2018 Democrats thread

[StrangeSox]

In-person voter fraud continues to remain essentially non-existent. It is not a real problem that needs addressing in this country, and we sure don't need to disenfranchise tens or hundreds of thousands of legitimate voters to address a problem that doesn't exist.

It's voter suppression. That's why the GOP does it. Sometimes they let the mask slip and make it a little too obvious, but that's the underlying reason again and again.

[Reddy]

 

And what are the "hurdles" to getting back the ability to vote? Re-registering? How on earth can people do that if they can't even send in a pre-addressed/stamped post card?!

Why should there be ANY hurdles? Why shouldn't we have automatic registration at your 18th birthday?

[illinilaw08]

25 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Also no one is taking away your right to vote. It's taking away your registration to vote. Registration is an important step and prevents you from being able to vote in elections you have no business voting in (e.g., voting in Chicago if you moved to California)

Under SB's example, yes you are taking away his right to vote in that election.  Trump carried Ohio by around 400k votes.  If, since 2011, Ohio has purged 2M voters since 2011 (as SS cited in a prior post), that tactic could have swung 2016.  I'm not saying that it DID, but that's a huge number.

Further, the State has a lot less intrusive ways that they could handle this.  The State can send requests to the Department of Revenue and Secretary of State to get current addresses from tax returns and driver's licenses.  They can provide same day re-registration for people who weren't aware that they were purged from the rolls.    

[Reddy]

 

Also no one is taking away your right to vote. It's taking away your registration to vote. Registration is an important step and prevents you from being able to vote in elections you have no business voting in (e.g., voting in Chicago if you moved to California)

Pretty fascinating seeing you defend an attack on the most quintessentially American part of our system of government - the right to vote. That GOP. All about freedom and patriotism, amirite? (Except when it helps black people, brown people and democrats)

[Jerksticks]

I’m of the opinion that this is not a big deal at all.  Clearly people  are going to be passionate about their 2018 vote.  Well they have tons of time to make sure they are set up correctly.  This will impact zero people passionate about voting this fall.  AKA the blue wave.  

 

 

I think you should have to bring your ID, recent mail, and SSN on the holiday election day and then you can vote.  Isn’t it that simple.   Prove you are a citizen, prove where you live, and use the SSN and photo ID to ensure no fraud.  One vote in one county. 

[Jenksismyhero]

2 hours ago, Reddy said:

Why should there be ANY hurdles? Why shouldn't we have automatic registration at your 18th birthday?

Probably because you also have the right not to vote if you don't want to. But more practically, you want some system in place to verify you are who you are and that you are entitled to vote in whatever election you are voting in (again, if you live in Chicago you shouldn't be voting for something in California). I think it's silly to consider registration an acceptable practice but verification of an address is somehow a huge burden that can't be overcome. 

 

2 hours ago, illinilaw08 said:

Under SB's example, yes you are taking away his right to vote in that election.  Trump carried Ohio by around 400k votes.  If, since 2011, Ohio has purged 2M voters since 2011 (as SS cited in a prior post), that tactic could have swung 2016.  I'm not saying that it DID, but that's a huge number.

Further, the State has a lot less intrusive ways that they could handle this.  The State can send requests to the Department of Revenue and Secretary of State to get current addresses from tax returns and driver's licenses.  They can provide same day re-registration for people who weren't aware that they were purged from the rolls.    

 

You're taking away the pre-requisite to voting which is registration. Nothing that i've read states that Ohio is then placing additional requirements on people after they've been removed from the registry to be able to vote again.

Again, EVERYONE goes through an administrative step at some point in order to vote. Why on earth is this verification suddenly a massive hurdle that is unacceptable? Let's assume people can same day register - is this system of removing people that don't verify their address and vote in the next four years still a problem??

And sure, multiple systems can and should be used before removing someone, and notice of being removed should absolutely be required, but sending a postcard to the address that needs to be verified seems to be a pretty simple and logical means to do this...

[StrangeSox]

There's a reason why the GOP undertakes these efforts again and again and again, and it sure as hell isn't because it creates a meaningless hurdle.

[illinilaw08]

4 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

You're taking away the pre-requisite to voting which is registration. Nothing that i've read states that Ohio is then placing additional requirements on people after they've been removed from the registry to be able to vote again.

Again, EVERYONE goes through an administrative step at some point in order to vote. Why on earth is this verification suddenly a massive hurdle that is unacceptable? Let's assume people can same day register - is this system of removing people that don't verify their address and vote in the next four years still a problem??

