4 ms·
Here’s just one way: One inconvenience is designed to solve a statistically-proven massively widespread problem (community spread of COVID) whereas the other in
by zaptrem 5y ago
Here’s just one way: One inconvenience is designed to solve a statistically-proven massively widespread problem (community spread of COVID) whereas the other inconvenience is promised to solve a problem the statistics show is nearly non-existent.
- dillondoyle 5y agoAND statistically targets voters which happen to vote more often a specific party. Not surprisingly, it's not the party that wants to make it harder to vote.
- TeeMassive 5y ago> whereas the other inconvenience is promised to solve a problem the statistics show is nearly non-existent Biden is the most popular president ever, millions of votes more than Obama.
- dillondoyle 5y agoExcept total votes don't matter much in our presidential system. Trump got the 2nd most and he lost... It comes down to a few ten thousands (or less) in critical swing states. There's a compelling statistical argument to be made that states like Georgia, or maybe perhaps even bigger margin in FL, might have gone another way without laws & regulations to make it harder to vote and cast a ballot by mail.
- TeeMassive 5y ago> Except total votes don't matter much in our presidential system. Trump got the 2nd most and he lost... My point wasn't about "who won", only pointing out the statistics of popularity, considering that an election is basically a popularity contest. The most unpopular president (and vice-president) got more historical more votes than the last most popular president of the past 50-100 years.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- thehappypm 5y agoThat doesn't answer the question, though. You need to show papers to go grocery shopping: that's OK. You need to show papers to vote: that's not OK. Do you see the inconsistency?