Voting Rights

[Farfromgeneva]

Republicans really don't like democracy. An article from one of the leading election lawyers in the country:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/23/opin ... e=Homepage

"A new, more dangerous front has opened in the voting wars, and it’s going to be much harder to counteract than the now-familiar fight over voting rules. At stake is something I never expected to worry about in the United States: the integrity of the vote count. The danger of manipulated election results looms.

We already know the contours of the battle over voter suppression. The public has been inundated with stories about Georgia’s new voting law, from Major League Baseball’s decision to pull the All-Star Game from Atlanta, to criticism of new restrictions that prevent giving water to people waiting in long lines to vote. With lawsuits already filed against restrictive aspects of that law and with American companies and elite law firms lined up against Republican state efforts to make it harder to register and vote, there’s at least a fighting chance that the worst of these measures will be defeated or weakened.

The new threat of election subversion is even more concerning. These efforts target both personnel and policy; it is not clear if they are coordinated. They nonetheless represent a huge threat to American democracy itself.

Some of these efforts involve removing from power those who stood up to President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The Georgia law removes the secretary of state from decision-making power on the state election board. This seems aimed clearly at Georgia’s current Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, punishing him for rejecting Mr. Trump’s entreaties to “find” 11,780 votes to flip Joe Biden’s lead in the state.

But the changes will apply to Mr. Raffensperger’s successor, too, giving the legislature a greater hand in who counts votes and how they are counted. Michigan’s Republican Party refused to renominate Aaron Van Langevelde to the state’s canvassing board. Mr. Van Langevelde voted with Democrats to accept Michigan’s Electoral College vote for Mr. Biden as legitimate. He was replaced by Tony Daunt, the executive director of a conservative Michigan foundation that is financially backed by the DeVos family.

Even those who have not been stripped of power have been censured by Republican Party organizations, including not just Mr. Raffensperger and Georgia’s Republican governor, Brian Kemp, but also Barbara Cegavske, the Republican secretary of state of Nevada who ran a fair election and rejected spurious arguments that the election was stolen. The message that these actions send to politicians is that if you want a future in state Republican politics, you had better be willing to manipulate election results or lie about election fraud.

Republican state legislatures have also passed or are considering laws aimed at stripping Democratic counties of the power to run fair elections. The new Georgia law gives the legislature the power to handpick an election official who could vote on the state election board for a temporary takeover of up to four county election boards during the crucial period of administering an election and counting votes. That provision appears to be aimed at Democratic counties like Fulton County that have increased voter access. A new Iowa law threatens criminal penalties against local election officials who enact emergency election rules and bars them from sending voters unsolicited absentee ballot applications.

A Texas bill would similarly stymie future efforts like the one in Harris County to expand access to the ballot and give challengers at the polls the ability not only to observe but to interfere with polling place procedures meant to ensure election integrity. According to a new report by Protect Democracy, Republican legislators have proposed at least 148 bills in 36 states that could increase the chances of cooking the electoral books.

State legislatures and others also have been taking steps to amplify false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, solidifying the false belief among a majority of Republican voters that the November vote count was unfair. It’s not just the hearings featuring charlatans like Rudy Giuliani or Sidney Powell spewing the big lie. It’s also steps like the Arizona State Senate demanding the seizure of November ballots from Democratic-leaning Maricopa County, and ordering an audit of the votes to be conducted by a proponent of the bogus “Stop the Steal” movement who falsely contended that the election was rigged against Mr. Trump. Never mind that Arizona’s vote count has been repeatedly subject to examination by courts and election officials with no irregularities found.

Combating efforts that can undermine the fair administration of elections and vote counting is especially tricky. Unlike issues of voter suppression, which are easy to explain to the public (what do you mean you can’t give water to voters waiting in long lines?!?), the risks of unfair election administration are inchoate. They may materialize or they may not, depending on how close an election is and whether Mr. Trump himself or another person running for office is willing to break democratic norms and insist on an unfair vote count.

So what can be done? To begin with, every jurisdiction in the United States should be voting with systems that produce a paper ballot that can be recounted in the event of a disputed election. Having physical, tangible evidence of voters’ choices, rather than just records on electronic voting machines, is essential to both guard against actual manipulation and protect voter confidence in a fair vote count. Such a provision is already contained in H.R. 1, the mammoth Democrat-sponsored voting bill.

Next, businesses and civic leaders must speak out not just against voter suppression but at efforts at election subversion. The message needs to be that fair elections require not just voter access to the polls, but procedures to assure that the means of conducting the election are fair, auditable and verifiable by representatives of both political parties and nongovernmental organizations.

