(02-04-2026 12:38 PM)mlb Wrote:  I know we've discussed this before, but what states don't require an ID? Ohio always checks my ID before allowing me to vote.

I saw a map yesterday on TV. IIRC, it was only blue states, except for Oklahoma. Not sure if it was ALL of the blue states, but close, for sure.

(02-04-2026 12:38 PM)mlb Wrote:  I know we've discussed this before, but what states don't require an ID? Ohio always checks my ID before allowing me to vote.

I don't need to show photo ID on election day in Maryland.

I just go to my polling location, tell them my name, confirm my birthday, and then give them my signature.

(02-04-2026 12:38 PM)mlb Wrote:  I know we've discussed this before, but what states don't require an ID? Ohio always checks my ID before allowing me to vote.

There are 14 states and DC that don’t require a picture ID to vote. This link should answer your questions.

https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id

Keep in mind the SAVE Act takes additional steps requiring proof of citizenship for example to sign up to vote.

(02-04-2026 12:38 PM)mlb Wrote:  I know we've discussed this before, but what states don't require an ID? Ohio always checks my ID before allowing me to vote.

here's a hint ... click on the first page and scroll down ... there's about 4 versions of maps throughout the thread...

#lazyarses

Thune is apparently feeling the heat

While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

Exactly. The Democrats set the precedent for removing it with Harry Reid. They will ruin the US if/when they get into power again. Get things that benefit the country while you can. Get people on record for voting against PROVING who you are when you vote.

(02-04-2026 03:06 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

Exactly. The Democrats set the precedent for removing it with Harry Reid. They will ruin the US if/when they get into power again. Get things that benefit the country while you can. Get people on record for voting against PROVING who you are when you vote.

Yep. Dingy Harry invoked the "Nuclear Option" for judges, if I recall correctly, and we ended up using it for the same thing as well as other things, and they hated it. Well, they opened up the can of worms so they have themselves to blame. We would be doing the same thing by getting rid of the filibuster. I'm not saying it shouldn't happen. I'm saying be prepared for the blowback when it comes, because it will come back to bite us eventually. (Which is also what you're saying, too. )

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

while I understand the resistance to change, let's think this thru ... disclaimer: I was opposed until I fully realized the residual impact the SAVE Act would have moving forward...

IMO, it would eventually force congress that is currently 'tits on a boar' on both sides, to go back to legislating for the folk they represent ... as it currently exists, it's the corpshite/fraudster/cheats vs. the leftovers that are 'strapped' ... just like ranked choice or eliminating the electoral college, today's version of the 60 vote filibuster is lose/lose...

this country has to get back to placing the burden on the voting electorate with the most to lose vs. those that only see losing as winning ... the latter being today's donk and RINO...

w/o voter ID, the status quo coupled with all the 'View' commie tommie's a biatchin' will simply continue ... this 'dude' cannot abide to such any longer...

(02-04-2026 04:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

while I understand the resistance to change, let's think this thru ... disclaimer: I was opposed until I fully realized the residual impact the SAVE Act would have moving forward...

IMO, it would eventually force congress that is currently 'tits on a boar' on both sides, to go back to legislating for the folk they represent ... as it currently exists, it's the corpshite/fraudster/cheats vs. the leftovers that are 'strapped' ... just like ranked choice or eliminating the electoral college, today's version of the 60 vote filibuster is lose/lose...

this country has to get back to placing the burden on the voting electorate with the most to lose vs. those that only see losing as winning ... the latter being today's donk and RINO...

w/o voter ID, the status quo coupled with all the 'View' commie tommie's a biatchin' will simply continue ... this 'dude' cannot abide to such any longer...

Hey, I'm right on board with the SAVE Act. I'm just saying don't get mad when the Dems use the lack of filibuster against us. (That is, if we get rid of it.) Turnabout is fair play, and just like we've used the Nuclear Option against them when they invoked it, they can use the lack of filibuster against us if we end up getting rid of it.

Again, I'm all for passing the SAVE Act at all costs. Just pointing out the double-edged sword removing the filibuster would be. That's all.

I think the resistance is in from the GOP as they realize the way the SAVE act is written disenfranchises maga as much as brown people/democrats.

1.most low income people and poor states don’t have passports.
2. If you got married and changed your name your birth certificate is no longer valid and a marriage certificate is not a recognized document from the save act. If you change addresses frequently it’s onerous to update your information.