And sure, multiple systems can and should be used before removing someone, and notice of being removed should absolutely be required, but sending a postcard to the address that needs to be verified seems to be a pretty simple and logical means to do this...

My understanding is that you had to be registered 30-days prior to the election.  So if you have been removed from the voting rolls, and you don't actually know that you were removed (lost in the mail, moved, whatever), you have effectively lost the right to vote in that election.  Same day registration solves that issue.   

Here's how I see this.  I can't serve a lawsuit by mail absent some sort of compelling justification, and after an additional notice from a court.  I have to serve them in person, so that the Court knows that the defendant is on notice of the proceeding against them.  It shouldn't be easier than that to divest somebody of the right to vote.  Inattention and lack of participation should not be sufficient to divest somebody of their right to vote.

[Reddy]

GOP-ers in this thread coming alive for the first time in months and jumping to the defense of making it harder to vote. Wonder why.

[caulfield12]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/11/politics/republican-new-jersey-diversity/index.html

GOP congressional candidate: Diversity is 'a bunch of crap and un-American'

A Republican running for New Jersey's 2nd Congressional District thinks diversity is "a bunch of crap and un-American," according to comments he made in a video posted to YouTube by a progressive super PAC.

"In my view, the best way to bring diversity to the Republican Party is for Republicans to openly say that the whole idea of diversity is a bunch of crap and un-American," Seth Grossman can be seen saying in the video uploaded on June 6 by American Bridge 21st Century, which monitors GOP candidates.

 

In the video, Grossman goes on to quote the Declaration of Independence and says, "the Constitution was designed to incorporate that idea of the Declaration of Independence that everybody is treated equally under the law. Now, what diversity has become, it's been an excuse by Democrats, communists and socialists, basically, to say that we're not all created equal, that some people, if he -- if somebody is lesser qualified, they will get a job anyway, or they'll get into college anyway because of the tribe that they're with, what group, what box they fit into."

[Jenksismyhero]

14 hours ago, Reddy said:

GOP-ers in this thread coming alive for the first time in months and jumping to the defense of making it harder to vote. Wonder why.

Nah, I just get sick of the weak argument that putting forth any effort whatsoever to vote is considered oppression. Especially since you all think other constitutionally protected rights require barrier after barrier after barrier to make sure it's as difficult as possible to exercise. 

[Reddy]

 

Nah, I just get sick of the weak argument that putting forth any effort whatsoever to vote is considered oppression. Especially since you all think other constitutionally protected rights require barrier after barrier after barrier to make sure it's as difficult as possible to exercise. 

White person tells me what should and shouldn't be considered oppression.

Dude, please, keep going. I need more lolz.

[StrangeSox]

10 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Nah, I just get sick of the weak argument that putting forth any effort whatsoever to vote is considered oppression. Especially since you all think other constitutionally protected rights require barrier after barrier after barrier to make sure it's as difficult as possible to exercise. 

Trump openly called it a "win" last night.

It's voter suppression by the GOP, full stop. The arguments that any of their voter suppression tactics are actually necessary to address real concerns or issues are not based on any real-world evidence. On the other side, we have evidence of large numbers of disenfranchised voters, more than enough to change electoral outcomes. It's election fraud by other means.

[Jenksismyhero]

5 minutes ago, Reddy said:

White person tells me what should and shouldn't be considered oppression.

Dude, please, keep going. I need more lolz.

Lol, so I guess the majority of people in this thread arguing it is oppressive should be ignored too, huh?

[Reddy]

But he means it should be ok to restrict voting rights if we think it's ok to restrict gun ownership rights.

Only problem with that argument is that the 2nd Amendment doesn't exactly clarify what TYPE of guns you're allowed to have. It doesn't say mag size, fire rate, etc. The right to VOTE is absolute (outside of felons, which... don't get me started). Do you support Democracy, Jenks, or don't you?

Edited June 12, 2018 by Reddy

[Reddy]

 

Lol, so I guess the majority of people in this thread arguing it is oppressive should be ignored too, huh?

No, because they're amplifying the voices of marginalized communities who voter suppression laws affect disproportionately. Thanks for asking, though. Hope this clarifies the difference. You're either supporting marginalized voices or you're shouting them down and telling them to "suck it up" and deal with it.

We know where you stand.

[Jenksismyhero]

1 minute ago, StrangeSox said:

Trump openly called it a "win" last night.

It's voter suppression by the GOP, full stop. The arguments that any of their voter suppression tactics are actually necessary to address real concerns or issues are not based on any real-world evidence. On the other side, we have evidence of large numbers of disenfranchised voters, more than enough to change electoral outcomes. It's election fraud by other means.

