Jump to content

Voter Suppression


MichaelWeston

Recommended Posts

[quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1345039118' post='1146498']
The rules should be the same for everyone. However, republicans like to stack the deck in their favor.
[/quote]

Come on. EVERYONE tries to stack the deck in their favor.

And yes, the rules should be the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='big_dish' timestamp='1345058413' post='1146611']
Come on. [b]EVERYONE[/b] tries to stack the deck in their favor.

And yes, the rules should be the same.
[/quote]

Ok find me as many examples of Democrats re-drawing their voting districts or proposing voter ID laws etc.in the past 3 years to stack the deck in their favor and if I can't find twice as many examples of Republicans doing it I will believe you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1345059396' post='1146616']
Ok find me as many examples of Democrats re-drawing their voting districts or proposing voter ID laws etc.in the past 3 years to stack the deck in their favor and if I can't find twice as many examples of Republicans doing it I will believe you.
[/quote]

I'm not going to go searching for anything... its true, and even if republicans did it twice as much, my point is valid that everyone does it. Off the top of my head, Democrats have been fighting military absentee votes for very similar reasons.

And... Voter ID laws should be required. Its ridiculous that anyone could vote a person into an American office without proving who they are. Voting is the right of law abiding American citizens- it should be proven that the person is correct. Makes no sense, and its only a partisan issue because the left has made it such. You can have anyone who feels like voting, voting. Thats not how our system works.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1345062248' post='1146634']
big-dish: my mind is made up, fuck you

I just told you what it would take to change my mind, you just told me that yours will never change. Congratulations, I will no longer bother to engage you here in the future.
[/quote]

I could say the exact same thing about every liberal that is in this forum, and could say the same thing about every conservative as well. I consider myself in the middle.

It boggles my mind that people actually believe one side of the aisle is out doing a bunch of evil shit, while the other side is perfect angels. Each side believes that of the other. The truth is, is that both are virtually just as corrupt and selfish as the other, both use scare tactics and shady numbers to get votes, and both are more worried about keeping their jobs and their benefits than they are about actually fixing this country. I feel sorry for you that you so blindly follow a political party and actually believe they are saints sent from heaven and dont involve themselves in the political rat race for votes that they all so obviously spend so much time crafting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='big_dish' timestamp='1345061550' post='1146631']

Voter ID laws should be required. [/quote]

Why should they be required ? Why can't I vote if I am an illegal immigrant ? Whomever gives me relaxed immigration laws is my new friend. Don't worry, I don't want your job. All I want to know is where do I get an EBT CARD and apply for welfare ? 1/2 :ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1345062949' post='1146641']
You do have your moments of being absolutely hilarious.
[/quote]

Pretty sure I would get weird looks from a Republican convention and a Democrat convention if I held up this sign of my beliefs:

I believe in small government. I believe in lower taxes. I believe in individual responsibility in life. I am against illegal immigration. I think welfare should be a hand UP, not a hand OUT.


I believe in separation of church and state. I am pro-choice. I believe in free rights for citizens/I believe in equality for women/minorities etc. I believe gays should be able to marry. I am 100% for legal immigration. I am OK with regulated markets if done correctly. I believe values change with the times.

Not sure whats so funny about that, other than I dont blindly adhere to subscriptions like you do.

Ultimately I want small steps towards towards more liberties, and less small steps towards government control/dependence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the problem with this forum, and American society at large. Too many closed minds. [b]Big Dish's[/b] post about his beliefs are quite reasonable, and align closely with my own, yet you guys that are opposed to him for whatever reason are attacking the poster, not the content of the post. I just don't understand blind partisanship to ANY political party. I think both parties have something worthwhile to offer (though the mainstream Republican Party I think has gone off the rails in many respects...too much religion and not enough common sense) in terms of ideals. There's simply nothing wrong with cherry picking the best that either party has to offer and forming your own political belief system around it. I also agree that both parties are deeply involved in shady bullshit. At least that part of politics is very much bi-partisan. And it all comes down to money and power in the end anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='big_dish' timestamp='1345061550' post='1146631']
I'm not going to go searching for anything... its true, and even if republicans did it twice as much, my point is valid that everyone does it. Off the top of my head, Democrats have been fighting military absentee votes for very similar reasons.