Republicans are probably more wanting to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to just disenfranchise the people that tend to vote democrat without affecting the dummies that rubber stamp them in.

Plus I’m not sure they want to set precedent via a vis filibuster so soon to the mid terms with how things are looking. Assuming we keep the integrity of our elections which is doubtful at this time

And of course, the peanut gallery's president and CEO has to chime in.

(02-04-2026 12:30 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I WANT TO SLAP THE F--- out of Thune..

He's afraid to let the Senate bring up the SAVE act, because "there are other timely matters that need to be looked at that a filibuster might delay".

WHAT THE **** IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SECURING OUR NATIONAL ELECTION PROCESS?

I though it might be the idiot gang of 4 Republicans holding this off, only to now find out it's THUNE himself?

I remember when I thought Thune was a rock-star conservative. Now he's just another FUGGING swamp creature.

Awoman

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

(02-04-2026 04:19 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 04:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

while I understand the resistance to change, let's think this thru ... disclaimer: I was opposed until I fully realized the residual impact the SAVE Act would have moving forward...

IMO, it would eventually force congress that is currently 'tits on a boar' on both sides, to go back to legislating for the folk they represent ... as it currently exists, it's the corpshite/fraudster/cheats vs. the leftovers that are 'strapped' ... just like ranked choice or eliminating the electoral college, today's version of the 60 vote filibuster is lose/lose...

this country has to get back to placing the burden on the voting electorate with the most to lose vs. those that only see losing as winning ... the latter being today's donk and RINO...

w/o voter ID, the status quo coupled with all the 'View' commie tommie's a biatchin' will simply continue ... this 'dude' cannot abide to such any longer...

Hey, I'm right on board with the SAVE Act. I'm just saying don't get mad when the Dems use the lack of filibuster against us. (That is, if we get rid of it.) Turnabout is fair play, and just like we've used the Nuclear Option against them when they invoked it, they can use the lack of filibuster against us if we end up getting rid of it.

Just pointing out the double-edged sword removing it would be. That's all.

hence, my disclaimer ... remember, the nuke option also worked in our favor when DJT appointed three justices in rd. 1 (which already makes the filibuster moot) ... I'm also of the opinion that voter ID would immediately give the senate and house close to a super majority for the pubs (Schmuckster and the rest know this ... it's why it's barely rec'd any traction) ... again, hence, it would fully burden the right to legislate accordingly vs. the bs we've dealt with our entire lives ... more hands/feet would be held to the fire vs. today's version of a HS student council election...

also, remember passing this is only the beginning ... it would then go to SCOTUS in the most important decision they will ever make ... and I like our chances if that happens ...

@nowORnever

(02-04-2026 04:24 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  I think the resistance is in from the GOP as they realize the way the SAVE act is written disenfranchises maga as much as brown people/democrats.

1.most low income people and poor states don’t have passports.
2. If you got married and changed your name your birth certificate is no longer valid and a marriage certificate is not a recognized document from the save act. If you change addresses frequently it’s onerous to update your information.

Republicans are probably more wanting to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to just disenfranchise the people that tend to vote democrat without affecting the dummies that rubber stamp them in.

Plus I’m not sure they want to set precedent via a vis filibuster so soon to the mid terms with how things are looking. Assuming we keep the integrity of our elections which is doubtful at this time

The irony and racist bent in this post is shocking

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

(02-04-2026 04:30 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 04:24 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  I think the resistance is in from the GOP as they realize the way the SAVE act is written disenfranchises maga as much as brown people/democrats.

1.most low income people and poor states don’t have passports.
2. If you got married and changed your name your birth certificate is no longer valid and a marriage certificate is not a recognized document from the save act. If you change addresses frequently it’s onerous to update your information.

Republicans are probably more wanting to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to just disenfranchise the people that tend to vote democrat without affecting the dummies that rubber stamp them in.

Plus I’m not sure they want to set precedent via a vis filibuster so soon to the mid terms with how things are looking. Assuming we keep the integrity of our elections which is doubtful at this time

The irony and racist bent in this post is shocking

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

That's how the left actually is. Ironically wrong and racist.

stink: Yeah, you're right. It is now or never.

