ex-President Trump

Sure. cost/benefit on the development side as well. That's not the political issue we have with voting systems which are a bit different. It's not just voting, it can be anyhtign where there are disadvantaged groups. In a much fairer/just world no-one would object to voter ID. It wouldn't even occur to anyine to object except possibly on the grounds of cost..

I live in a more complex world than you do

Indeed you do. I'd find the world intolerably complex too, if I were also incapable of forming the simplest of coherent sentences to structure my thoughts about it.

What I said was that you can't go back a year or so and find if most types of voter fraud even occurred. This simply isn't true with bank or identity fraud - an investigator could very easily look at a 10 year old case of either of those frauds and still see an electronic record of money moving out of an account.

In many states they don't require an ID to vote so let's not pretend the US has sufficient measures in place to reduce voter fraud. If anything we are actively trying not to catch voter fraud.

I agree there should be an insane amount of evidence before we reverse an election result. I think trump is fine saying the election was stolen if he is referring to the collusion between dems and the intelligence community prior to the election but he should not say it was stolen via voter fraud. I don't any serious person would say the 2020 election was the least fraudlant considering what I mention above about the laptop story being buried.

I think the federal government should use cost/benefit analysis on everything they do, but I'm not sure they are even aware what such an analysis is. I think if the govt is going to start using cost/benefit analysis it shouldn't start with investigating voter fraud.

Far right aka moderate republican voting restrictions are meant and designed to prevent eligible voters from voting. It’s never been about these fabled ineligible voters that somehow vote and asymmetrically support democrats.

Can you name 3-4 repub polices that prevent eligible voters from voting?

States striking the presidential candidate off primary ballots
States not having primary elections at all and declaring their preferred candidate the winner

Oh wait you said republican

Voter ID laws. Some percentage of people are going to fail to be eligible because of any restriction you put on voting. ID laws make it harder for people who move a lot (or have no home) to vote. They make it harder for poor people to vote. They make it harder for young people, especially students, to vote. No, it's not THAT hard, but the restrictions disproportionately block poor and young people from voting and that benefits the GOP. GOP also opposes things like automatic voter registration (through the DMV or whatever). If someone moves, they may find themselves not registered. Sure, they can go out of their way to register, but the old people who have lived in the same house forever don't have to do that. They get to vote even if they barely pay attention to such things. A young person or someone moving between houses/apartments has to do more work to vote.

No Sunday voting in Texas, because black churches started using it. A fraudulent vote was no more likely to be cast on Sunday than any other day, but valid Dem votes were so republicans made it illegal.

The multiple North Carolina voter restriction laws that were overturned by their conservative far right Supreme Court because they clearly targeted eligible voters. Due to the subpoenas we streaight up have emails from these morons confirming that their proposed laws will reduce legal votes that go against them. There was actually no discussion of whether these new laws would prevent illegal votes.

Are there any far right restrictions actually trying to reduce fraud and not simply valid votes for the other team? I don’t know of any.

You realize that states are under no obligation to hold primaries at all, right?

Using the word "prevent" is a subtle framing that tends to obscure the real issue.

Almost nothing that Republicans propose with respect to election security 100% prevents any individual person from voting. But almost everything that Republicans propose with respect to election security is intended to decrease the number of people who actually vote. That's the whole point.

If higher turnout generally favored Republicans, all this alleged concern about voter fraud would evaporate into thin air. And to be fair, if higher turnout favored Republicans, Democrats probably would behave a lot more cynically on things like voter ID.

You realize that the Colorado and Maine suits were brought by Republicans right?

To be fair that was part of the thought process behind the electoral college in the first place

That is not accurate . The Colorado one was brought by a Republican Group but a Democrat selected Supreme Court ruled it was OK . As for Maine that is entirely false Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows who is a loyal democrat banned him solely based on her bias .

Trump has never been charged of convicted of insurrection

Courts don't initiate lawsuits. Gorgonian said that the Colorado litigation was brought by Republicans. That is correct, as you yourself acknowledge.

I don't know anything about the origins of the decision in Maine.

He said

That is not factual at all as only the Colorado one was originated by a GOP group.

It is accurate.

You already admitted I was correct about the Colorado suit.

As for the Maine suit:

"The decision came after a group of former Maine lawmakers said that Trump should be disqualified based on a provision of the U.S. Constitution that bars people from holding office if they engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” after previously swearing an oath to the United States.

The former lawmakers -- Kimberley Rosen, Thomas Saviello and Ethan Strimling -- said in a statement that Bellows "stood on the side of democracy and our constitution in her decision to bar former President Donald Trump from Maine’s ballot."

Rosen and Saviello are both former Republican state senators. Strimling is a former Democratic state senator."

-- from https://www.reuters.com/world/us/maine-e...

So, 2 Republicans and a Democrat.

How exactly are you blaming this on Democrats?

I am blaming the democrats as they elected the seven justices on the state supreme court that ignored the fact that the former president has never been convicted of an insurrection or charged with it . As for the Maine one that is a clear cut case of a state official that is clearly a biased democrat choosing to ignore due process and remove the former president from the ballot

I agree that no matter what restriction you put on voting it will end up reducing voter turnout.

Would you support the following laws and if not please explain why you support laws that intentionally reduce voter turnout:
1. every county in the country to be required to send full stocked limos to every voters house to drive them to the polls
2. for polls to be open 24/7
3. for each county to be required to have at least the same number of poll workers as the county's total population to ensure absolutely no lines
4. for voting to be held over a 6 month period
5. anyone can text in their votes from any phone (remember poor people don't always have their own phone) by just saying their name and who they want to vote for
6. anyone can vote in any state they choose (we don't want people who recently moved to be shut out of voting)

I'm sure every state is different but in my state a valid ID costs $2.87 a year so let's no act like it is super expensive. I would also be up for a program that allows everyone a free ID that last 8 years once every 8 years (if you want more than that you can pay the $2.87/year).

Why do you think young people have a harder time to the polls than really old people? Most really old people can't drive and aren't mobile. Don't you think your ageist opinion that every county should be required to send a limo to everyone to drive them to the poll hurts old people the most?

this is one of the dumbest things i've ever read from you, and that's saying something.. trying to break the ID cost down per year is just either incredibly stupid or incredibly intentionally deceptive.. lol

Everything is a compromise. It's weighing cost vs benefit.

What's the cost of not having voter ID? (there is none)

It's harder for young people, especially students, to vote because they are moving all the time and often aren't even anywhere near their permanent place of residence during an election. If I had to register for every election I'm sure I'd have missed out on some. Also brings to mind vote by mail. That's a big one and solves all your problems with limos and such. I vote by mail every time like a lot of people in blue states. Republicans hate that.

How many of those 4 that voted in favor of it were democrats? (hint, you're not going to need very many fingers for this one)

Why do you think a conviction or charge is necessary for disqualification?

Why do you believe due process was ignored? You realize there was a trial, right?

What Trial in Maine ? There wasn’t a trial

Bottom line I think it helps Trump by them doing this

I actually hope the Supreme Court says they can do it