3 ms·

When he was talking about Americans not voting in other countries Mike meant only when they are a noncitizens of that country. I couldn't imaging anyone truly

When he was talking about Americans not voting in other countries Mike meant only when they are a noncitizens of that country. I couldn't imaging anyone truly interpreting his words to mean "If you have citizenship in American and another country you can't now only vote in America", which I think was what Paul was saying Mike meant (I can't see Paul's exact Tweet anymore after being blocked). The tweet is poorly worded, but you know... it's just Twitter, er, X.

throwaway89201 2y ago
> I can't see Paul's exact Tweet anymore after being blocked https://xcancel.com/atdavidmurdoch/status/1829200559108509861 https://xcancel.com/atdavidmurdoch/status/182920055910850986... > I may have ruined my chance of ever being backed by YC in the future. If anything, this reactionary boring thread ruined that chance.
- davidmurdoch 2y ago
  > I may have ruined my chance of ever being backed by YC in the future. was tongue in cheek, as I don't have any desire to start a start up. > If anything, this reactionary boring thread ruined that chance. I thought it was funny, not boring. It got more upvotes in the 45 minutes it wasn't flagged than any other post in the same time frame. But to each their own, I guess.
cherry_tree 2y ago
No the tweet is flatly wrong and xenophobic. https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote > Who cannot vote? > Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents, cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections. But even if it wasn’t wrong, the idea behind it is un-American. A country founded on the principle of no taxation without representation which taxes people within its borders while allowing them no voice in that taxation.
- davidmurdoch 2y ago
  I'm not interested in debating politics, so I won't remark on that. Ignoring the fact that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes... but by this logic would you say the law itself is xenophobic?
  - deadlydose 2y ago
    > I'm not interested in debating politics > would you say the law itself.. Well, you're asking a question that, in a vacuum, isn't political but since it can be considered controversial, and I think you know this, it becomes political. So did you want to debate politics or not?
    - davidmurdoch 2y ago
      I was just trying to understand your perspective on laws that forbid allowing non-citizens to vote. I guess I realized I wasn't aware of American citizens who believe non-citizens should be legally allowed to vote in federal elections, and my question about xenophobia was, in retrospect, intended to explore that.
      - defrost 2y ago
        Any law that prevents taxpayers voting is inconsistent with the principle of no taxation without representation. If that law is founded on the basis of excluding "outsiders" because they are outsiders then that's texbook xenophobia. What you might want to explore is whether "no taxation without representation" is a core US axiom, whether "outsiders" should pay taxes, etc.
        davidmurdoch 2y ago
        Tangentially related: My father tried to fight taxes on the grounds that they're unconstitutional. He went to prison for 3 years (in part) because of it. > Any law that prevents taxpayers voting is inconsistent with the principle of no taxation without representation. That sentence would have been a great response to Mike's tweet. Thanks for letting me explore some thoughts with you without spiraling into divisive language.
remram 2y ago
You're clear about what he didn't mean, but again: what did he mean by his tweet?
- davidmurdoch 2y ago
  > Americans don’t vote in foreign elections > Noncitizens shouldn’t vote in ours He means American citizens that aren't also citizens of a (democratic-esque) foreign nation don't vote in that foreign nation's elections. Genuine question: did you not understand that?
  - remram 2y ago
    I mean the whole tweet. What is his point that he is making by pointing out this fact? Genuine question: do you think every line in Mike Lee's tweet is an independent fact that should be taken as totally unconnected, and happen to be in the same post by chance?
    - davidmurdoch 2y ago
      You're just being silly. I replied to Paul because he took a single line in Mike's tweet as an independent statement without considering the context, and then turned around and insulted the OPs intelligence. I'll try to break it down for you because your being so genuine. I've explained the first line already. The next line follows up by saying that noncitizens (people who are not American citizens specifically) shouldn’t have the right to vote in U.S. elections. It then calls for the passage of something called the SAVE ACT, which Mike wants to be included in the upcoming September spending bill, to prevent noncitizens from voting. Finally, the tweet encourages people who agree with this idea to share the message with others, amplifying its reach. I don't think I can break it down any further without coming off as patronizing. And I hope it's very clear that I'm not reading the lines in the tweet as separate unconnected ideas.
      - remram 2y ago
        > noncitizens (people who are not American citizens specifically) shouldn’t have the right to vote in U.S. elections They already can't, and they already don't. Mike knows that, Paul knows that. You are going to have to try again...

