Jim Banks Calls for Passage of SAVE America Act to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote

RocksInMyHead · Sunday at 9:05 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
When it was in the neighborhood of 60-65%, we had presidential elections like Clinton v Dole and Obama v Romney, and the "bookends" of the Overton window in the House spanned from Barney Frank to Newt Gingrich.

Once we got up in the mid-70%'s, now we have reality show hosts winning presidential elections, and "socialists vs. conspiracy theorists" battles in the House.

Where are you getting your numbers? I don't see anyone putting any election turnouts above 70% since 1900. Trump won in 2016 with a voter turnout of about 60% - same as 2004 and 2008, more or less. Turnout in 2020 and 2024 was a bit higher (around 65% in 2020 and 63% in 2024), but I propose that Trump himself is the driver of that trend - he's a very divisive candidate, and when he's on the ballot, voters show up both to vote for him and against him, especially after seeing him in action.

US Elections Project - national-1789-present

National General Election VEP Turnout Rates, 1789-Present National general election voting-eligible population turnout rates for presidential and midterm elections are plotted below, along with the raw data provided in an accompanying spreadsheet. These numbers are taken from Vital Statistics of

www.electproject.org

Voter Turnout in Presidential Elections | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

Hans Blaster · Sunday at 9:50 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
The stats are what they are...I showed what percentage of the citizen voting age population is registered and voting.

You gave registration numbers, which are not voting numbers. I'll leave the turnout number to your response to @RocksInMyHead

ThatRobGuy said:
When it was in the neighborhood of 60-65%, we had presidential elections like Clinton v Dole and Obama v Romney, and the "bookends" of the Overton window in the House spanned from Barney Frank to Newt Gingrich.

Have you used proper Poly. Sci. Methodology to demonstrate that causation?

ThatRobGuy said:
Once we got up in the mid-70%'s, now we have reality show hosts winning presidential elections, and "socialists vs. conspiracy theorists" battles in the House.

... and your "counter" is based on *one* populist incompetent being elected and your failure to understand the history of Congress.

ThatRobGuy said:
You can project the "oh, you just think you're soooo much smarter" onto me if you like, but that's a sentiment that's pretty much ubiquitous on the left these days. I've heard numerous progressives express (in no uncertain terms) that the fact that Trump could be elected president (or even win a primary), and that someone like a Lauren Boebert could become a congress member represents a "dumbing down" of the electorate.

I think you've confused thinking "Boebert is dumb" (and she is) with thinking her voters are intellectually deficient. If you wanted to talk about how Trump got elected we could (though not here), but you won't hear anything you haven't heard before (and probably don't want to hear). This is the first time I've ever heard anyone blame the Motor Voter Act.

ThatRobGuy said:
...but they seem to have blind spots with regards to "the Squad" even being a thing representing the same kind of watering down.

I actually miss the time of Nancy Pelosi having a leadership position for the House Democrats, she put the complete Yahoos in their place and understood the pragmatic realities of politics.

Never quite got why "the squad" gets so much criticism. (OK, I can think of *one* reason, but we need not go there today). I'm not particularly impressed by Omar or Talib as they seem like rather ordinary politicians, but Pressley is pretty sharp and "AOC" is one of the most skilled of young American politicians.

RocksInMyHead · Sunday at 10:06 PM

Hans Blaster said:
You gave registration numbers, which are not voting numbers. I'll leave the turnout number to your response to @RocksInMyHead

It's not even that - the percentage registered has stayed remarkably constant as long as it's been tracked. It's been 69% +/- 2% since 1980.

Stopped_lurking · Sunday at 11:28 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
The stats are what they are...I showed what percentage of the citizen voting age population is registered and voting.

When it was in the neighborhood of 60-65%, we had presidential elections like Clinton v Dole and Obama v Romney, and the "bookends" of the Overton window in the House spanned from Barney Frank to Newt Gingrich.

Once we got up in the mid-70%'s, now we have reality show hosts winning presidential elections, and "socialists vs. conspiracy theorists" battles in the House.

Is it the young adult group that vote for reality stars (I guess you mean Trump)? Perhaps I'm reading your post wrong but you seem to say that reality stars become president because the electorate is less informed. If the young adults aren't the ones voting for him are they supposed to be the informed ones now? I thought you alluded to that they were being led more by external influences (celebrities) than middle-aged voters.

ThatRobGuy said:
You can project the "oh, you just think you're soooo much smarter" onto me if you like, but that's a sentiment that's pretty much ubiquitous on the left these days. I've heard numerous progressives express (in no uncertain terms) that the fact that Trump could be elected president (or even win a primary), and that someone like a Lauren Boebert could become a congress member represents a "dumbing down" of the electorate.