And... Voter ID laws should be required. Its ridiculous that anyone could vote a person into an American office without proving who they are. Voting is the right of law abiding American citizens- it should be proven that the person is correct. Makes no sense, and its only a partisan issue because the left has made it such. You can have anyone who feels like voting, voting. Thats not how our system works.
[/quote]

The question is not stacking the Deck or not, it's whether or not EVERYONE should have the SAME opportunity to vote. You bring up the Military. Do you think they should be able to vote in Montgomery County on the Saturday, Sunday or Monday before the election, but no one else can? Do you think that because you live in Miami County on one side of the Street and your neighbor lives in Montgomery County on the other side of the street that you should be able to vote at 7 pm on a Friday, but he can't? Or that your gun License is considered OK as voter ID, but my Student ID is not? Voting ID is a partisan issue because Republicans want to use it to minimize the vote, especially of people that are more likely to vote democrat. There is a better chance that you will be hit by lightning, than there is of recognizable Voter FRAUD occuring in Ohio. PFFTTT on all that bullshit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1345068677' post='1146658']
This is the problem with this forum, and American society at large. Too many closed minds. [b]Big Dish's[/b] post about his beliefs are quite reasonable, and align closely with my own, yet you guys that are opposed to him for whatever reason are attacking the poster, not the content of the post. I just don't understand blind partisanship to ANY political party. I think both parties have something worthwhile to offer (though the mainstream Republican Party I think has gone off the rails in many respects...too much religion and not enough common sense) in terms of ideals. There's simply nothing wrong with cherry picking the best that either party has to offer and forming your own political belief system around it. I also agree that both parties are deeply involved in shady bullshit. At least that part of politics is very much bi-partisan. And it all comes down to money and power in the end anyway.
[/quote]

All I'm saying is that he isnt middle of the isle. I've said many times here that the center has shifted so far to the right that Obama is basically a republican, dish is right of Obama, dish is not center, he is right.

[quote name='CincyInDC' timestamp='1345071110' post='1146665']
...he said to the ultra-Christian liberal, who also can't spell...lol
[/quote]


:glare:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[b]Update:[/b][i] On Wednesday afternoon, Jon Husted, the Ohio Secretary of State, announced that all Ohio counties would follow a uniform early-voting policy. The policy would extend early-voting hours to 7 p.m. on weekdays during the last two weeks before the election, though all early voting is banned during the final three days of the campaign.[/i]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1345068677' post='1146658']
This is the problem with this forum, and American society at large. Too many closed minds. [b]Big Dish's[/b] post about his beliefs are quite reasonable, and align closely with my own, yet you guys that are opposed to him for whatever reason are attacking the poster, not the content of the post. I just don't understand blind partisanship to ANY political party. I think both parties have something worthwhile to offer (though the mainstream Republican Party I think has gone off the rails in many respects...too much religion and not enough common sense) in terms of ideals. There's simply nothing wrong with cherry picking the best that either party has to offer and forming your own political belief system around it. I also agree that both parties are deeply involved in shady bullshit. At least that part of politics is very much bi-partisan. And it all comes down to money and power in the end anyway.
[/quote]
One of the enduring questions which has motivated my recreational study since my teen years is this: "What kind of craziness was it that divided this nation and brought it to the slaughter of our Civil War?" My rough guess is that over the years I've read somewhere in the neighborhood of 80-100 books searching for answers. I'm still not done. I'm still not satisfied, at least in the sense that I can say I have any kind of definitive, final answer. And besides, along the way, one learns all kinds of things about human nature as well as a plethora of simply interesting facts.

Here's one of those facts. Did you know that James Longstreet was Ulysses Grant's best man at Grant's wedding in 1848? Or was he? Even a fact which should be as straightforward as this has been subject to debate. What we do know is that Longstreet and Grant were good pals before the Civil War and that Longstreet, who was the cousin of Grant's wife-to-be, Julia Dent, definitely participated in the wedding.

What does this have to do with voter suppression? We'll get to that, but first, a bit more about Longstreet: What did he do after the war? How was he treated by his fellow officers? Long story short, he was vilified, called a scalawag, and held in disrepute by the Lost Cause Dead-Enders. Why? Again, in brief, because he reformed and reshaped his views. Anyone interested in the circumstances surrounding Longstreet will find a mini cottage industry about his career. I'd recommend it for anyone who wants to understand the social and psychological dynamics which underlie that war. After all, guns don't kill people. People kill people. Which, if true, makes said social and psychological dynamics fair game for study.

One of the remarkable aspects of American history is just how the dead-enders never seem to completely die off. Even today one finds semi-crazy defenders of the lost cause spouting a series of semi-crazy rationales for their beliefs and latent prejudices. This, despite mountains of evidence which discredit those views. It seems that some people tend to prefer the turds in their diapers more than they are willing to assess evidence and refine their views accordingly.

I get what you are driving at with your mention of "closed minds." I just think that isn't the best way to frame such a concern. Here's why. How does a person get smarter or wiser? It isn't because they were born that way--popping out into the world with a snifter of cognac in one hand and a set of Encyclopedia Brittanicas in the other. It is generally because they are willing to form a hypothesis, they are willing to test that hypothesis, and they are willing to refine that hypothesis according to the evidence as they discover it. It's a continual process performed frequently over the course of one's life, either consciously or sub-consciously.