Congress must also fix the rules for counting Electoral College votes, so that spurious objections to the vote counts like the ones we saw on Jan. 6 from senators and representatives, including Senators Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz, are harder to make. It should take much more than a pairing of a single senator and a single representative to raise an objection, and there must be quick means to reject frivolous objections to votes fairly cast and counted in the states.

Congress can also require states to impose basic safeguards in the counting of votes in federal elections. This is not part of the H.R. 1 election reform bill, but it should be, and Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress wide berth to override state laws in this area.

Finally, we need a national effort to support those who will count votes fairly. Already we are seeing a flood of competent election administrators retiring from their often-thankless jobs, some after facing threats of violence during the 2020 vote count. Local election administrators need political cover and the equivalent of combat pay, along with adequate budget resources to run fair elections. It took hundreds of millions of dollars in private philanthropy to hold a successful election in 2020; that need for charity should not be repeated.

If someone running for secretary of state endorses the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen, they should be uniformly condemned. Support should go to those who promote election integrity, regardless of party, and who put in place fair and transparent procedures. Ultimately, we need to move toward a more nonpartisan administration of elections and create incentives for loyalty to the integrity of the democratic process, not to a political party.

We may not know until January 2025, when Congress has counted the Electoral College votes of the states, whether those who support election integrity and the rule of law succeeded in preventing election subversion. That may seem far away, but the time to act to prevent a democratic crisis is now. It may begin with lawsuits against new voter-suppression laws and nascent efforts to enshrine the right to vote in the Constitution. But it is also going to require a cross-partisan alliance of those committed to the rule of law — in and out of government — to ensure that our elections continue to reflect the will of the people."

What is a "fair election" anymore coaster? You will get a different answer depending on if you ask that question to a Democrat and then a Republican. I'm always of the opinion that when dealing with 2 contrary positions the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If the integrity of the election process is to be determined by one party or the other... something is wrong. I thought both parties were suppose to have observers at all polling places to keep the hinky stuff out and the elections honest? This country is turning voting into rocket science and it should not be that complicated.

This isn’t a split the baby situation

[Farfromgeneva]

A national ID provided at no cost to the individual. You want voter ID, then propose that. It is not a voter ID only. It is a citizenship ID. Lots of liberals will go for that. What liberals aren't going to go for are voter IDs that are voter suppression IDs made up by a bunch of Cracker Barrel states.

The current controversy isn't really over ID, it is over rules and regulations geared to suppress minority voting. You and your friends dining out at Cracker Barrel have no one fooled. The majority in this country understand what you are doing.

Lol.

You guys are so scared of any identification because it defeats what you’re trying now, which is flooding inner city poll booths with anyone walking in from the southern border and others voting 15x on one day. You need chaos. American taxpayers reject the Democratic Party and that divide (actual taxpayers versus the Democratic Party) only grows as the Democratic Party veers further and further away from American culture.

Btw, Cracker Barrel is amazing. Best breakfast and real syrup in America. Which is naturally why Democrats (again) hate it. They hate America.

Cracker Barrell sucks and I’ve been to every southern chain out there. Another falsity. Christ, Shoneys weekend breakfast Buffett is far superior and that’s trash too.

[RedFromMI]

(long quote omitted)

What is a "fair election" anymore coaster? You will get a different answer depending on if you ask that question to a Democrat and then a Republican. I'm always of the opinion that when dealing with 2 contrary positions the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If the integrity of the election process is to be determined by one party or the other... something is wrong. I thought both parties were suppose to have observers at all polling places to keep the hinky stuff out and the elections honest? This country is turning voting into rocket science and it should not be that complicated.

And that opinion in this case would be absolutely wrong (correct in the middle), as the Rs have gone off the rails with false theories about all sorts of issues with voting that are frankly not a problem.

When you have a political party lying repeatedly about election issues because their goal is to keep what power they have in spite of not being able to do so if all the voters participate. So they come up with bogus reasons why the rules must change - but the reasoning behind all these changes is to lessen the ability of the other side to vote (most commonly by making it harder to vote in urban areas than in rural ones).

The problem with R observers is that in the past they have been there to intimidate, not to actually observe - and there was a court decision (consent decree) that for years limited their ability to place observers just because they had done that repeatedly. Only in the last year or so was that decision lifted (which was a mistake IMHO).

In reality we should make it EASY to vote. Mail voting should be more widely used, as its security has been demonstrated over the last couple of decades. We should make IDs for anyone who needs one for voting if they do not have a DL, and widen the forms of ID allowed.

The problem with the Rs today is they do not want to change to meet the needs of a changed electorate. The whole point of politics is to govern on behalf of the citizenry (all of them) instead of representing a tribe (us vs. them).

Make the politicians responsive to ALL the voters. Make the districts more competitive for BOTH parties. Then you can start to tamp down the stupid extremism that governs too much of politics.

