3 ms·

Similarly, I don't see how "a well documented history of voter suppression" applies to increasing election security. I don't see that phrase in your first link,

Similarly, I don't see how "a well documented history of voter suppression" applies to increasing election security. I don't see that phrase in your first link, but I found it here: https://www.studioatao.org/post/understanding-the-u-s-government https://www.studioatao.org/post/understanding-the-u-s-govern.... From there I found a link to the evil Brian Kemp who dared to purge voter rolls! https://newrepublic.com/article/151858/americas-relentless-suppression-black-voters https://newrepublic.com/article/151858/americas-relentless-s... Many believe that one of the greatest opportunities for fraud come from outdated voter rolls. We need more effort to purge them, not less. Again, I am not hearing a single thing from you that convinces me laws like voter ID laws are more harmful than beneficial. If this weren't a deeply partisan issue for an insanity-driven culture of divisiveness, there would be little argument against voter ID laws in this day and age. Lastly, it is very partisan to focus on efforts of republicans to suppress democrat votes while ignoring democrat efforts to continuously game the system in their favor, like: * Making Washington D.C. a state, which makes zero sense unless you just want to win. * Stacking the supreme court, which, again, makes zero sense unless you just want to win. * Abolishing the filibuster, which completely undermines the purpose of the senate. The founders of the constitution purposely did not set up a pure democracy and they had many good reasons for it. * Federalizing election laws, obviously in ways that favor democrats, even ignoring the complete unconstitutionality of the law. if anything is obvious about the democrats, they see the constitution as an obstacle more than as a founding document. * Purposely not enforcing existing immigration laws (this should be illegal and Biden should be in jail for it), and then fighting to allow non-citizens to vote (this is already legal in NYC), or to grant citizenship to illegal entrants. Fortunately, the Hispanic vote seems to be shifting right, so we can hope this evil strategy will backfire against the democrats. * Gerrymandering that rivals or exceeds republican gerrymandering efforts. But, when it's the democrats doing it, the corporate media like to call it "redistricting". The democrats have long ago made it clear that they will fight as dirty as possible to win. If anything, Republicans need to start fighting dirtier back.