throwaway89201 2y ago

> I can't see Paul's exact Tweet anymore after being blocked https://xcancel.com/atdavidmurdoch/status/1829200559108509861 https://xcancel.com/atdavidmurdoch/status/182920055910850986... > I may have ruined my chance of ever being backed by YC in the future. If anything, this reactionary boring thread ruined that chance.

davidmurdoch 2y ago
> I may have ruined my chance of ever being backed by YC in the future. was tongue in cheek, as I don't have any desire to start a start up. > If anything, this reactionary boring thread ruined that chance. I thought it was funny, not boring. It got more upvotes in the 45 minutes it wasn't flagged than any other post in the same time frame. But to each their own, I guess.

cherry_tree 2y ago

No the tweet is flatly wrong and xenophobic. https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote https://www.usa.gov/who-can-vote > Who cannot vote? > Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents, cannot vote in federal, state, and most local elections. But even if it wasn’t wrong, the idea behind it is un-American. A country founded on the principle of no taxation without representation which taxes people within its borders while allowing them no voice in that taxation.

davidmurdoch 2y ago
I'm not interested in debating politics, so I won't remark on that. Ignoring the fact that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes... but by this logic would you say the law itself is xenophobic?
- deadlydose 2y ago
  > I'm not interested in debating politics > would you say the law itself.. Well, you're asking a question that, in a vacuum, isn't political but since it can be considered controversial, and I think you know this, it becomes political. So did you want to debate politics or not?
  - davidmurdoch 2y ago
    I was just trying to understand your perspective on laws that forbid allowing non-citizens to vote. I guess I realized I wasn't aware of American citizens who believe non-citizens should be legally allowed to vote in federal elections, and my question about xenophobia was, in retrospect, intended to explore that.
    - defrost 2y ago
      Any law that prevents taxpayers voting is inconsistent with the principle of no taxation without representation. If that law is founded on the basis of excluding "outsiders" because they are outsiders then that's texbook xenophobia. What you might want to explore is whether "no taxation without representation" is a core US axiom, whether "outsiders" should pay taxes, etc.
      - davidmurdoch 2y ago
        Tangentially related: My father tried to fight taxes on the grounds that they're unconstitutional. He went to prison for 3 years (in part) because of it. > Any law that prevents taxpayers voting is inconsistent with the principle of no taxation without representation. That sentence would have been a great response to Mike's tweet. Thanks for letting me explore some thoughts with you without spiraling into divisive language.

remram 2y ago

You're clear about what he didn't mean, but again: what did he mean by his tweet?

davidmurdoch 2y ago
> Americans don’t vote in foreign elections > Noncitizens shouldn’t vote in ours He means American citizens that aren't also citizens of a (democratic-esque) foreign nation don't vote in that foreign nation's elections. Genuine question: did you not understand that?
- remram 2y ago
  I mean the whole tweet. What is his point that he is making by pointing out this fact? Genuine question: do you think every line in Mike Lee's tweet is an independent fact that should be taken as totally unconnected, and happen to be in the same post by chance?
  - davidmurdoch 2y ago
    You're just being silly. I replied to Paul because he took a single line in Mike's tweet as an independent statement without considering the context, and then turned around and insulted the OPs intelligence. I'll try to break it down for you because your being so genuine. I've explained the first line already. The next line follows up by saying that noncitizens (people who are not American citizens specifically) shouldn’t have the right to vote in U.S. elections. It then calls for the passage of something called the SAVE ACT, which Mike wants to be included in the upcoming September spending bill, to prevent noncitizens from voting. Finally, the tweet encourages people who agree with this idea to share the message with others, amplifying its reach. I don't think I can break it down any further without coming off as patronizing. And I hope it's very clear that I'm not reading the lines in the tweet as separate unconnected ideas.
    - remram 2y ago
      > noncitizens (people who are not American citizens specifically) shouldn’t have the right to vote in U.S. elections They already can't, and they already don't. Mike knows that, Paul knows that. You are going to have to try again...