[cradleandshoot]

Republicans really don't like democracy. An article from one of the leading election lawyers in the country:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/23/opin ... e=Homepage

"A new, more dangerous front has opened in the voting wars, and it’s going to be much harder to counteract than the now-familiar fight over voting rules. At stake is something I never expected to worry about in the United States: the integrity of the vote count. The danger of manipulated election results looms.

We already know the contours of the battle over voter suppression. The public has been inundated with stories about Georgia’s new voting law, from Major League Baseball’s decision to pull the All-Star Game from Atlanta, to criticism of new restrictions that prevent giving water to people waiting in long lines to vote. With lawsuits already filed against restrictive aspects of that law and with American companies and elite law firms lined up against Republican state efforts to make it harder to register and vote, there’s at least a fighting chance that the worst of these measures will be defeated or weakened.

The new threat of election subversion is even more concerning. These efforts target both personnel and policy; it is not clear if they are coordinated. They nonetheless represent a huge threat to American democracy itself.

Some of these efforts involve removing from power those who stood up to President Donald Trump’s attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The Georgia law removes the secretary of state from decision-making power on the state election board. This seems aimed clearly at Georgia’s current Republican secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, punishing him for rejecting Mr. Trump’s entreaties to “find” 11,780 votes to flip Joe Biden’s lead in the state.

But the changes will apply to Mr. Raffensperger’s successor, too, giving the legislature a greater hand in who counts votes and how they are counted. Michigan’s Republican Party refused to renominate Aaron Van Langevelde to the state’s canvassing board. Mr. Van Langevelde voted with Democrats to accept Michigan’s Electoral College vote for Mr. Biden as legitimate. He was replaced by Tony Daunt, the executive director of a conservative Michigan foundation that is financially backed by the DeVos family.

Even those who have not been stripped of power have been censured by Republican Party organizations, including not just Mr. Raffensperger and Georgia’s Republican governor, Brian Kemp, but also Barbara Cegavske, the Republican secretary of state of Nevada who ran a fair election and rejected spurious arguments that the election was stolen. The message that these actions send to politicians is that if you want a future in state Republican politics, you had better be willing to manipulate election results or lie about election fraud.

Republican state legislatures have also passed or are considering laws aimed at stripping Democratic counties of the power to run fair elections. The new Georgia law gives the legislature the power to handpick an election official who could vote on the state election board for a temporary takeover of up to four county election boards during the crucial period of administering an election and counting votes. That provision appears to be aimed at Democratic counties like Fulton County that have increased voter access. A new Iowa law threatens criminal penalties against local election officials who enact emergency election rules and bars them from sending voters unsolicited absentee ballot applications.

A Texas bill would similarly stymie future efforts like the one in Harris County to expand access to the ballot and give challengers at the polls the ability not only to observe but to interfere with polling place procedures meant to ensure election integrity. According to a new report by Protect Democracy, Republican legislators have proposed at least 148 bills in 36 states that could increase the chances of cooking the electoral books.

State legislatures and others also have been taking steps to amplify false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, solidifying the false belief among a majority of Republican voters that the November vote count was unfair. It’s not just the hearings featuring charlatans like Rudy Giuliani or Sidney Powell spewing the big lie. It’s also steps like the Arizona State Senate demanding the seizure of November ballots from Democratic-leaning Maricopa County, and ordering an audit of the votes to be conducted by a proponent of the bogus “Stop the Steal” movement who falsely contended that the election was rigged against Mr. Trump. Never mind that Arizona’s vote count has been repeatedly subject to examination by courts and election officials with no irregularities found.

Combating efforts that can undermine the fair administration of elections and vote counting is especially tricky. Unlike issues of voter suppression, which are easy to explain to the public (what do you mean you can’t give water to voters waiting in long lines?!?), the risks of unfair election administration are inchoate. They may materialize or they may not, depending on how close an election is and whether Mr. Trump himself or another person running for office is willing to break democratic norms and insist on an unfair vote count.

So what can be done? To begin with, every jurisdiction in the United States should be voting with systems that produce a paper ballot that can be recounted in the event of a disputed election. Having physical, tangible evidence of voters’ choices, rather than just records on electronic voting machines, is essential to both guard against actual manipulation and protect voter confidence in a fair vote count. Such a provision is already contained in H.R. 1, the mammoth Democrat-sponsored voting bill.

Next, businesses and civic leaders must speak out not just against voter suppression but at efforts at election subversion. The message needs to be that fair elections require not just voter access to the polls, but procedures to assure that the means of conducting the election are fair, auditable and verifiable by representatives of both political parties and nongovernmental organizations.