ZeroGravitas 5y ago
It appears we dont really have enough commonly accepted facts to have a fruitful conversation. The article you linked to talks about a lot of really horrible things, which I guess you agree with based on your linking to it and describing removing voters from the voters role for simply not voting in the previous election as no big deal? My big picture take is that democracy is good, and depriving people of votes is bad. If thats partisan then I'm glad I'm not in the party fighting to reduce democracy.
- PathOfEclipse 5y ago
  It appears we dont really have enough commonly accepted facts to have a fruitful conversation. Welcome to American politics. That you were willing to have a dialog at all with someone who disagrees with you might set you above the average. My big picture take is that democracy is good, and depriving people of votes is bad. How about this big picture take? Democracy is good, and citizen votes deserve protection. Every fraudulent vote dilutes a legitimate vote. Even the appearance of insecurity undermines faith in the democracy. And yes, it's incredibly partisan for you to claim that republicans are trying to "reduce democracy." An attitude like that will both fail to convince anyone who disagrees with you, and also keep you in the dark about truths your party in general are unwilling to accept.
  - dustyleary 5y ago
    > And yes, it's incredibly partisan for you to claim that republicans are trying to "reduce democracy." Is it, though? My belief is that voter fraud is basically a non-issue, that it doesn't really happen very much at all, and that it is a bogus argument put forth by the Republicans to give an excuse for why they are so consistently fighting to not allow people to vote. Google search "does voter fraud really happen", and "how bad is voter fraud": https://www.google.com/search?q=does+voter+fraud+really+happen https://www.google.com/search?q=does+voter+fraud+really+happ... https://www.google.com/search?q=how+bad+is+voter+fraud https://www.google.com/search?q=how+bad+is+voter+fraud I can't find any results that don't back up my belief. Can you? The Heritage Foundation, a far-right think tank, has a page on voter fraud: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud But, in my opinion, it's kind of amazing that they leave the page up. The purpose of this page is to document and expose how bad voter fraud is, and they provide a searchable database on all the cases they have found and confirmed. Their database goes back to 1982, and they have found... 1340 cases of voter fraud. This is an embarrassingly low number, isn't it? A few thousand fraudulent votes over the last 40 years? Also, it's not like these cases are cases of people manufacturing thousands of votes. You can check for yourself, the entire list is here: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud-print/search https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud-print/search These are overwhelmingly on the order of "a single extra vote was cast" because someone voted in two districts, or mailed in an absentee ballot for a deceased relative. Meanwhile, do Republicans work to suppress votes? I think it's hard to argue otherwise in good faith: https://www.google.com/search?q=do+republicans+suppress+votes https://www.google.com/search?q=do+republicans+suppress+vote... Why does Mitch McConnell say that the idea of making election day a national holiday is a "naked power grab" for Democrats? Shouldn't making it easier for people to vote be a "good idea that strengthens our democracy"? https://www.google.com/search?q=mitch+mcconnell+election+day+power+grab https://www.google.com/search?q=mitch+mcconnell+election+day... Another belief of mine is that it's common knowledge in politics that the more people who vote, the worse Republicans fare in elections. The Republican professional politicians are usually better at not openly admitting such things, but Trump gave us another example of "saying the quiet part out loud" with his usual eloquence: "They had levels of voting, that if you ever agreed to it you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again" https://www.google.com/search?q=They+had+levels+of+voting%2C+that+if+you+ever+agreed+to+it+you%27d+never+have+a+Republican+elected+in+this+country+again https://www.google.com/search?q=They+had+levels+of+voting%2C... Why would Trump say that? The Republicans are trying to reduce democracy. They lost the support of the people. They have only won the popular vote once in the past 30 years. Rather than changing their platform to try to appeal to more voters, they've decided that the people are their enemy.
fortuna86 5y ago
> Similarly, I don't see how "a well documented history of voter suppression" applies to increasing election security Because "election security" - applied strategically and unequally (such as removing ballot boxes and voting stations in areas that are strongholds for your political opponents) is nothing but suppression tactics. Even voter ID laws, when applied only in places where gov ID is not common, can be weaponized. You know this.
- PathOfEclipse 5y ago
  Please point out one person in power who suggests selectively applying voter ID laws in a state. If this discussion weren't partisan, your concern would simply translate to: "voter ID laws make sense; let's make sure the laws are written and enforced fairly", and not, "we can't do voter ID laws because it's possible to be unfair with them!" It's possible to be unfair with every law, and every law will have disparate impact. What a silly argument to make!
  - ZeroGravitas 5y ago
    Anyone proposing it that doesn't also legislate for every voter to be issued with one is being selective. > The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread
    - PathOfEclipse 5y ago
      Yes, they are selecting for citizens with a valid ID. That's the point! And, no, the law doesn't need to ensure every citizen gets a voting ID. How would one even do that? The voter rolls are out of date and don't contain every citizen. Also, how would you ensure the right IDs get to the right people? You, as a citizen, do not have an inherent right to vote without having the ability to prove you are who you claim to be. You, as a citizen, may have to experience some inconvenience to get a valid ID if you don't have one already. As long as the inconvenience is reasonable, it should not prevent the creation of voter ID laws.
8note 5y ago
> Many believe that one of the greatest opportunities for fraud come And where is the abuse that fuels this belief? What are the numbers?
8note 5y ago
> Many believe that one of the greatest opportunities for fraud come And where is the abuse that fuels this belief? What are the numbers? And more importantly, how many people does doing so prevent from voting, which is just as fraudulent as allowing an extra vote?

ZeroGravitas 5y ago

It appears we dont really have enough commonly accepted facts to have a fruitful conversation. The article you linked to talks about a lot of really horrible things, which I guess you agree with based on your linking to it and describing removing voters from the voters role for simply not voting in the previous election as no big deal? My big picture take is that democracy is good, and depriving people of votes is bad. If thats partisan then I'm glad I'm not in the party fighting to reduce democracy.