(02-04-2026 04:19 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 04:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

while I understand the resistance to change, let's think this thru ... disclaimer: I was opposed until I fully realized the residual impact the SAVE Act would have moving forward...

IMO, it would eventually force congress that is currently 'tits on a boar' on both sides, to go back to legislating for the folk they represent ... as it currently exists, it's the corpshite/fraudster/cheats vs. the leftovers that are 'strapped' ... just like ranked choice or eliminating the electoral college, today's version of the 60 vote filibuster is lose/lose...

this country has to get back to placing the burden on the voting electorate with the most to lose vs. those that only see losing as winning ... the latter being today's donk and RINO...

w/o voter ID, the status quo coupled with all the 'View' commie tommie's a biatchin' will simply continue ... this 'dude' cannot abide to such any longer...

Hey, I'm right on board with the SAVE Act. I'm just saying don't get mad when the Dems use the lack of filibuster against us. (That is, if we get rid of it.) Turnabout is fair play, and just like we've used the Nuclear Option against them when they invoked it, they can use the lack of filibuster against us if we end up getting rid of it.

Again, I'm all for passing the SAVE Act at all costs. Just pointing out the double-edged sword removing the filibuster would be. That's all.

Its really not nuking anything, this current day filibuster handshake to just threaten a filibuster is uniparty BS.

The filibuster is not in the Constitution, it was created as a procedural tool and has morphed into lazy button for no good pieces of sh!t legislators

Go back to the original filibuster procedure and let the chips fall.

At the very least it will give the American people a clearer picture of who bent the country over with the laws they passed.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

(02-04-2026 04:41 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 04:19 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 04:15 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 02:59 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  While I don't disagree the filibuster may need to go, I know it would be used against the GOP if and when the Dems get back in power. I just hope it isn't very soon.

while I understand the resistance to change, let's think this thru ... disclaimer: I was opposed until I fully realized the residual impact the SAVE Act would have moving forward...

IMO, it would eventually force congress that is currently 'tits on a boar' on both sides, to go back to legislating for the folk they represent ... as it currently exists, it's the corpshite/fraudster/cheats vs. the leftovers that are 'strapped' ... just like ranked choice or eliminating the electoral college, today's version of the 60 vote filibuster is lose/lose...

this country has to get back to placing the burden on the voting electorate with the most to lose vs. those that only see losing as winning ... the latter being today's donk and RINO...

w/o voter ID, the status quo coupled with all the 'View' commie tommie's a biatchin' will simply continue ... this 'dude' cannot abide to such any longer...

Hey, I'm right on board with the SAVE Act. I'm just saying don't get mad when the Dems use the lack of filibuster against us. (That is, if we get rid of it.) Turnabout is fair play, and just like we've used the Nuclear Option against them when they invoked it, they can use the lack of filibuster against us if we end up getting rid of it.

Again, I'm all for passing the SAVE Act at all costs. Just pointing out the double-edged sword removing the filibuster would be. That's all.

Its really not nuking anything, this current day filibuster handshake to just threaten a filibuster is uniparty BS.

The filibuster is not in the Constitution, it was created as a procedural tool and has morphed into lazy button for no good pieces of sh!t legislators

Go back to the original filibuster procedure and let the chips fall.

At the very least it will give the American people a clearer picture of who bent the country over with the laws they passed.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

Alright. You and stink have convinced me. To hell with the filibuster as it is now!

(02-04-2026 04:30 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(02-04-2026 04:24 PM)ballantyneapp Wrote:  I think the resistance is in from the GOP as they realize the way the SAVE act is written disenfranchises maga as much as brown people/democrats.

1.most low income people and poor states don’t have passports.
2. If you got married and changed your name your birth certificate is no longer valid and a marriage certificate is not a recognized document from the save act. If you change addresses frequently it’s onerous to update your information.

Republicans are probably more wanting to go back to the drawing board to figure out how to just disenfranchise the people that tend to vote democrat without affecting the dummies that rubber stamp them in.

Plus I’m not sure they want to set precedent via a vis filibuster so soon to the mid terms with how things are looking. Assuming we keep the integrity of our elections which is doubtful at this time

The irony and racist bent in this post is shocking

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

even that dipshite knows they would lose all the gag ball gurglin' gimp's feign o' reign o' power ... his pony boi arse would become even more irrelevant with the swipe of the pen...