Congress must also fix the rules for counting Electoral College votes, so that spurious objections to the vote counts like the ones we saw on Jan. 6 from senators and representatives, including Senators Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz, are harder to make. It should take much more than a pairing of a single senator and a single representative to raise an objection, and there must be quick means to reject frivolous objections to votes fairly cast and counted in the states.

Congress can also require states to impose basic safeguards in the counting of votes in federal elections. This is not part of the H.R. 1 election reform bill, but it should be, and Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution gives Congress wide berth to override state laws in this area.

Finally, we need a national effort to support those who will count votes fairly. Already we are seeing a flood of competent election administrators retiring from their often-thankless jobs, some after facing threats of violence during the 2020 vote count. Local election administrators need political cover and the equivalent of combat pay, along with adequate budget resources to run fair elections. It took hundreds of millions of dollars in private philanthropy to hold a successful election in 2020; that need for charity should not be repeated.

If someone running for secretary of state endorses the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen, they should be uniformly condemned. Support should go to those who promote election integrity, regardless of party, and who put in place fair and transparent procedures. Ultimately, we need to move toward a more nonpartisan administration of elections and create incentives for loyalty to the integrity of the democratic process, not to a political party.

We may not know until January 2025, when Congress has counted the Electoral College votes of the states, whether those who support election integrity and the rule of law succeeded in preventing election subversion. That may seem far away, but the time to act to prevent a democratic crisis is now. It may begin with lawsuits against new voter-suppression laws and nascent efforts to enshrine the right to vote in the Constitution. But it is also going to require a cross-partisan alliance of those committed to the rule of law — in and out of government — to ensure that our elections continue to reflect the will of the people."

What is a "fair election" anymore coaster? You will get a different answer depending on if you ask that question to a Democrat and then a Republican. I'm always of the opinion that when dealing with 2 contrary positions the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If the integrity of the election process is to be determined by one party or the other... something is wrong. I thought both parties were suppose to have observers at all polling places to keep the hinky stuff out and the elections honest? This country is turning voting into rocket science and it should not be that complicated.

This isn’t a split the baby situation

No it is trying to find a definition for how we determine what a fair election should be. The Rs and the Ds have different ideas how a fair election should be defined. Voting should not be the rocket science issue it has now become. It was real simple the first time I voted in 1976. You signed in at the polling station in our neighborhood. You waited in line and went into the booth and voted. There was no voter suppression, there was no hinky chit happening at the voting booth. When you pushed the levers your vote counted. For some silly ass reason it worked for many, many, many, many years until both parties decided to eff with the process to make it more fair and more secure. The system wasn't broke but that had nothing to do the logic that it had to be fixed. Good effing job people, now the system really is broke. At least it has the appearance of being broke. Just like every other problem in DC that is NEVER fixed, now voting can be added to the list of things never to be fixed.

[Farfromgeneva]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

[cradleandshoot]

(long quote omitted)

What is a "fair election" anymore coaster? You will get a different answer depending on if you ask that question to a Democrat and then a Republican. I'm always of the opinion that when dealing with 2 contrary positions the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If the integrity of the election process is to be determined by one party or the other... something is wrong. I thought both parties were suppose to have observers at all polling places to keep the hinky stuff out and the elections honest? This country is turning voting into rocket science and it should not be that complicated.

And that opinion in this case would be absolutely wrong (correct in the middle), as the Rs have gone off the rails with false theories about all sorts of issues with voting that are frankly not a problem.

When you have a political party lying repeatedly about election issues because their goal is to keep what power they have in spite of not being able to do so if all the voters participate. So they come up with bogus reasons why the rules must change - but the reasoning behind all these changes is to lessen the ability of the other side to vote (most commonly by making it harder to vote in urban areas than in rural ones).

The problem with R observers is that in the past they have been there to intimidate, not to actually observe - and there was a court decision (consent decree) that for years limited their ability to place observers just because they had done that repeatedly. Only in the last year or so was that decision lifted (which was a mistake IMHO).

In reality we should make it EASY to vote. Mail voting should be more widely used, as its security has been demonstrated over the last couple of decades. We should make IDs for anyone who needs one for voting if they do not have a DL, and widen the forms of ID allowed.

The problem with the Rs today is they do not want to change to meet the needs of a changed electorate. The whole point of politics is to govern on behalf of the citizenry (all of them) instead of representing a tribe (us vs. them).

Make the politicians responsive to ALL the voters. Make the districts more competitive for BOTH parties. Then you can start to tamp down the stupid extremism that governs too much of politics.

Voting should be easy. It should be so easy that every vote can be received and counted by election day. When your still counting votes a week or 2 later... what do you expect people to think? IMO every vote being as fair and easy to achieve as possible should be cast and counted on election day. If you don't, or can't or won't cast your vote by election day then your vote doesn't count. If your given one month in advance to mail in your vote that time frame is more than fair. Every American should have their vote counted. If you think procrastinating is okay, well no it is not. If you are too lazy to mail in your vote a month ahead of time then get your ass to the polling station on election day and vote. You snooze you lose buckwheat.