PathOfEclipse 5y ago
It appears we dont really have enough commonly accepted facts to have a fruitful conversation. Welcome to American politics. That you were willing to have a dialog at all with someone who disagrees with you might set you above the average. My big picture take is that democracy is good, and depriving people of votes is bad. How about this big picture take? Democracy is good, and citizen votes deserve protection. Every fraudulent vote dilutes a legitimate vote. Even the appearance of insecurity undermines faith in the democracy. And yes, it's incredibly partisan for you to claim that republicans are trying to "reduce democracy." An attitude like that will both fail to convince anyone who disagrees with you, and also keep you in the dark about truths your party in general are unwilling to accept.
- dustyleary 5y ago
  > And yes, it's incredibly partisan for you to claim that republicans are trying to "reduce democracy." Is it, though? My belief is that voter fraud is basically a non-issue, that it doesn't really happen very much at all, and that it is a bogus argument put forth by the Republicans to give an excuse for why they are so consistently fighting to not allow people to vote. Google search "does voter fraud really happen", and "how bad is voter fraud": https://www.google.com/search?q=does+voter+fraud+really+happen https://www.google.com/search?q=does+voter+fraud+really+happ... https://www.google.com/search?q=how+bad+is+voter+fraud https://www.google.com/search?q=how+bad+is+voter+fraud I can't find any results that don't back up my belief. Can you? The Heritage Foundation, a far-right think tank, has a page on voter fraud: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud But, in my opinion, it's kind of amazing that they leave the page up. The purpose of this page is to document and expose how bad voter fraud is, and they provide a searchable database on all the cases they have found and confirmed. Their database goes back to 1982, and they have found... 1340 cases of voter fraud. This is an embarrassingly low number, isn't it? A few thousand fraudulent votes over the last 40 years? Also, it's not like these cases are cases of people manufacturing thousands of votes. You can check for yourself, the entire list is here: https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud-print/search https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud-print/search These are overwhelmingly on the order of "a single extra vote was cast" because someone voted in two districts, or mailed in an absentee ballot for a deceased relative. Meanwhile, do Republicans work to suppress votes? I think it's hard to argue otherwise in good faith: https://www.google.com/search?q=do+republicans+suppress+votes https://www.google.com/search?q=do+republicans+suppress+vote... Why does Mitch McConnell say that the idea of making election day a national holiday is a "naked power grab" for Democrats? Shouldn't making it easier for people to vote be a "good idea that strengthens our democracy"? https://www.google.com/search?q=mitch+mcconnell+election+day+power+grab https://www.google.com/search?q=mitch+mcconnell+election+day... Another belief of mine is that it's common knowledge in politics that the more people who vote, the worse Republicans fare in elections. The Republican professional politicians are usually better at not openly admitting such things, but Trump gave us another example of "saying the quiet part out loud" with his usual eloquence: "They had levels of voting, that if you ever agreed to it you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again" https://www.google.com/search?q=They+had+levels+of+voting%2C+that+if+you+ever+agreed+to+it+you%27d+never+have+a+Republican+elected+in+this+country+again https://www.google.com/search?q=They+had+levels+of+voting%2C... Why would Trump say that? The Republicans are trying to reduce democracy. They lost the support of the people. They have only won the popular vote once in the past 30 years. Rather than changing their platform to try to appeal to more voters, they've decided that the people are their enemy.

fortuna86 5y ago

> Similarly, I don't see how "a well documented history of voter suppression" applies to increasing election security Because "election security" - applied strategically and unequally (such as removing ballot boxes and voting stations in areas that are strongholds for your political opponents) is nothing but suppression tactics. Even voter ID laws, when applied only in places where gov ID is not common, can be weaponized. You know this.

PathOfEclipse 5y ago
Please point out one person in power who suggests selectively applying voter ID laws in a state. If this discussion weren't partisan, your concern would simply translate to: "voter ID laws make sense; let's make sure the laws are written and enforced fairly", and not, "we can't do voter ID laws because it's possible to be unfair with them!" It's possible to be unfair with every law, and every law will have disparate impact. What a silly argument to make!
- ZeroGravitas 5y ago
  Anyone proposing it that doesn't also legislate for every voter to be issued with one is being selective. > The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread
  - PathOfEclipse 5y ago
    Yes, they are selecting for citizens with a valid ID. That's the point! And, no, the law doesn't need to ensure every citizen gets a voting ID. How would one even do that? The voter rolls are out of date and don't contain every citizen. Also, how would you ensure the right IDs get to the right people? You, as a citizen, do not have an inherent right to vote without having the ability to prove you are who you claim to be. You, as a citizen, may have to experience some inconvenience to get a valid ID if you don't have one already. As long as the inconvenience is reasonable, it should not prevent the creation of voter ID laws.

8note 5y ago

> Many believe that one of the greatest opportunities for fraud come And where is the abuse that fuels this belief? What are the numbers?

8note 5y ago

> Many believe that one of the greatest opportunities for fraud come And where is the abuse that fuels this belief? What are the numbers? And more importantly, how many people does doing so prevent from voting, which is just as fraudulent as allowing an extra vote?