US President Donald Trump, on Friday, February 13, threatened to try to bypass Congress and force new voting laws ahead of the November midterm elections, where his Republican Party fears losing control of the legislature. Trump said he would soon issue an executive order attempting to impose the rules if Congress does not pass a law requiring photo identification to vote and other nationwide reforms.
Any attempt would likely be met by a legal challenge that could ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court. “There will be Voter ID for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “If we can’t get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted. I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order,” he wrote.
While many jurisdictions across the United States require photo ID to cast ballots, not all do, with Trump and many Republicans arguing without evidence that those areas have permitted significant voter fraud.
The Trump-backed “SAVE America” election reform act passed in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives this week. However, it is expected to fail in the Senate, where the Republican majority is too slim to pass the law without Democratic support.
In addition to requiring a photo ID to cast a ballot, the bill would also require proof of citizenship to register to vote. There is no evidence of meaningful fraud in US elections and critics say that the bill’s measures would instead push millions of people away from casting ballots, because they don’t have a passport or a paper copy of their birth certificate.
That’s the spirit! Anyone with a different opinion from mine can only be trolling, and doubly so if their opinion requires me to - gasp - question literally anything at all. Echo chambers are the Lemmy way, after all.
It’s not an issue of opinion, it’s that your argument is logically insufficient and you sound stupid.
No, I just have basic pattern recognition, sowwy sweety
If you’re not happy with the state of the place, why do you come here?
You’re giving me the same “well if you don’t like it then you should just leave” rhetoric that Republicans use in response to my efforts to make this a better place? This thread is a hell of a trip.
I wouldn’t say the tone you’re using conveys an intention to better the environment. It feels more like you’re stressing yourself out.
I’m more concerned with the hypocrisy than the tone policing myself, but either way I’m only returning the energy I’m being given.
See there it is again! Tone policing would imply you’re being limited in expression. You’re allowed to be an asshole if you want to, but getting upset at people’s responses to it is like being mad at them because you pissed your own pants. More importantly, why subject yourself to it if you’re not happy with it?
Nobody here is upset - I pointed out that Lemmings are hypocrites in one specific area, they predictably didn’t like that and upped the vitriol, and I returned as good as I got. I’m very used to voicing uncomfortable truths on the internet - there’s no need for this weird, patronizing coddling thing you’ve got going on.
See, again I have to wonder what your reasoning is here. Aside from seeing no posts about states rights, your response was the only thing that would register as vitriolic. And again, why do it? What brings you to the internet that would make you used to voicing uncomfortable truths? You wouldn’t go out into the world with the goal of sitting in uncomfortable chairs? Why do the digital equivalent if it’s not bringing you any joy?
The bandwagon effect is strong here. They condemn Trump for “rigging” elections, yet they’re perfectly comfortable downvoting anything that doesn’t fit their paradigm regardless of how correct it is. That undermines the intended purpose of upvoting and downvoting.
I believe the word for that is hypocrisy.
I really thought this comment was satire, then I got to the end and the satire turn never happened. Turns out it was just stupid.
He’s right, though. Isn’t he? All you saw was “states’ rights,” and your immediate reaction was, “He supports slavery,” even though his comment had nothing to do with slavery. States’ rights are a legitimate constitutional concept. They exist independently of racism.
You were so locked into your presuppositions that the only response you could imagine was satire.
You advocate for federal authority when it suits you, and then invoke states’ rights when that is more convenient.
The logical fallacies just keep stacking higher.
Cool straw man you built that’s completely unrelated to anything said in the comment you replied to. No idea where you even pulled slavery from but I bet you’re having an epic takedown in your head.
At no point did I obfuscate the argument into something more easily defensible this is exactly what people were saying under his original comment.
Then again, most people who use the term straw man don’t know what it is… That goes doubly for you.
The irony of posting this comment in this specific chain would be hilarious if it weren’t so sad.