[cradleandshoot]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

How do you define cleaner, simpler and more transparent? We have 50 states with 1000s of different counties with thousands of different rules and regulations on how people that live in their counties can vote. The only way cleaner, simpler and transparent works is by having federal guidelines at least at the national level, as to how national elections need to be conducted. How the states conduct their bidness on a state level can still be the equivalent of a bar room free for all.

[RedFromMI]

(long quote omitted)

What is a "fair election" anymore coaster? You will get a different answer depending on if you ask that question to a Democrat and then a Republican. I'm always of the opinion that when dealing with 2 contrary positions the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If the integrity of the election process is to be determined by one party or the other... something is wrong. I thought both parties were suppose to have observers at all polling places to keep the hinky stuff out and the elections honest? This country is turning voting into rocket science and it should not be that complicated.

And that opinion in this case would be absolutely wrong (correct in the middle), as the Rs have gone off the rails with false theories about all sorts of issues with voting that are frankly not a problem.

When you have a political party lying repeatedly about election issues because their goal is to keep what power they have in spite of not being able to do so if all the voters participate. So they come up with bogus reasons why the rules must change - but the reasoning behind all these changes is to lessen the ability of the other side to vote (most commonly by making it harder to vote in urban areas than in rural ones).

The problem with R observers is that in the past they have been there to intimidate, not to actually observe - and there was a court decision (consent decree) that for years limited their ability to place observers just because they had done that repeatedly. Only in the last year or so was that decision lifted (which was a mistake IMHO).

In reality we should make it EASY to vote. Mail voting should be more widely used, as its security has been demonstrated over the last couple of decades. We should make IDs for anyone who needs one for voting if they do not have a DL, and widen the forms of ID allowed.

The problem with the Rs today is they do not want to change to meet the needs of a changed electorate. The whole point of politics is to govern on behalf of the citizenry (all of them) instead of representing a tribe (us vs. them).

Make the politicians responsive to ALL the voters. Make the districts more competitive for BOTH parties. Then you can start to tamp down the stupid extremism that governs too much of politics.

Voting should be easy. It should be so easy that every vote can be received and counted by election day. When your still counting votes a week or 2 later... what do you expect people to think? IMO every vote being as fair and easy to achieve as possible should be cast and counted on election day. If you don't, or can't or won't cast your vote by election day then your vote doesn't count. If your given one month in advance to mail in your vote that time frame is more than fair. Every American should have their vote counted. If you think procrastinating is okay, well no it is not. If you are too lazy to mail in your vote a month ahead of time then get your ass to the polling station on election day and vote. You snooze you lose buckwheat.

You do realize that the Rs in many states are trying to limit the timing of mail balloting to make the window quite narrow, and also want to limit secure ballot boxes to very few locations to force voting in person.

We also need to fix the postal service so the delivery is not slowed down but accelerated so the ballot arrival problem goes away. And make the polls open for more hours (even overnight) so those with jobs during the day can get to vote in person.

Make the actual election day a national holiday for federal elections would help as well.

[cradleandshoot]

(long quote omitted)

What is a "fair election" anymore coaster? You will get a different answer depending on if you ask that question to a Democrat and then a Republican. I'm always of the opinion that when dealing with 2 contrary positions the truth lies somewhere in the middle. If the integrity of the election process is to be determined by one party or the other... something is wrong. I thought both parties were suppose to have observers at all polling places to keep the hinky stuff out and the elections honest? This country is turning voting into rocket science and it should not be that complicated.

And that opinion in this case would be absolutely wrong (correct in the middle), as the Rs have gone off the rails with false theories about all sorts of issues with voting that are frankly not a problem.

When you have a political party lying repeatedly about election issues because their goal is to keep what power they have in spite of not being able to do so if all the voters participate. So they come up with bogus reasons why the rules must change - but the reasoning behind all these changes is to lessen the ability of the other side to vote (most commonly by making it harder to vote in urban areas than in rural ones).

The problem with R observers is that in the past they have been there to intimidate, not to actually observe - and there was a court decision (consent decree) that for years limited their ability to place observers just because they had done that repeatedly. Only in the last year or so was that decision lifted (which was a mistake IMHO).

In reality we should make it EASY to vote. Mail voting should be more widely used, as its security has been demonstrated over the last couple of decades. We should make IDs for anyone who needs one for voting if they do not have a DL, and widen the forms of ID allowed.

The problem with the Rs today is they do not want to change to meet the needs of a changed electorate. The whole point of politics is to govern on behalf of the citizenry (all of them) instead of representing a tribe (us vs. them).

