Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Republican Voter Suppression


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Bogie56 said:
QcgK2k4V_normal.jpg
 
 
The surest way to put an end to the Republican demand that the driver's license be a voting qualification is to require regular re-testing for drivers over age 75. Might save some lives too!

My personal experience is.....

The worst drivers are a 50-50 split between those over 75 and those under 30.   

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bogie56 said:
QcgK2k4V_normal.jpg
 
 
The surest way to put an end to the Republican demand that the driver's license be a voting qualification is to require regular re-testing for drivers over age 75. Might save some lives too!

Proof?

Why not require re-testing for all drivers who receive traffic tickets and are involved in at fault accidents?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sepiatone said:

My personal experience is.....

The worst drivers are a 50-50 split between those over 75 and those under 30.   

Sepiatone

More accurate that Frumcake.  

If you read newspapers or listen to news reports that cover accidents, traffic violations, chases by police, etc., it is almost never someone over 75.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, ElCid said:

More accurate that Frumcake.  

If you read newspapers or listen to news reports that cover accidents, traffic violations, chases by police, etc., it is almost never someone over 75.

In those cases sure.  But I'm simply referring to the everyday driving "ordeal".  ;)   One example:

Driving down a main road the other day, a car was going to turn off the road and down a side street.   Now, there was NO CAR stopped at the junction of the street he was going to turn down and waiting to turn ONTO the street he was already on.  In other words, he was free and clear of any obstruction of his effort. But still he felt the need to come to an almost COMPLETE STOP to  make his turn!   As it was light enough for me to see him clearly I noticed he looked to be about in his mid 20's.    But that's just based on my not knowing anyone over 70 who wears a "man-bun"  :rolleyes:  But I've run across the same situation and too noticed the driver was clearly my age(70 this July) or older.

Sepiatone    And, just WHAT is a "Frumcake"?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2021 at 11:57 AM, Sepiatone said:

In those cases sure.  But I'm simply referring to the everyday driving "ordeal".  ;)   One example:

Driving down a main road the other day, a car was going to turn off the road and down a side street.   Now, there was NO CAR stopped at the junction of the street he was going to turn down and waiting to turn ONTO the street he was already on.  In other words, he was free and clear of any obstruction of his effort. But still he felt the need to come to an almost COMPLETE STOP to  make his turn!   As it was light enough for me to see him clearly I noticed he looked to be about in his mid 20's.    But that's just based on my not knowing anyone over 70 who wears a "man-bun"  :rolleyes:  But I've run across the same situation and too noticed the driver was clearly my age(70 this July) or older.

Sepiatone    And, just WHAT is a "Frumcake"?

David Frum can be a fruitcake at times.

The greatest danger on the roads today is distracted drivers and those are primarily the ones between 15 and 50 most likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, ElCid said:

David Frum can be a fruitcake at times.

The greatest danger on the roads today is distracted drivers and those are primarily the ones between 15 and 50 most likely.

My daughter said she heard a radio news report that claimed Michigan law enforcement is going to add drinking from water bottles, coffee cups,  soft drink containers and lighting cigarettes to the driving distractions list.  

Hell, SNEEZING while driving can be more of a hazard than sipping a Pepsi, if you ask me....

Sepiatone

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, read the article, it's full of data points that Republican pollsters and strategists know, but that Republican lawmakers ignore because they rely on false information from racist TV hosts.
 
GOP voter suppression will bear heavily on white rural voters, like those of Martin County KY, 2020 turnout 44.5% Those laws will advantage educated homeowners, in Fayette County KY, 2020 turnout 66.5%. Martin voted Trump; Fayette, Biden.
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bogie56 said:
Anyway, read the article, it's full of data points that Republican pollsters and strategists know, but that Republican lawmakers ignore because they rely on false information from racist TV hosts.
 