...but they seem to have blind spots with regards to "the Squad" even being a thing representing the same kind of watering down.

I actually miss the time of Nancy Pelosi having a leadership position for the House Democrats, she put the complete Yahoos in their place and understood the pragmatic realities of politics.

stevevw · Monday at 12:54 AM

Hans Blaster said:
No Steve. I want you to stop with your distractions.

How is a good comparison a distraction. You do understand how examples work. We show a similar example to support the point. Ie the examples of qualifying for welfare, or a licence are similar examples to qualifying to vote.

They ensure the right person gets welfare and to drive. The same as ensuring the right person gets to vote.

stevevw · Monday at 12:59 AM

Pommer said:
Nearly every social-service (government) agency, where I ever saw a real, live human being, at some point would ask if i would “like to vote”, in an absolutely neutral tone/manner, i do not know if this has occurred in the last decade, (for me), and i kind of wonder if this still occurs?

I am talking about how every social-service (government) agency will ask you to qualify yourself before you get welfare. You can;t just send a letter and say I want welfare. You have to show ID and qualify yourself.

Hans Blaster · Monday at 1:48 AM

stevevw said:
How is a good comparison a distraction. You do understand how examples work. We show a similar example to support the point. Ie the examples of qualifying for welfare, or a licence are similar examples to qualifying to vote.

They ensure the right person gets welfare and to drive. The same as ensuring the right person gets to vote.

I do understand what distractions are. Financial fraud in Minnesota has nothing to do with this bill. It is not the reason; It is not the cause. The bill will not stop it. Etc.

The bill is about *VOTING*.

Pommer · Monday at 2:07 AM

stevevw said:
I am talking about how every social-service (government) agency will ask you to qualify yourself before you get welfare. You can;t just send a letter and say I want welfare. You have to show ID and qualify yourself.

Thanks for informing me how things work in my country.
Whatever would I do without your guiding hand?

stevevw · Monday at 4:24 AM

Hans Blaster said:
I do understand what distractions are. Financial fraud in Minnesota has nothing to do with this bill. It is not the reason; It is not the cause. The bill will not stop it. Etc.

The bill is about *VOTING*.

Yes about identifying the voter before they have the right to vote.

stevevw · Monday at 4:25 AM

Pommer said:
Thanks for informing me how things work in my country.
Whatever would I do without your guiding hand?

What a coincident. Its the same in my country as well. I don't think its rocket science. Just prudent economics I think.

GoldenBoy89 · Monday at 9:23 AM

stevevw said:
Last I checked there was around 100 charged in Minnasota's fraud. California is next. They have dicovered recod breaking Fraud. Just because there's no arrest at the moment doesn't mean the fraud did not happen.

From the side that tried to convince us a guilty verdict doesn’t mean anything…

ThatRobGuy · Monday at 9:53 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
Where are you getting your numbers? I don't see anyone putting any election turnouts above 70% since 1900. Trump won in 2016 with a voter turnout of about 60% - same as 2004 and 2008, more or less. Turnout in 2020 and 2024 was a bit higher (around 65% in 2020 and 63% in 2024), but I propose that Trump himself is the driver of that trend - he's a very divisive candidate, and when he's on the ballot, voters show up both to vote for him and against him, especially after seeing him in action.

US Elections Project - national-1789-present

National General Election VEP Turnout Rates, 1789-Present National general election voting-eligible population turnout rates for presidential and midterm elections are plotted below, along with the raw data provided in an accompanying spreadsheet. These numbers are taken from Vital Statistics of

www.electproject.org

Voter Turnout in Presidential Elections | The American Presidency Project

www.presidency.ucsb.edu

Mine was the percentage of the voting aged population that's registered.

And while obviously not everyone votes in every election there is a correlation between the two

So to overlay actual turnout on the stats I provided before

1990s:

1996: 127.7 million registered (approximately 62% of CVAP)

2000s:

2000: 129.5 million registered (approximately 63% of CVAP)
2008: 146.3 million registered (approximately 65% of CVAP)

2010s:

2020: 168.3 million registered (71% of citizen voting-age population)

Actual voter turn out appears to lack about 5-10 points below whatever the CVAP registration percentage is.

And with that increase happening, so has the increase in what they call "single issue voters"

The Epidemic of Single Issue Voting

Single-issue voters are greatly influential in American politics, as they shape elections and policy debates, as well as contribute heavily towards political polarization.

www.hercampus.com

ThatRobGuy · Monday at 9:55 AM

Stopped_lurking said:
Is it the young adult group that vote for reality stars (I guess you mean Trump)? Perhaps I'm reading your post wrong but you seem to say that reality stars become president because the electorate is less informed. If the young adults aren't the ones voting for him are they supposed to be the informed ones now? I thought you alluded to that they were being led more by external influences (celebrities) than middle-aged voters.