Make the politicians responsive to ALL the voters. Make the districts more competitive for BOTH parties. Then you can start to tamp down the stupid extremism that governs too much of politics.

Voting should be easy. It should be so easy that every vote can be received and counted by election day. When your still counting votes a week or 2 later... what do you expect people to think? IMO every vote being as fair and easy to achieve as possible should be cast and counted on election day. If you don't, or can't or won't cast your vote by election day then your vote doesn't count. If your given one month in advance to mail in your vote that time frame is more than fair. Every American should have their vote counted. If you think procrastinating is okay, well no it is not. If you are too lazy to mail in your vote a month ahead of time then get your ass to the polling station on election day and vote. You snooze you lose buckwheat.

You do realize that the Rs in many states are trying to limit the timing of mail balloting to make the window quite narrow, and also want to limit secure ballot boxes to very few locations to force voting in person.

We also need to fix the postal service so the delivery is not slowed down but accelerated so the ballot arrival problem goes away. And make the polls open for more hours (even overnight) so those with jobs during the day can get to vote in person.

Make the actual election day a national holiday for federal elections would help as well.

Agree with everything you say. Election day should be a national holiday. I just don't like the idea of votes trickling in many days later. That does not mean fraud but it does open the door for people to question the process. I must be old fashioned enough to think the country should know who won the election on election day. When i hear this precinct or that precinct still has 10 thousand votes to count and it could take them weeks to count them. That begins to make people think that hinky stuff could be happening. Maybe I am not being reasonable. If you give people enough time to vote, your vote needs to be in and counted on election day. IMO early voting should start 30 days prior to election. There is no excuse for anybody to not have voted given that much time to cast your vote.

[Peter Brown]

A national ID provided at no cost to the individual. You want voter ID, then propose that. It is not a voter ID only. It is a citizenship ID. Lots of liberals will go for that. What liberals aren't going to go for are voter IDs that are voter suppression IDs made up by a bunch of Cracker Barrel states.

The current controversy isn't really over ID, it is over rules and regulations geared to suppress minority voting. You and your friends dining out at Cracker Barrel have no one fooled. The majority in this country understand what you are doing.

Lol.

You guys are so scared of any identification because it defeats what you’re trying now, which is flooding inner city poll booths with anyone walking in from the southern border and others voting 15x on one day. You need chaos. American taxpayers reject the Democratic Party and that divide (actual taxpayers versus the Democratic Party) only grows as the Democratic Party veers further and further away from American culture.

Btw, Cracker Barrel is amazing. Best breakfast and real syrup in America. Which is naturally why Democrats (again) hate it. They hate America.

Cracker Barrell sucks and I’ve been to every southern chain out there. Another falsity. Christ, Shoneys weekend breakfast Buffett is far superior and that’s trash too.

Democrats can’t even admit retail food defeat.

Cracker Barrel is the only chain with REAL maple syrup. Not sure if they still use Crisco on the griddle but it tastes like it. Deeeee-lish!!!

Cracker Barrel is a great example of America’s excellence and how most people aren’t racist. My Cracker Barrel is almost always 50% white, 50% non white. Everyone gets along. The servers are super pleasant.

I doubt Cracker Barrel really wants to be in a liberal state; in New York they stay in the normal parts of the state (not NYC).

Why do libs hate success? Cracker Barrel, In n-Out, Chick Fil-A, Hobby Lobby, Coinbase, Tesla, on and on and on.

[Farfromgeneva]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

How do you define cleaner, simpler and more transparent? We have 50 states with 1000s of different counties with thousands of different rules and regulations on how people that live in their counties can vote. The only way cleaner, simpler and transparent works is by having federal guidelines at least at the national level, as to how national elections need to be conducted. How the states conduct their bidness on a state level can still be the equivalent of a bar room free for all.

You know you can see it directionally and philosophically without becoming bogged down with the trees in the forest and it should tell you what the underlying agenda is about whatever detailed heuristic their using. You can the angles which means this isn’t a “there’s room to split the middle” situation. Doing so is tantamount to endorsing and co signing on behavior intended to make voting harder and less available for existing citizens let alone gray area ones. Does that mean it’s a binary, polar, situation? No, but it’s like 90/10, 85/15 not “well there’s room for both sides here as if it’s in that 40-60% band.

[Farfromgeneva]

A national ID provided at no cost to the individual. You want voter ID, then propose that. It is not a voter ID only. It is a citizenship ID. Lots of liberals will go for that. What liberals aren't going to go for are voter IDs that are voter suppression IDs made up by a bunch of Cracker Barrel states.

The current controversy isn't really over ID, it is over rules and regulations geared to suppress minority voting. You and your friends dining out at Cracker Barrel have no one fooled. The majority in this country understand what you are doing.

