in this case I rescind the obscure part.

But in the next 12 threads, I won't be so kind!

#23 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • Joined: 12-December 08
  • posts: 9,002
  • Reputation: 1,386
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:42 PM

I bet it won't pass, however I hate the religion thing.

Both seem pretty stupid to me however.

Then again, I am not really a Republican either.

#24 Gazi

Gazi

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 07-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 7,831
  • Reputation: 311
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 12:59 PM

They can't claim them as dependents and can't carry them on their insurance under Obamacare? WTF is this?

#25 I Mean He Was Found Guilty

I Mean He Was Found Guilty

    I MEAN AT LEAST TRADE HIM FOR SOMETHING AMIRITE

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 11,671
  • Reputation: 5,063
  • LocationChapel Hill
SUPPORTER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 01:02 PM

even if the entire mechanism of tying dependent status of an adult child to place of voter registration was found to be legal (it's within the realm of possibility as various voter registration laws have passed the undue burden test in the past) it still doesn't mean that the aim of this bill isn't to keep certain people from voting (or make it a massive pain in the ass) which was my entire point.

#26 Harris Aballah

Harris Aballah

    Fayette-Villian

  • Joined: 22-March 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,867
  • Reputation: 370
  • Locationnorth carolina
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 01:32 PM

even if the entire mechanism of tying dependent status of an adult child to place of voter registration was found to be legal (it's within the realm of possibility as various voter registration laws have passed the undue burden test in the past) it still doesn't mean that the aim of this bill isn't to keep certain people from voting (or make it a massive pain in the ass) which was my entire point.

Adult child? gimme a break! Cheating the system is inexcusible on any level. And thats why this country is half as screwed up as it is. You are suggesting that someone who lives in one district should be able to pretend he lives at mommies house, so he can avoid registries in the county in which he lives. And be able to vote on behalf of a district in which he does not live? And mommie is supposed to claim him on her taxes. And this arguement is supposed to make me embarrassed that I have voted for reps in the past? I mean its not like anyone says he can't vote. Just that you do it honestly. And not cheating the irs while you are at it. Adult child?

#27 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • Joined: 10-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,885
  • Reputation: 3,405
  • LocationShallotte, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 01:36 PM

Adult child? gimme a break! Cheating the system is inexcusible on any level. And thats why this country is half as screwed up as it is. You are suggesting that someone who lives in one district should be able to pretend he lives at mommies house, so he can avoid registries in the county in which he lives. And be able to vote on behalf of a district in which he does not live? And mommie is supposed to claim him on her taxes. And this arguement is supposed to make me embarrassed that I have voted for reps in the past? I mean its not like anyone says he can't vote. Just that you do it honestly. And not cheating the irs while you are at it. Adult child?


Are you arguing that a college student who lives off his parents dime while attending school away from home is not a financial dependent?

Because that's what this is attempting to do. You either let your child, who attends college away from home, register to vote and thus forfeit your right to claim them as a dependent, or your child forfeits their right to vote so that you can continue to afford to send them to college.

#28 Harris Aballah

Harris Aballah

    Fayette-Villian

  • Joined: 22-March 12
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,867
  • Reputation: 370
  • Locationnorth carolina
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:02 PM

Are you arguing that a college student who lives off his parents dime while attending school away from home is not a financial dependent?

Because that's what this is attempting to do. You either let your child, who attends college away from home, register to vote and thus forfeit your right to claim them as a dependent, or your child forfeits their right to vote so that you can continue to afford to send them to college.

lots of kids go to college on thier own. It is my expierence that if you are living off your parents dime at 18, and going to school..., you got dough. In reality it is unfair to the kids who have to make thier own way. The ones that don't have mommie's dime to live off of. These kids make it. So why can't the rich kids do it? Funny you guys are mad that reps are fighting for the poor. Evening it up so the rich pay thier fair share.

#29 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • Joined: 10-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,885
  • Reputation: 3,405
  • LocationShallotte, NC
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:06 PM

Funny you guys are mad that reps are fighting for the poor..


You think that this legislation is a Republican attempt to fight for the poor? fuging LOL.

"Forcing everyone to become saddled with a lifetime of student loan dept in order to maintain equal voting rights, is totally a righteous fight for the poor!!1 Can't you guys see it?!?!?"

The rest of your post is just too much dumbassery to bother dignifying with a serious response.

#30 mav1234

mav1234

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 18-October 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,037
  • Reputation: 2,231
HUDDLER

Posted 03 April 2013 - 02:10 PM

lots of kids go to college on thier own. It is my expierence that if you are living off your parents dime at 18, and going to school..., you got dough. In reality it is unfair to the kids who have to make thier own way. The ones that don't have mommie's dime to live off of. These kids make it. So why can't the rich kids do it? Funny you guys are mad that reps are fighting for the poor. Evening it up so the rich pay thier fair share.


so is your argument that the "unit" of voting is not an adult, but a tax return?

I like your thinking. Why bother letting two married people vote if they file jointly? If they're a union, make a decision like one!


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users