Republican Anti-Democracy and Voter Disenfranchisement

Guy Chamberlin said:
No, Einstein. Go back and read my posts, where I walked you through how people use this kind of "plausible deniability" to pretend what they're doing isn't amoral. 

Again, that part's not really debatable. It's the GOP playbook. Feel free to read all the other words tucked around the quotes you cherry-pick. 

Sorry if words like "plausible deniability" are a little fancy for your taste.  We could also double check if you're having trouble with the word "suppression." which is not synonymous with "stripped away." 
Click to expand...
You sure are an angry little elf when you don’t get your way and don’t seem to be able to make your point.  
 

 
Archy1221 said:
Having one or two Sundays for a few hours to vote seems fine.  If it’s not available (like in Delaware) that’s fine too.  People seem to figure it out (like in Delaware) 
Click to expand...
If they can vote any other day of the week, what’s the point of wanting Sunday voting?

I get that you’d be okay if it didn’t happen.  But if you’re on record as saying you’re for it there must be a reason.  Right?

 
funhusker said:
If they can vote any other day of the week, what’s the point of wanting Sunday voting?  Agree, but if a State wants that as an option then cool.  

I get that you’d be okay if it didn’t happen.  But if you’re on record as saying you’re for it there must be a reason.  Right?  
Click to expand...

 
funhusker said:
So you can’t say why you would be for Sunday voting?
Click to expand...
Ya I did.  Because it’s a gay of the week.  If the state said voting is not available that day then figure out how to vote a different day.  Not to difficult to understand or figure out, or to vote.   :thumbs

 
Archy1221 said:
Ya I did.  Because it’s a gay of the week.  If the state said voting is not available that day then figure out how to vote a different day.  Not to difficult to understand or figure out, or to vote.   :thumbs
Click to expand...
So then you’re not really for Sunday voting.  If I’m understanding you correctly, you’re for some type of Election Day, whatever they tell us it is.

Strong stance there....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
funhusker said:
So then you’re not really for Sunday voting.  If I’m understanding you correctly, you’re for some type of Election Day, whatever they tell us it is.

Strong stance there....
Click to expand...
I am for any type of voting as long as voter ID, signature matching, and ballot drop box monitoring takes place.  That is my stance.  Categorize it however you wish in order to feel Internet strong :thumbs . 

 
Archy1221 said:
I am for any type of voting as long as voter ID, signature matching, and ballot drop box monitoring takes place.  That is my stance.  Categorize it however you wish in order to feel Internet strong :thumbs . 
Click to expand...
Asking questions makes me internet strong?

I guess I’ll take my super big internet muscles and bounce so you don’t have to bother defending why you hold certain positions.

oh well...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
A good article by Vox on GOP suppression legislation in Texas and beyond.  Ok, I get partisan ship.  I get that we want our 'team' to win. But in reality there should be only one team - Democracy.  What I don't get, is a party running head over heals to suppress votes and making it more difficult to vote.  Voting is the central core right and privilege  of our democracy.  The current GOP mindset and their actions are anti-democratic.  So what does that make the party? 

https://www.vox.com/22463490/voting-rights-democracy-texas-georgia-suppression-jim-crow-supreme-court-sb7

Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of voter suppression laws. Many provisions currently being pushed by Republican state lawmakers make it harder to cast a ballot in a certain way — such as by mailing in the ballot or placing it in a drop box. Or they place unnecessary procedural obstacles in the way of voters. These provisions often serve no purpose other than to make it more difficult to vote, but they also are not insurmountable obstacles.

Other provisions are more virulent. They might disqualify voters for no valid reason. Or allow partisan officials to refuse to certify an election, even if there are no legitimate questions about who won. Or make it so difficult for some voters, who are likely to vote for the party that is out of power, to cast their ballot that it’s nigh impossible for the incumbent party to lose.

These are the sorts of provisions that are most likely to rig an election. Distinguishing between the two can be helpful as voting rights advocates have to choose their battles on multiple fronts.
Click to expand...

 
TGHusker said:
A good article by Vox on GOP suppression legislation in Texas and beyond.  Ok, I get partisan ship.  I get that we want our 'team' to win. But in reality there should be only one team - Democracy.  What I don't get, is a party running head over heals to suppress votes and making it more difficult to vote.  Voting is the central core right and privilege  of our democracy.  The current GOP mindset and their actions are anti-democratic.  So what does that make the party? 
Click to expand...
That's my biggest problem with all of this.  Everyone should be on team Democracy and trying to get as many people voting as possible and involved in the process.  Parties need to win on ideas.  Not back handed crap like this.

It's pretty obvious that Republicans know they can't win on ideas right now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
That's my biggest problem with all of this.  Everyone should be on team Democracy and trying to get as many people voting as possible and involved in the process.  Parties need to win on ideas.  Not back handed crap like this.

It's pretty obvious that Republicans know they can't win on ideas right now.
Click to expand...
They have become of the 'anti' party - full of pessimists, anti-intellectuals, conspirators.  Hard to generate support when you appeal to only the lowest common denominator and your policy making is pretty small tent thinking.   How far they have fallen from the optimism of Reagan.  I don't see a Reagan like leader within the party. 

 
To add to the above post, the Dems should really be making hay at this opportunity.  But they sit on their hands debating the filibuster's rightness. I'm not saying I'd support all the Dem policies that would come out of a filibuster free senate, but I'm shocked on how inept the Dems are in overcoming the obstacles placed before them when they have the house, the senate and the WH.  Of course the GOP didn't do any better when they had all three - their cancel ObamoCare PROMISE went no where.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top