Lol.

You guys are so scared of any identification because it defeats what you’re trying now, which is flooding inner city poll booths with anyone walking in from the southern border and others voting 15x on one day. You need chaos. American taxpayers reject the Democratic Party and that divide (actual taxpayers versus the Democratic Party) only grows as the Democratic Party veers further and further away from American culture.

Btw, Cracker Barrel is amazing. Best breakfast and real syrup in America. Which is naturally why Democrats (again) hate it. They hate America.

Cracker Barrell sucks and I’ve been to every southern chain out there. Another falsity. Christ, Shoneys weekend breakfast Buffett is far superior and that’s trash too.

Democrats can’t even admit retail food defeat.

Cracker Barrel is the only chain with REAL maple syrup. Not sure if they still use Crisco on the griddle but it tastes like it. Deeeee-lish!!!

Cracker Barrel is a great example of America’s excellence and how most people aren’t racist. My Cracker Barrel is almost always 50% white, 50% non white. Everyone gets along. The servers are super pleasant.

I doubt Cracker Barrel really wants to be in a liberal state; in New York they stay in the normal parts of the state (not NYC).

Why do libs hate success? Cracker Barrel, In n-Out, Chick Fil-A, Hobby Lobby, Coinbase, Tesla, on and on and on.

Amazon. Wrong again.

[MDlaxfan76]

Here's a question: If the 15th Amendment to the US Constitution had never been passed, voting had simply been regulated by the States according to the original Founders' agreement, would it be passable today?

Repeating this question, would the 15th be able to be passed today, or would it founder on the power politics of the right wing?

Would need to be passed by 2/3 majorities in both House and Senate AND ratified by 3/4 of the legislatures of the States.

Section 1
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2
The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

[cradleandshoot]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

How do you define cleaner, simpler and more transparent? We have 50 states with 1000s of different counties with thousands of different rules and regulations on how people that live in their counties can vote. The only way cleaner, simpler and transparent works is by having federal guidelines at least at the national level, as to how national elections need to be conducted. How the states conduct their bidness on a state level can still be the equivalent of a bar room free for all.

You know you can see it directionally and philosophically without becoming bogged down with the trees in the forest and it should tell you what the underlying agenda is about whatever detailed heuristic their using. You can the angles which means this isn’t a “there’s room to split the middle” situation. Doing so is tantamount to endorsing and co signing on behavior intended to make voting harder and less available for existing citizens let alone gray area ones. Does that mean it’s a binary, polar, situation? No, but it’s like 90/10, 85/15 not “well there’s room for both sides here as if it’s in that 40-60% band.

My opinion FFG has always been pretty simplistic. I believe that every American that wants to vote can vote. Unless you live in Philadelphia I'm doubting your going to run into a bunch of thugs with clubs trying to dissuade you from going inside to vote.

[Farfromgeneva]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

How do you define cleaner, simpler and more transparent? We have 50 states with 1000s of different counties with thousands of different rules and regulations on how people that live in their counties can vote. The only way cleaner, simpler and transparent works is by having federal guidelines at least at the national level, as to how national elections need to be conducted. How the states conduct their bidness on a state level can still be the equivalent of a bar room free for all.

You know you can see it directionally and philosophically without becoming bogged down with the trees in the forest and it should tell you what the underlying agenda is about whatever detailed heuristic their using. You can the angles which means this isn’t a “there’s room to split the middle” situation. Doing so is tantamount to endorsing and co signing on behavior intended to make voting harder and less available for existing citizens let alone gray area ones. Does that mean it’s a binary, polar, situation? No, but it’s like 90/10, 85/15 not “well there’s room for both sides here as if it’s in that 40-60% band.

My opinion FFG has always been pretty simplistic. I believe that every American that wants to vote can vote. Unless you live in Philadelphia I'm doubting your going to run into a bunch of thugs with clubs trying to dissuade you from going inside to vote.

I understand. Think for some folks where disenfranchisement is real there’s a very different analysis. But regardless the current activity should clearly be understood as an effort to restrict and reduce don’t you think?

[cradleandshoot]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

How do you define cleaner, simpler and more transparent? We have 50 states with 1000s of different counties with thousands of different rules and regulations on how people that live in their counties can vote. The only way cleaner, simpler and transparent works is by having federal guidelines at least at the national level, as to how national elections need to be conducted. How the states conduct their bidness on a state level can still be the equivalent of a bar room free for all.

You know you can see it directionally and philosophically without becoming bogged down with the trees in the forest and it should tell you what the underlying agenda is about whatever detailed heuristic their using. You can the angles which means this isn’t a “there’s room to split the middle” situation. Doing so is tantamount to endorsing and co signing on behavior intended to make voting harder and less available for existing citizens let alone gray area ones. Does that mean it’s a binary, polar, situation? No, but it’s like 90/10, 85/15 not “well there’s room for both sides here as if it’s in that 40-60% band.