GOP voter suppression will bear heavily on white rural voters, like those of Martin County KY, 2020 turnout 44.5% Those laws will advantage educated homeowners, in Fayette County KY, 2020 turnout 66.5%. Martin voted Trump; Fayette, Biden.

Not exactly. 

From the article: "They may lose some of their older, poorer, or sicker rural voters, but if they can thwart a larger number of Black or young voters, they [GOP]will emerge ahead."

The GOPers have researched this and they may lose a few older, white voters who vote early or by mail.  But, the majority of voters using those methods in 2020 were Democratic voters.  GOPers will go to the polls on election day if they have to, whereas Democratic voters are far less likely to do so.

No proof that Republican voters would have more difficulty creating an acceptable copy of identification to send in for mail-in voting.  On the other hand, Democratic voters would have more difficulty and be more prone to just not bothering.

There are some points made for where GOPers are losing voters.  One area where they are gaining them is among Hispanics, particularly males.   This is what keeps TX and FL firmly in the GOP column.  Much of this has to do with GOP successfully branding the Dems as socialists.

Also, don't expect the courts to prevent state voter suppression laws.  The federal bench is dominated by either moderate or conservative judges at this point.  The 68 Biden might get through the Senate will have little effect on that.  Regardless, the cases will ultimately end up before the Republican/conservative US Supreme Court.  Based on both precedent and the bent of the justices, they will let the states do as they please.  Just as they do with gerrymandering.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There seems to be a disconnect. On the one hand, MAGA boasts: "Trump did so well with Latinos -- take THAT, haters!" and also: "These Latinos will doom the GOP."
 
 
0z1CcWWA_normal.jpg
 
 
From my experience as an immigrant that came here as a child, most immigrants tend to be naturally Republican & it’s their children that lean Democrat bc of social issues. If they were a little more flexible & way less racist, they would be more competitive w/o the need to cheat.
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/13/2021 at 1:49 PM, Bogie56 said:
There seems to be a disconnect. On the one hand, MAGA boasts: "Trump did so well with Latinos -- take THAT, haters!" and also: "These Latinos will doom the GOP."
 
 
0z1CcWWA_normal.jpg
 
 
From my experience as an immigrant that came here as a child, most immigrants tend to be naturally Republican & it’s their children that lean Democrat bc of social issues. If they were a little more flexible & way less racist, they would be more competitive w/o the need to cheat.

OK first....

As one who married into a Latino family, I can assure NONE of them cared for Trump.  And only ONE non-Latino in the family ever voted for him.  But not the second time.

And as a descendant of immigrants, I can say I've known those before me either voted Democrat, or Labor party or not at all.  Of course, a lot of it does depend on where those people immigrated from, eh?  ;) 

Sepiatone

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
15 hours ago, mr6666 said:

<_<

It is absolutely voter suppression and the Republicans know it.  Of course, it may also appeal to the more rural areas of Georgia as suppression of metro Atlanta voting and power.

Can't wait to see how they try to re-district GA based on new census.   The plan will be to lessen power of metro Atlanta at all levels - county, state and federal.

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Are Democrats sleepwalking toward democratic collapse?

“I’m not sure people appreciate how much danger we’re in.”

"..........“The most destructive thing that Trump did on his way out the door was he took the Republicans’ waning commitment to democracy and he weaponized it”..............

 

......Take the scenario where Republicans don’t have to steal the 2024 election. They just use their built-in advantages in which Biden wins the popular vote by three points but still loses the Electoral College. Democrats win the House vote but lose the House. Democrats win the Senate vote, but they lose the Senate.

That’s a situation where the citizens of the country fundamentally don’t have control of the agenda and they don’t have the ability to change the leadership. Those are two core features of democracy, and without them, you’re living in competitive authoritarianism. People are going to wake up the next day and go to work, and take care of their kids, and live their lives, and democracy will be gone. There really won’t be very much that we can do about it. Or there’s the worst-case scenario where the election is stolen and then we’re sleepwalking into a potentially catastrophic breakup of the country.