And as I argued yesterday, which you ignored, ANY effort, ANY means of voting is necessarily going to impact more liberals than conservatives simply based on class. Voter registration itself is a suppressive tactic according to you simply because the end result is more D's will be left home than R's. I fundamentally disagree with that. 

And as I prefaced my first post on this topic, I have no idea if it's even a big deal to keep someone on a registry, so this may be a completely  unnecessary move by the state of ohio. That's a separate argument. All i'm arguing is that requiring that someone turn in a pre-addressed/pre-stamped postcard AND vote in a four year period of time is not an oppressive barrier to voting.

[Jenksismyhero]

Just now, Reddy said:

No, because they're amplifying the voices of marginalized communities who voter suppression laws affect disproportionately. Thanks for asking, though. Hope this clarifies the difference. You're either supporting marginalized voices or you're shouting them down and telling them to "suck it up" and deal with it.

We know where you stand.

lol, you're amazing.

[Reddy]

 

lol, you're amazing.

Do you disagree? Do you not see a difference? Honestly asking.

[Reddy]

 

And as I argued yesterday, which you ignored, ANY effort, ANY means of voting is necessarily going to impact more liberals than conservatives simply based on class. Voter registration itself is a suppressive tactic according to you simply because the end result is more D's will be left home than R's. I fundamentally disagree with that. 

 

Why?

[Jenksismyhero]

Just now, Reddy said:

Do you disagree? Do you not see a difference? Honestly asking.

Yes, I wholeheartedly disagree with your fundamental belief that questioning liberal-think automatically means you're racist/sexist/classist/etc. 

[StrangeSox]

7 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

And as I argued yesterday, which you ignored, ANY effort, ANY means of voting is necessarily going to impact more liberals than conservatives simply based on class. Voter registration itself is a suppressive tactic according to you simply because the end result is more D's will be left home than R's. I fundamentally disagree with that. 

And as I prefaced my first post on this topic, I have no idea if it's even a big deal to keep someone on a registry, so this may be a completely  unnecessary move by the state of ohio. That's a separate argument. All i'm arguing is that requiring that someone turn in a pre-addressed/pre-stamped postcard AND vote in a four year period of time is not an oppressive barrier to voting.

Same-day easy voter registration on top of automatic voter registration for everyone else should be the goal.

Setting that aside, moving from the status quo to a change that makes voting or voting registration even more difficult is deliberate voter suppression. That is what you keep ignoring, that this is a deliberate electoral tactic by the GOP to disenfranchise people not likely to vote for them.

Ohio's removed 2 million people from the rolls already. What you're arguing, that this isn't a deliberate barrier to prevent as many non-GOP voters from voting, isn't really based on anything at all. Various conservative groups that sue states to force voter roll purges were already cheering the decision and announcing plans to push for more of these measures nationally, just like they were after the last major baseless voter suppression ruling, Shelby County.

There's no separating out the argument that the measures taken by Ohio here, or the new Voter ID garbage NC is trying to pass, or all of the voter suppression efforts taken in the wake of Shelby County, are completely unnecessary for electoral integrity. The sole purpose of those efforts is voter suppression by conservatives.

[Jenksismyhero]

1 minute ago, Reddy said:

Why?

Because your right to vote isn't absolute. There is nothing improper or suppressive about having rules and requirements to vote. Some have been and some in the future may be, but I think if you're taking the position that this postcard issue is oppressive, than having ANY rule or requirement is also oppressive, which is, IMO, ridiculous. 

[StrangeSox]

2 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Because your right to vote isn't absolute. There is nothing improper or suppressive about having rules and requirements to vote. Some have been and some in the future may be, but I think if you're taking the position that this postcard issue is oppressive, than having ANY rule or requirement is also oppressive, which is, IMO, ridiculous. 

It's a rule instituted by Republicans, cheered on and supported by other Republicans, that has resulted in a 2:1 ratio in who's been purged, favoring Republicans.

You can't separate that out from the rule change, which is completely unnecessary and, despite the hacks on the SC saying otherwise, not even legal. It's the reason they undertook the rule change.

"If you think this naked partisan electoral suppression is bad, you think literally all requirements for voting are bad" doesn't actually follow.

[Jenksismyhero]

Even if we assume that this is all intentional to suppress D votes, the act itself is still not oppressive. It's a fucking postcard. It's voting in a 4 year period of time ONCE. That's not an unreasonable barrier. 

And yes, if you believe that is a barrier, then you also have to believe that registration itself is a barrier since registration takes more work.