Republican Anti-Democracy and Voter Disenfranchisement

[Archy1221]

8 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

I was given a water bottle when I voted last year and it was convenient. The people whi handed them out said nothing political whatsoever and were not wearing anything political.

Would you have not voted if someone did not give you that water?   Because that is what we are being told. 

[DevoHusker]

14 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Use Occam’s razor more please. This is clearly an attempt to make it harder to vote. It’s obvious and there is no other reason to do it. It doesn’t matter how small you think it is, that’s why it was added. 

 

I was given a water bottle when I voted last year and it was convenient. The people who handed them out said nothing political whatsoever and were not wearing anything political. You know why? Because it’s against the law to do that. It’s also against the law in Georgia and was before they added this uneccesary rule which has the sole and obvious purpose of making it less convenient to vote. 

 

You are looking at this from the complete opposite angle that you should. Allowing people to hand out water is completely harmless, and adding a law to prevent it is an increase in bureaucracy, is just plain stupid, and is anti-conservatism. Conservatives love to b!^@h about big government except when it’s convenient for them to argue the other side. Just look at what you’re arguing for. It’s a stupid and unnecessary law made for one obvious reason. 

 

Hi Moiraine. Thanks for your point of view. Please explain how it makes it harder to vote. Water can be distributed more than 150 feet from the polling place. If that last 50 yards with no water station is going to cause medical dehydration issues, then by all means it would be dangerous...but not harder to vote.

 

If it was already prohibited, and just the language was cleared up to specifically say "water or food", why would it specifically "disenfranchise people of color."

 

[Moiraine]

Just now, DevoHusker said:

 

Hi Moiraine. Thanks for your point of view. Please explain how it makes it harder to vote. Water can be distributed more than 150 feet from the polling place. If that last 50 yards with no water station is going to cause medical dehydration issues, then by all means it would be dangerous...but not harder to vote.

 

If it was already prohibited, and just the language was cleared up to specifically say "water or food", why would it specifically "disenfranchise people of color."

 

 

 

You've already been told why. People of color have higher average wait times at polls. And you can laugh all you want at the 50 minutes but these are averages. There were examples of people waiting for 6 hours in Georgia. Again, use Occam's Razor. Why all this extra government intervention? Why do you think they made the law? Laws shouldn't be made for no good reason. That's one of the tenants of conservatism. I think you are thinking about this in a convoluted way because of what "team" it's coming from. Step back and try to come up with a reason for this to exist when it was already illegal to do it in a politically motivated way.

[DevoHusker]

8 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

You've already been told why. People of color have higher average wait times at polls. And you can laugh all you want at the 50 minutes but these are averages. There were examples of people waiting for 6 hours in Georgia. Again, use Occam's Razor. Why all this extra government intervention? Why do you think they made the law? Laws shouldn't be made for no good reason. That's one of the tenants of conservatism. I think you are thinking about this in a convoluted way because of what "team" it's coming from. Step back and try to come up with a reason for this to exist when it was already illegal to do it in a politically motivated way.

 

Trust me, I am not laughing at the GA districts that have long wait times...I am laughing at (in general not you specifially) the feigned outrage over something so trivial.  You say yourself it was already prohibited by the politicking wording...so why then does it matter?

 

I also think it is funny that the left have latched on to this single aspect so stringently because all the other concerns,  were mitigated for the most part. You can still early vote. You can still vote on Sundays with your Church. There are still drop boxes. etc/etc/etc et al.

 

(with the exception of the Governor's role: The secretary of state will no longer chair the State Election Board, becoming instead a non-voting ex-officio member. The new chair would be nonpartisan but appointed by a majority of the state House and Senate. The chair would not be allowed to have been a candidate, participate in a political party organization or campaign or made campaign contributions for two years prior to being appointed. The law also says the governor should appoint someone if the position becomes vacant when lawmakers are not in session.)