One thing I would ask Republicans: If it goes that way, what is it that you think you will have won? What are we even fighting about at this point?

You got your corporate tax cuts. You got the Supreme Court. What is the purpose of this? Why do you want the power if it means alienating half the country and potentially breaking it up? I guess I just hope that there will be some introspection among party leaders when we’re approaching that precipice.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22432229/democracy-america-democratic-party-reform

:huh:

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, mr6666 said:

Are Democrats sleepwalking toward democratic collapse?

“I’m not sure people appreciate how much danger we’re in.”

"..........“The most destructive thing that Trump did on his way out the door was he took the Republicans’ waning commitment to democracy and he weaponized it”..............

 

......Take the scenario where Republicans don’t have to steal the 2024 election. They just use their built-in advantages in which Biden wins the popular vote by three points but still loses the Electoral College. Democrats win the House vote but lose the House. Democrats win the Senate vote, but they lose the Senate.

That’s a situation where the citizens of the country fundamentally don’t have control of the agenda and they don’t have the ability to change the leadership. Those are two core features of democracy, and without them, you’re living in competitive authoritarianism. People are going to wake up the next day and go to work, and take care of their kids, and live their lives, and democracy will be gone. There really won’t be very much that we can do about it. Or there’s the worst-case scenario where the election is stolen and then we’re sleepwalking into a potentially catastrophic breakup of the country.

One thing I would ask Republicans: If it goes that way, what is it that you think you will have won? What are we even fighting about at this point?

You got your corporate tax cuts. You got the Supreme Court. What is the purpose of this? Why do you want the power if it means alienating half the country and potentially breaking it up? I guess I just hope that there will be some introspection among party leaders when we’re approaching that precipice.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22432229/democracy-america-democratic-party-reform

:huh:

Duh.  GOPers, Corporations, extremists and their allies and supporters do not care about democracy.  They care only about power.  The power to use the government to benefit them or bend people to their will.

Toward that end, the end justifies the means.  

22 hours ago, mr6666 said:

<_<

No Kidding.  This is pretty obvious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mr6666 said:

:)

This is nice to hear, but ultimately will likely fail.  The governor is going to call the legislature back into session and they will have to vote on SB7.  As has happened in other states, the governor can send state police out to find Dems and bring them back into the chamber and keep them there.

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ElCid said:

This is nice to hear, but ultimately will likely fail.  The governor is going to call the legislature back into session and they will have to vote on SB7.  As has happened in other states, the governor can send state police out to find Dems and bring them back into the chamber and keep them there.

Last time they did this, they left the state en masse, so troopers had no jurisdiction.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, txfilmfan said:

Last time they did this, they left the state en masse, so troopers had no jurisdiction.

I seem to recall most went to Oklahoma, but they eventually had to return to the state and their positions in the legislature.  So, the tactic failed.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bogie posted the below from The Plum Line in the Filibuster thread, but since it is about Republican Voter Suppression, it bears repeating in this thread.

 

Opinion: A frantic warning from 100 leading experts: Our democracy is in grave danger

 
Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.). (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) 
Image without a caption
Opinion by  
Columnist
June 1, 2021 at 9:49 a.m. EDT

Democrats can’t say they weren’t warned.

With yet another GOP effort to restrict voting underway in Texas, President Biden is now calling onCongress to act in the face of the Republican “assault on democracy.” Importantly, Biden cast that attack as aimed at “Black and Brown Americans,” meriting federal legislation in response.

That is a welcome escalation. But it remains unclear whether 50 Senate Democrats will ever prove willing to reform or end the filibuster, and more to the point, whether Biden will put real musclebehind that cause. If not, such protections will never, ever pass.

Now, in a striking intervention, more than 100 scholars of democracy have signed a new public statement of principles that seeks to make the stakes unambiguously, jarringly clear: On the line is nothing less than the future of our democracy itself.