My opinion FFG has always been pretty simplistic. I believe that every American that wants to vote can vote. Unless you live in Philadelphia I'm doubting your going to run into a bunch of thugs with clubs trying to dissuade you from going inside to vote.

I understand. Think for some folks where disenfranchisement is real there’s a very different analysis. But regardless the current activity should clearly be understood as an effort to restrict and reduce don’t you think?

My answer to you comes in the form of a cliche. The first step to being a doormat is to lie down. IMO the average American who wants to vote will not allow themselves to be disenfranchised by anyone. I know I wouldn't stop anybody from preventing me from voting. I believe today in 2021 there are not too many Americans that won't let their vote be counted.

[Farfromgeneva]

We will have to disagree on that aspect. I’m a huge believer in self agency but don’t believe we all are born equal in the country and consequently don’t think we have the same playing field.

[ggait]

I just don't like the idea of votes trickling in many days later. That does not mean fraud but it does open the door for people to question the process. I must be old fashioned enough to think the country should know who won the election on election day. When i hear this precinct or that precinct still has 10 thousand votes to count and it could take them weeks to count them. That begins to make people think that hinky stuff could be happening. Maybe I am not being reasonable. If you give people enough time to vote, your vote needs to be in and counted on election day. IMO early voting should start 30 days prior to election. There is no excuse for anybody to not have voted given that much time to cast your vote.

C&S -- I agree with you. Polls/voting in Colorado hard close at 7 pm on Election Day. We don't allow ED postmarked ballots mail delivered a few days later to be counted. But...

In order to make that hard close rule fair, we have three weeks to vote from when the ballots land in your mailbox. 80+% of those votes are cast via secure drop boxes open 24/7 and located everywhere. And those plentiful drop boxes stay open all the way through to ED. [Unlike GA where they will now close four days prior to ED -- huh?] Which is important, because if you want to wait until ED to cast your vote, then you need to be able to use a drop box (since mailing is too late/uncertain).

CO also processes and counts votes as they are received. So there's time to correct problems with signatures and the like. And election results are available lightning fast. Since most of the counting is done before you get to ED.

Convenient, secure, fast and cost-effective isn't that hard to do. So long as there's not a partisan agenda getting in the way.

[Peter Brown]

But simplifying it reductively, one cohort is trying to create more rules based opacity and difficulty in voting and has made specious claims to fraud they’ve never ever been able to prove only continue to flood with lies, innuendo and rumors. The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

It’s not hard to tell who’s trying to pull one over on their constituency based on the level of honesty and transparency. Means you have to skew to the “left” side a little because the other side has not earned and/or lost the benefit of the doubt with people in the middle at this point. Hence Ga just took two senate seats and went for a Dem for the first time not having to do w Stacey Abrams efforts but rather the vast moderate republican sect here that is done with idiocy, lying and nonsense.

The other cohort wants cleaner, simpler and more transparent voting for citizens.

How do you define cleaner, simpler and more transparent? We have 50 states with 1000s of different counties with thousands of different rules and regulations on how people that live in their counties can vote. The only way cleaner, simpler and transparent works is by having federal guidelines at least at the national level, as to how national elections need to be conducted. How the states conduct their bidness on a state level can still be the equivalent of a bar room free for all.

You know you can see it directionally and philosophically without becoming bogged down with the trees in the forest and it should tell you what the underlying agenda is about whatever detailed heuristic their using. You can the angles which means this isn’t a “there’s room to split the middle” situation. Doing so is tantamount to endorsing and co signing on behavior intended to make voting harder and less available for existing citizens let alone gray area ones. Does that mean it’s a binary, polar, situation? No, but it’s like 90/10, 85/15 not “well there’s room for both sides here as if it’s in that 40-60% band.

My opinion FFG has always been pretty simplistic. I believe that every American that wants to vote can vote. Unless you live in Philadelphia I'm doubting your going to run into a bunch of thugs with clubs trying to dissuade you from going inside to vote.

I understand. Think for some folks where disenfranchisement is real there’s a very different analysis. But regardless the current activity should clearly be understood as an effort to restrict and reduce don’t you think?

My answer to you comes in the form of a cliche. The first step to being a doormat is to lie down. IMO the average American who wants to vote will not allow themselves to be disenfranchised by anyone. I know I wouldn't stop anybody from preventing me from voting. I believe today in 2021 there are not too many Americans that won't let their vote be counted.

+1

Very good post

[Brooklyn]

this is how the radical reich wing views voting "rights":




https://media.timesfreepress.com/img/ph ... 954808.jpg