So far, so good. Here is where it get interesting. One has to decide, along the way, just where the anchors go. Where are the truths? Are they big Truths or little, more provisional truths? How much effort was expended in obtaining and certifying that truth? And, of course, is that truth really a truth? So, metaphors about open minds and closed minds do not really encapsulate the issue here--because it is a combo of both, so to speak, which leads one forward on the path to wisdom.

Once one has figured that fundamental out, it is pretty easy to determine another person's general orientation to the process. One assesses just how amenable another person is to the evidence provided when a view differs from an original proposition. One assesses just how "open minded" a person is willing to be before they become "close minded" about a specific truth, and therefore drop an anchor which forecloses all further discussion. Further, one has to be able to navigate through all the mines and other potential side-tracking detritus which can get in the way of the pursuit of truth.

For some people, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to our constitution were anathema. So, in some locales in this country, ways were devised to make those amendments superfluous. If you were black and lived in the south, then next 100 years sort of sucked. Poll taxes and literacy tests disenfranchised blacks for clearly unjust reasons. So then we passed the 24th amendment and a series of Civil Rights Acts in the early 60s, including the all-important Voting Rights Act in 64/65. Even in the wake of these positive laws, some folks clung to their prejudices--their closed minds, one might say. The heretofore mostly Democratic South started shifting Republican, and Nixon iced the cake with his infamous "Southern Strategy" in 1968. And one of the outcomes of this Southern Strategy is that a large number of the yahoos who find it easier to prefer their ill-formed beliefs to the actually challenging and often hard intellectual work of pursuing even moderate forms of wisdom have become the "meat" which the Republican party exploits to this day.

Lastly, those among us who militate against this trend in American politics are enjoined by those yahoos (and sometimes by others who are well-intentioned folks) that we aren't being fair. That we ought to accept some purported equality of views because that is what it means to have an open mind. And yes, some of those yahoos wouldn't think twice about shooting us if their perverse minds lead them to some rationale for pulling the trigger. That's how little they think of us eggheads, so we should be polite when they advocate another load of crap which is weighing this country down? Because all views are more or less equal?

Socrates claimed that the unexamined life was not worth living. For the purposes of this argument, suppose he was right. Which group of people would tend to be more tolerant of those who didn't "toe the line" according to the lights of their beliefs? Would it be the eggheads or the yahoos?

I know there are plenty of folks here who think I'm full of shit. That's fine, I can live with that. I don't give two hoots or a fuck about poorly-conceived notions of fairness. I'm much more interested in justice. Much more...and I have a lifetime of proving that I'm willing to do the work along those pathways. So, when the evidence regarding voter suppression by one political party mounts, it's worth calling out. Thankfully, some Republicans also think this way, too:

[quote][url="http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/jim-greer-denounces-florida-republican-party-officials-as-liars-and/1242157"]I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,'' he said.[/url][/quote]

[size=4][color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Kennethmw is right as rain. If we are going to be fair, then be just. But enough of the crocodile tears and enough with the lackeys who aid and abet those who would be unjust.[/font][/color][/size]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great post Homer. I wanted to add also: I am pretty sure that I have had to present my photo ID to prove whom I was every single time I have voted...and this is in my whitebread little Indiana town. Without having read much about whatever these numbnut Republicans are doing WRT demanding ID's to vote, I ask: hasn't it always been this way everywhere? What is different in this case?

Also, Homer: can you recommend me some books on Longstreet?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1345119434' post='1146833']
Great post Homer. I wanted to add also: [b]I am pretty sure that I have had to present my photo ID to prove whom I was every single time I have voted[/b]...and this is in my whitebread little Indiana town. Without having read much about whatever these numbnut Republicans are doing WRT demanding ID's to vote, I ask: hasn't it always been this way everywhere? What is different in this case?

Also, Homer: can you recommend me some books on Longstreet?
[/quote]

I believe its not about proving who you are which has always been required to some degree, but about adding additional steps to the process and disenfranchising people in the process. Before if you didn't have a drivers license, were unemployed you likely only needed a bank statement or bill of some sort to prove your residence.

They are now saying "the same things that you used to provide to prove your ID and residence are still fine, but now you have to make a trip to the county clerk, provide that info to them, answer questions from under-trained individuals, wait for an undetermined length of time and hope the paperwork was processed correctly before you recieve a photo ID and can go vote."

In theory it shouldn't be a difficult step, but considering half the country doesn't even bother to take 3 minutes out of their day to actually vote, in practice it turns out that they can eliminate more people from the polls and those people tend to be minorities and other already disenfranchised citizens who usually vote Democrat.