“Our entire democracy is now at risk,” the scholars write in the statement, which I obtained before its release. “History will judge what we do at this moment.”

And these scholars underscore the crucial point: Our democracy’s long-term viability might depend on whether Democrats reform or kill the filibuster to pass sweeping voting rights protections.

“We urge members of Congress to do whatever is necessary — including suspending the filibuster — in order to pass national voting and election administration standards,” the scholars write, in a reference to the voting rights protections enshrined in the For the People Act, which passed the House and is before the Senate.

What’s striking is that the statement is signed by scholars who specialize in democratic breakdown, such as Pippa Norris, Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky. Other well-known names include Francis Fukuyama and Jacob Hacker.

“We wanted to create a strong statement from a wide range of scholars, including many who have studied democratic backsliding, to make it clear that democracy in America is genuinely under threat,” Lee Drutman, senior fellow at New America and a leading organizer of the letter, told me.

“The playbook that the Republican Party is executing at the state and national levels is very much consistent with actions taken by illiberal, anti-democratic, anti-pluralist parties in other democracies that have slipped away from free and fair elections,” Drutman continued.

Among these, the scholars note, are efforts by GOP-controlled state legislatures everywhere to restrict access to voting in ways reminiscent of tactics employed before the United States became a real multiracial democracy in the mid-1960s:

Republican lawmakers have openly talked about ensuring the “purity” and “quality” of the vote, echoing arguments widely used across the Jim Crow South as reasons for restricting the Black vote.

The scholars also sound the alarm about GOP efforts to deepen control of electoral machinery in numerous states, casting them as a live threat to overturn future elections, and a redoubling of emphasis on extreme gerrymanders and other anti-majoritarian tactics:

In future elections, these laws politicizing the administration and certification of elections could enable some state legislatures or partisan election officials to do what they failed to do in 2020: reverse the outcome of a free and fair election. Further, these laws could entrench extended minority rule, violating the basic and longstanding democratic principle that parties that get the most votes should win elections.
Democracy rests on certain elemental institutional and normative conditions. Elections must be neutrally and fairly administered. They must be free of manipulation. Every citizen who is qualified must have an equal right to vote, unhindered by obstruction. And when they lose elections, political parties and their candidates and supporters must be willing to accept defeat and acknowledge the legitimacy of the outcome.

After noting that all these Republican efforts are threatening those fundamental principles, the scholars warn: “These actions call into question whether the United States will remain a democracy.”

Crucially, the scholars note that the John Lewis Voting Rights Act — which would restore some protections gutted by the Supreme Court — would be insufficient, and they call for federal protections such as those in the For the People Act, or S.1.

“Just as it ultimately took federal voting rights law to put an end to state-led voter suppression laws throughout the South" in the 1960s, the scholars write, so must federal law step in again:

rue electoral integrity demands a comprehensive set of national standards that ensure the sanctity and independence of election administration, guarantee that all voters can freely exercise their right to vote, prevent partisan gerrymandering from giving dominant parties in the states an unfair advantage in the process of drawing congressional districts, and regulate ethics and money in politics.
It is always far better for major democracy reforms to be bipartisan, to give change the broadest possible legitimacy. However, in the current hyper-polarized political context such broad bipartisan support is sadly lacking.

That is the rub. An acceptance that protecting democracy will never, ever, ever be bipartisan, and will happen only on a partisan basis, is fundamental to accepting the reality of the situation that Democrats face.

We can go back and forth about specific misgivings that some Democrats have about S.1 — see this good Andrew Prokop report for an overview — but the core question is whether Democrats will cross that Rubicon. So doing would lead inevitably to the need to reform or end the filibuster.

Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) is the most visible obstacle here. But an unknown number of other moderate Democrats are also reluctant to cross that Rubicon, and it’s unclear how much effort Biden will put into making that happen.

And so, when these scholars warn that history is watching, those Democrats are the ones who should take heed.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...