 

[knapplc]

4 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

I am laughing at (in general not you specifially) the feigned outrage over something so trivial.  

 

Are you sure you understand the situation? There are three different lawsuits over this legislation. Corporations are pulling out of Georgia over this legislation.

 

Maybe sit back a minute, stop laughing at the consternation of others, and realize you may not have a full grasp on what's going on here.

[DevoHusker]

33 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Are you sure you understand the situation? There are three different lawsuits over this legislation. Corporations are pulling out of Georgia over this legislation.

 

Maybe sit back a minute, stop laughing at the consternation of others, and realize you may not have a full grasp on what's going on here.

I have been speaking specifically of the water issue. I look forward to more insight on the lawsuits regarding the issue in it's entirety. You might be right regarding my eventual outlook, who knows.

[Ulty]

Maybe I haven't read the thread closely enough, but if @DevoHusker and @Archy1221 are downplaying the importance of criminalizing the handing out of water, passing it off as a trivial issue and such, and knowing that it is already illegal to give food, water, or other gifts in an effort to influence one's vote, then why was this part of the law necessary in the first place? Pushing unnecessary legislation is certainly not a conservative value, and then defending it so vociferously  seems odd if it is truly not a big deal. So what's the motivation for this?

[RedDenver]

37 minutes ago, Ulty said:

Maybe I haven't read the thread closely enough, but if @DevoHusker and @Archy1221 are downplaying the importance of criminalizing the handing out of water, passing it off as a trivial issue and such, and knowing that it is already illegal to give food, water, or other gifts in an effort to influence one's vote, then why was this part of the law necessary in the first place? Pushing unnecessary legislation is certainly not a conservative value, and then defending it so vociferously  seems odd if it is truly not a big deal. So what's the motivation for this?

I can't speak for either of them specifically, but politics has become a team sport and many people get caught up in defending anything their own team does and vilifying the other team.

[Moiraine]

2 hours ago, DevoHusker said:

 

Trust me, I am not laughing at the GA districts that have long wait times...I am laughing at (in general not you specifially) the feigned outrage over something so trivial.  You say yourself it was already prohibited by the politicking wording...so why then does it matter?

 

 

No it wasn’t prohibited. So I think maybe you don’t have a full understanding. 

[Archy1221]

2 hours ago, Moiraine said:

There were examples of people waiting for 6 hours in Georgia

If I’m not mistaken that was only on the very first day on early voting if it was even that long.  News reports from a few days later showed less than 15 minute wait times at those same polling locations. Did people REALLY need to wait that long just to vote the very first day?  Or, could they have seen the news or saw the line and told themselves “guess we should try a different day”. Especially when they knew the wait times existed.  

 

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, DevoHusker said:

I have been speaking specifically of the water issue. I look forward to more insight on the lawsuits regarding the issue in it's entirety. You might be right regarding my eventual outlook, who knows.

Have the corporations spoken out over specific issues within the law, or just feigned outrage in general.  That’s an important point

[DevoHusker]

2 hours ago, RedDenver said:

I can't speak for either of them specifically, but politics has become a team sport and many people get caught up in defending anything their own team does and vilifying the other team.

Completely agree 

[knapplc]

I'm all for making voting easier, more accessible, and more interesting to all Americans.

 

I'm interested in knowing how any new laws in any state legislatures makes that happen.

 

Anyone here want to explain how this Georgia law makes voting easier, more accessible, and/or more interesting for Joe on the Street?

 

[knapplc]

[TGHusker]

48 minutes ago, knapplc said:

I'm all for making voting easier, more accessible, and more interesting to all Americans.

 

I'm interested in knowing how any new laws in any state legislatures makes that happen.

 

Anyone here want to explain how this Georgia law makes voting easier, more accessible, and/or more interesting for Joe on the Street?

 

I say make it a national holiday or a 3day weekend event. Add rank voting and give out some door prizes   Ok the last item may make it too interesting