@averagejoe1 saidHere again I post a simple question. Not ONE of your posts answer the question. Not One. MBus wrote about my reading some article, and capped it with some story about 100 citizens. None of that relevant.
The only reason is that only citizens of a municipality or a state or a country should vote. Try this, little feller. If all of the citizens of Yazoo MS are voting on how to spend a surplus in the city budget next Tuesday, do you think that ANY PERSON FROM ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTRY, OR FROM ANY OTHER COUNTRY, should be allowed, or would be qualified, to vote on this matter?
Libs don't answer simple questions, but please answer this one?
So, I post here a basic societal question, should non-citizens of a municipality or a country, or anything in between, vote in such a venue? Please don't ask someone to read an article, or to read silly posts. Rather, a thoughtful comment?
@averagejoe1 saidAlready answered, but let's answer it again: A system like voting can have Type 1 and Type 2 errors.
Here again I post a simple question. Not ONE of your posts answer the question. Not One. MBus wrote about my reading some article, and capped it with some story about 100 citizens. None of that relevant.
So, I post here a basic societal question, should non-citizens of a municipality or a country, or anything in between, vote in such a venue? Please don't ask someone to read an article, or to read silly posts. Rather, a thoughtful comment?
Type 1 is when someone votes who was not qualified. Type 2 is when someone who was qualified does not vote.
Before you decide to spend money on a problem, you look at how bad the problem is and which direction are the errors. Everything points to Type 1 is not much of a problem but Type 2 is a HUGE problem (made worse by gerrymandering, but that's another thread.)
There is clear historical evidence that MANY groups over time have tried to restrict others from legally voting by means of literacy tests, poll taxes, keeping rolls of 'registered' voters and then challenging and purging people from those rolls, not enough polling stations, forcing people to take off time from work to vote (e.g. not get paid), etc. Basically every dirty trick in the book. These facts then cause people to 'check out' and not even bother trying to vote which amplifies the problem.
In contrast, almost NO ONE ever tries to vote illegally, and the few that do are almost always good-faith mistakes.
So the question is not "should non-citizens vote?" That's obvious. The question is, "can government make voting hard?" And there answer there is a RESOUNDING NO!!!
194d
@spruce112358 saidMy question made no reference whatsoever to ‘making voting hard’. Do you realize this penchant of EVERY ONE OF YOU to veer off, segue, change issues and intent of posts.
Already answered, but let's answer it again: A system like voting can have Type 1 and Type 2 errors.
Type 1 is when someone votes who was not qualified. Type 2 is when someone who was qualified does not vote.
Before you decide to spend money on a problem, you look at how bad the problem is and which direction are the errors. Everything points to Type 1 is not much ...[text shortened]... us. The question is, "can government make voting hard?" And there answer there is a RESOUNDING NO!!!
Forget it, Spruce.
Loser. Is there anyone out there who will answer this question?
@averagejoe1 saidDepends on the municipality. Some counties and some states allow legal residents, including resident registered aliens, to vote on local issues. And rightly so. They pay taxes, so they should have at least some say how local taxes are spent, for example, for public services, such as libraries and schools.
Here again I post a simple question. Not ONE of your posts answer the question. Not One. MBus wrote about my reading some article, and capped it with some story about 100 citizens. None of that relevant.
So, I post here a basic societal question, should non-citizens of a municipality or a country, or anything in between, vote in such a venue? Please don't ask someone to read an article, or to read silly posts. Rather, a thoughtful comment?
Non-citizens are already forbidden by law to vote in federal elections. That’s why there is no need for any further legislation to regulate this.
@moonbus
But for those captured by the Trump religion, not good enough since they KNOW there is massive fraud because their orange fascist anti Christ told them so and they believe every word coming out of the mouth of this criminal. Pretty sad. I say religion because it has gone WAY past mere cult. They literally worship this creep.
@AverageJoe1
Is there something wrong with us just saying NO, aliens should not be able to vote in the US federal elections? I don't suppose you know about the already existing federal law against that which clearly means nothing to you and the rest of the Trump religion crowd. Trump says jump you go how high your majesty?
@averagejoe1 saidYou must be hard a hearin' we answered you about FIVE times.
My question made no reference whatsoever to ‘making voting hard’. Do you realize this penchant of EVERY ONE OF YOU to veer off, segue, change issues and intent of posts.
Forget it, Spruce.
Loser. Is there anyone out there who will answer this question?
You know, standin' up there with thumbs in your lapels sayin' "Will no one answer me this Question? Will no one answer? Will no one? Buehler? Buehler?" you remind a lot of Huey Long.
And btw everybody knows why you are asking trivial questions like "Should illegality be illegal?" It's no secret where you are trying to go - and no, we ain't going there with you, so you might as well hesh up about it.
@moonbus saidDiscounting the plethora of Sunhouse post, the question is much simpler than that.
Depends on the municipality. Some counties and some states allow legal residents, including resident registered aliens, to vote on local issues. And rightly so. They pay taxes, so they should have at least some say how local taxes are spent, for example, for public services, such as libraries and schools.
Non-citizens are already forbidden by law to vote in federal elections. That’s why there is no need for any further legislation to regulate this.
You are aware. I am sure that, for someone to be listed on the voter rolls, that they would have had to have been approved to be able to vote? If you agree, here is the question. Can someone who is not approved, not on the rolls, vote?
A simple question. Thankyou. It is so simple, I did not even whine about voter ID.
PS: as to being qualified, the town fathers decide whether they are qualified. So, if José swam over just yesterday and is approved for voting this Tuesday, he CAN vote.
I think my questions are so easy that you think I am trying to trick you fellers?
194d
@averagejoe1 saidSimple answer. no stupid. How many times are you going to ask this moronic question.
Discounting the plethora of Sunhouse post, the question is much simpler than that.
You are aware. I am sure that, for someone to be listed on the voter rolls, that they would have had to have been approved to be able to vote? If you agree, here is the question. Can someone who is not approved, not on the rolls, vote?
A simple question. Thankyou. It is so simpl ...[text shortened]... , he CAN vote.
I think my questions are so easy that you think I am trying to trick you fellers?
194d
Yikes, Joe asks a question, everyone answers. Then Joe rants about no one answering his questions.
AND the question itself was insane. Should illegal things be illegal?
A better question, Joe: why is the speaker of the house flying to mar a Lago to meet with the former president and declare they're making things illegal that are already illegal?
194d
@wildgrass saidThat's too hard for joe. He's the kindergarten kid who says
Yikes, Joe asks a question, everyone answers. Then Joe rants about no one answering his questions.
AND the question itself was insane. Should illegal things be illegal?
A better question, Joe: why is the speaker of the house flying to mar a Lago to meet with the former president and declare they're making things illegal that are already illegal?
* why?
the adult tells him in simple words.
* but why?
adult patiently repeats simple answer.
* but you don't say just why?
adult tries a more detailed answer, but patience is wearing thin.
* but you never answer my questions. why can't you give me an answer?
adult, at his wit's end: either "go play in the road" or "because I said so"
* stamps foot and runs to mom for sympathy.
Joe - you're the asterisk.
@yeah-boy saidYeah Boy should be brave and step outside of the lib talking points....and tell us the answer to the question. If someone is not approved, posted, entered on the polling roles by authorities, should they be allowed to step up and vote? If you don't answer with the next post, which you will not,, you go in the loser column. (Back page of my journal)
Simple answer. no stupid. How many times are you going to ask this moronic question.
Why, I detect emotion here....