No, it would be the maga base who's voting for a TV character for president, and some house reps that behave as if they're on a reality show.

It's the younger adult group that's voting for people with socialist leanings.

ThatRobGuy · Monday at 10:01 AM

Hans Blaster said:
Never quite got why "the squad" gets so much criticism. (OK, I can think of *one* reason, but we need not go there today). I'm not particularly impressed by Omar or Talib as they seem like rather ordinary politicians, but Pressley is pretty sharp and "AOC" is one of the most skilled of young American politicians.

They engaged in as much of the theatrics as the "freedom caucus" people used to do.

Hans Blaster · Monday at 10:11 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
They engaged in as much of the theatrics as the "freedom caucus" people used to do.

You do know the "freedom caucus" still exists, right?

ThatRobGuy · Monday at 10:19 AM

Hans Blaster said:
You do know the "freedom caucus" still exists, right?

I figured that was largely a hollowed out entity now with some of the key players leaving office

rjs330 · Monday at 10:28 AM

RocksInMyHead said:
Sure - they vote for the candidates who voice support for the issues they care about. The fact that that happens to be mostly Democrats right now is immaterial

Lol, no its not. Teenagers of 18 have no clue how the issues they care about really affect them and others. Most of them have never really been affected by these issues. They operate on pure emotion at that point and do NOT think through the consequences of their desires. They are easily manipulated by the emotional appeals of the Democrats. This is a FACT. Thats ehy Democrats want teens even younger than 18 to vote.

RocksInMyHead said:
nothing is stopping Republicans from trying to appeal to young voters, and trying to disenfranchise an electoral cohort just because they tend to vote for the "other side" would be massively immoral (and possibly illegal).

We are. Ever heard of Turning Point? It is a challenge thats for sure. All the Democrats have to do is toss out emotional tripe and the kids suck it up. Where as we have to debate with facts and logic in order to CHANGE minds. Minds that are already set in fire of emotional reaponse and emotional beliefs which the Democrats pour fuel on. The Republicans do have an uphill battle and have often abandoned the attempt because it IS difficult to counter the educational systems that indictinate kids into leftist ideologies and beliefs.

Finally we had someone who was doing that and a member of the emotional left killed him.

RocksInMyHead said:
Not sure how that follows - just because they haven't had the same life experiences as someone older does not mean that do not have life experiences.

So? Its life experience of living a life, being responsible for yourself, paying your own bills. Being responsible for your family your health, your own work and learning what it means to be a responsible adult makes a difference in how you see things. Thats why people generally move to the right as they get older.

RocksInMyHead said:
Nor does having life experience prevent older voters from voting based on emotions.

Of course. They say wisdom comes with age. But sometimes age comes alone.

It IS a well established fact that teen brains are not fully developed to fully grasp the complexities of life that come with the decisions they make. The saying is true. Youth is wasted on the young. I was young once, so were you. You know its true.

rjs330 · Monday at 10:30 AM

Pommer said:
Democracy works best

Democracy doesn't work. It is a HORRIBLE way of governing.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 10:33 AM

ThatRobGuy said:
Mine was the percentage of the voting aged population that's registered.

Again, not sure where you're getting your numbers. One of the links I posted has number of registered voters, as well as VAP (voting age population) and VEP (voting eligible population). If we use VEP, there's 4 points of variation between the highest and lowest registration years, with a maximum of 71% (1980 and 2024) and a minimum of 67% (2000). If we use VAP, the range is from 64% to 70% (ignoring the outlier of 59% for 1960, as that was the first year the data exists, and numbers just generally seem wonky that year), with 2024 actually being one of thee lowest years at 65%.

But percentage registered isn't really a relevant statistic - the main thing that matters is the percentage of the eligible population that actually casts a vote.

RocksInMyHead · Monday at 10:34 AM

rjs330 said:
Democracy doesn't work. It is a HORRIBLE way of governing.

As the famous quote goes, "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the other forms that have been tried."

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Jim Banks Calls for Passage of SAVE America Act to Require Proof of Citizenship to Vote

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Call Me Al

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Well-Known Member

inquisitive

inquisitive

Call Me Al

CoPacEtiC SkEpTic

inquisitive

inquisitive

Abolish ICE

Part of the IT crowd

Attachments

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

Call Me Al

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Similar threads