[url="http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/31/617401/why-pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-will-create-chaos-on-election-day/"]http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/31/617401/why-pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-will-create-chaos-on-election-day/[/url]

Its concurrent with the evolving political strategies that you don't even have to tell the truth, just espousing a lie is enough to make people doubt. So add another step to the voting process and suddenly people are worried about their eligibility to vote and stay home.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why it isn't mandatory in this country to at least have a walking ID. Everyone should have some kind of an ID card, just like everyone is given a social security number. Then, if everyone had one, then anyone of age that wanted to vote could, easy peezy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1345119434' post='1146833']
Great post Homer. I wanted to add also: I am pretty sure that I have had to present my photo ID to prove whom I was every single time I have voted...and this is in my whitebread little Indiana town. Without having read much about whatever these numbnut Republicans are doing WRT demanding ID's to vote, I ask: hasn't it always been this way everywhere? What is different in this case?

Also, Homer: can you recommend me some books on Longstreet?
[/quote]

The finger pointing is hilarious... both parties do this shit. Wake up people... don't stand there and point at one group as though your affiliated party is holier than thou... they all do it. Does it make it right, no.

I do agree that all people that go to vote should have to provide some type of photo ID... to what extent that is allowed, not sure, as a lot of stuff is VERY easy to forge and there is historical proof that both parties (largely democrat though) drum up voters (a lot of them dead) that manage to drag themselves out of the grave and get to the booth. Walk in, give a name, and vote without proving who you are or anything?

The repubs trying to give only those in the military the extended voting times is hilarious... are they shipping out in those couple days? They'd know well in advance. If you do open it, just open it to all. Can we not just dump both parties and start over? Please?

Oh, and love the latest... "oh, you don't like my opinion? Well fuck you." Very classy. This is a Bengals board folks with political talk as a sub forum... remember we're all Bengals fans... Now I remember why I've tried to steer clear of this forum lately.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' timestamp='1345121310' post='1146841']
I believe its not about proving who you are which has always been required to some degree, but about adding additional steps to the process and disenfranchising people in the process. Before if you didn't have a drivers license, were unemployed you likely only needed a bank statement or bill of some sort to prove your residence.

They are now saying "the same things that you used to provide to prove your ID and residence are still fine, but now you have to make a trip to the county clerk, provide that info to them, answer questions from under-trained individuals, wait for an undetermined length of time and hope the paperwork was processed correctly before you recieve a photo ID and can go vote."

In theory it shouldn't be a difficult step, but considering half the country doesn't even bother to take 3 minutes out of their day to actually vote, in practice it turns out that they can eliminate more people from the polls and those people tend to be minorities and other already disenfranchised citizens who usually vote Democrat.

[url="http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/31/617401/why-pennsylvanias-voter-id-law-will-create-chaos-on-election-day/"]http://thinkprogress...n-election-day/[/url]

Its concurrent with the evolving political strategies that you don't even have to tell the truth, just espousing a lie is enough to make people doubt. So add another step to the voting process and suddenly people are worried about their eligibility to vote and stay home.
[/quote]

No... it is as simple as requiring a photo identification. Currently, there are multiple states that, provided you're on a voter roll, you vote. You don't have to show them anything. But, some form of photo id should be required to prove you're actually you... and not the dead guy that has been buried for a couple years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Bunghole' timestamp='1345119434' post='1146833']
Great post Homer. I wanted to add also: I am pretty sure that I have had to present my photo ID to prove whom I was every single time I have voted...and this is in my whitebread little Indiana town. Without having read much about whatever these numbnut Republicans are doing WRT demanding ID's to vote, I ask: hasn't it always been this way everywhere? What is different in this case?

Also, Homer: can you recommend me some books on Longstreet?
[/quote]

I've only read two books specifically about Longstreet, his memoirs written around 1900 and a book called "Lee's War Horse" written in the 30s or 40s. Most of the rest I've garnered about him is via other books about specific campaigns or other more comprehensive Civil War/Reconstruction Era books. I've read a few scholarly articles on Longstreet, too, but article titles, etc... escape me now. Other books I recommend re this period are: pretty much anything by Eric Foner or David Donald for Reconstruction, C. Vann Woodward, too. On the CW itself, James McPherson's books are well done, especially "Battle Cry of Freedom." A particular favorite of mine is "The Last Full Measure" about a Minnesota regiment--can't remember the author's name at the moment.

I think Squirrelnutz' summary regarding the underlying motives about voter ID is correct. And I really like kenneth's take, too. I know I have shown ID in the past when I lived in other states--and I think it was a utility bill that I used in that instance, but have never been asked here in KY. But my precinct is small and the folks working the polls know me. I don't think it is the mechanics which upset folks so much as it is the brazen motives of the Republicans in caging votes. That's no secret.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...