Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Joe Mammy

Bloomberg Pays Fines for 32,000 Florida Felons to Vote!

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, quick-hands said:

If this was in January.    Id be fine with it.   In sept.  Bribery 

LOL, you'd be OK with a Democratic candidate doing this 2 months before the Democratic primary? Get outta here! :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Joe Summer said:

LOL, you'd be OK with a Democratic candidate doing this 2 months before the Democratic primary? Get outta here! :lmao:

Obtuse.    Whatever .   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shutout said:

So the fact it is written law, specific to be citable in section 6.  Its just fluff?  Made up fairy tales?  Doesn't look funny at all?  Just curious. Whatever your honest thought is, that's cool.  I just wonder if people really believe that and, if so, how they got to that point.  We all have to know the intention and i bet if Trump did this, the pitchforks would be in the streets. 

Its kind of funny that the party that wants to push socialism is backed by all the insulated super rich. 

"funny"?  No...it looks like Bloomberg is donating money to the organizations helping the ex-felons overcome the poll tax so they can be allowed to vote.  I think it's crystal clear what he's trying to do.  And I stated up thread, it's hard to imagine attaching "philanthropist" to Trump's name, but if he chose to do the same, I'd applaud him for doing it.  If you'd like to post the part of the law you are referring to, I'd like to read it.  I goggled but came up blank.  All the pieces I've been quoted by my officials here in state lack the ability to get to the quid pro quo part.  I mean, the charities that are helping these people are perfectly legit and have been raising money for months to help these people.  Are we to believe all those donations to the legal charity are illegal and the state's been letting this go on this long without saying anything?  I mean, I KNOW it's Florida and things are kinda ###### up around here, but geeze.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

"funny"?  No...it looks like Bloomberg is donating money to the organizations helping the ex-felons overcome the poll tax so they can be allowed to vote.  I think it's crystal clear what he's trying to do.  And I stated up thread, it's hard to imagine attaching "philanthropist" to Trump's name, but if he chose to do the same, I'd applaud him for doing it.  If you'd like to post the part of the law you are referring to, I'd like to read it.  I goggled but came up blank.

I think I posted a link in the thread somewhere for someone. Maybe I am just skeptical but I would probably be more inclined to buy this if this was done in a non-election year or even a mid-term year or...I dunno, maybe even an election year where it wasn't considered an extremely tight race in an extremely contested state.  Or maybe eve if he was doing it in a state that he had ties in, like New York.  But what would be the point in that to help people vote in a state he doesn't need a vote in?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shutout said:

I think I posted a link in the thread somewhere for someone. Maybe I am just skeptical but I would probably be more inclined to buy this if this was done in a non-election year or even a mid-term year or...I dunno, maybe even an election year where it wasn't considered an extremely tight race in an extremely contested state.  Or maybe eve if he was doing it in a state that he had ties in, like New York.  But what would be the point in that to help people vote in a state he doesn't need a vote in?  

 

I don't know what you're asking here.  It's always interesting to observe how people cut/edit quotes to respond to.  As soon as the Florida legislature started down this path of shenanigans they're on these charities started popping up to help.  They didn't just come into existence a few weeks ago.  This has been going on since the 2018 election.  They really started working in earnest once the Florida SC made their ruling.  Bloomberg has stated a million times that he'll do what he can to help defeat Trump, so he's using his philanthropy in a swing state to get as many people eligible to vote as he can.  That's the point.  That seems rather obvious to me.  I don't know what else it would be. Personally, I have zero problem with it given my belief that the more people who vote the better for the country  From a "conservative" perspective (not speaking of you...I don't have any idea where you stand on that spectrum) there is never a good time for their to be an increase in voter turnout...I get that.  But that isn't a voter problem, that's a GOP problem.  

Edited by The Commish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, [scooter] said:

These ex-felons are less likely to be African-American, and more likely to be Republican. That would be good for Trump.

So, despite all the talk about Bloomberg vowing spend money to defeat Trump, this move actually has an ulterior benefit for Bloomberg: if Trump wins, then it will almost certainly lower his tax bill. $16 million would be a tiny investment to avoid Biden's inevitable tax hike.

So, this is basically win-win for Bloomberg.

you're saying the majority of the felons Bloomberg paid the fines were are white GOP MAGA hat wearers ? 

seriously ?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, sho nuff said:

No...you think you know what it is...you claim it is what is happening...but have zero to back that up.

Yes...he is doing it where it is...so that people will go vote...more people voting is a good thing.  We should want that.  Seems one party does...one party would rather try to limit how many people vote.  Then that same party that tries to limit people from voting...claims to be America First and Patriotic.

why isn't he doing it in other places ? 

isn't there like 21 states that allow felons to vote ? 

why would Bloomberg pick Florida? c'mon .... we know the reason ... because Florida can vey well be won by 30,000 votes right ?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stealthycat said:

why isn't he doing it in other places ? 

isn't there like 21 states that allow felons to vote ? 

why would Bloomberg pick Florida? c'mon .... we know the reason ... because Florida can vey well be won by 30,000 votes right ?

Did other places enact such laws and win recent appeals?

I think recent events is why he fundraised for this group (as did others like Lebron and Jordon...).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

why isn't he doing it in other places ? 

isn't there like 21 states that allow felons to vote ? 

why would Bloomberg pick Florida? c'mon .... we know the reason ... because Florida can vey well be won by 30,000 votes right ?

This question has been answered every time you've asked it.  It's simple...because Florida is where the biggest numbers of suppressed ex-felons are.  The more people that vote, the better for the process and Democrats as a whole.  Why would one spend their time doing small groups suppressed all over the country when they have a HUGE target rich environment right here in Florida.

The funniest part of this whole thing is this isn't even a thing if the GOP here executed the desires defined in Amendment 4 submitted to the people to vote on.  Can't overlook that entire fiasco.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

I think recent events is why he fundraised for this group

you don't think location in a highly contested state mattered? Bloomberg has never donated to pay felons before, why now 6 weeks before an election that he desperately wants Trump to lose ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Commish said:

It's simple...because Florida is where the biggest numbers of suppressed ex-felons are.  The more people that vote, the better for the process and Democrats as a whole.  Why would one spend their time doing small groups suppressed all over the country when they have a HUGE target rich environment right here in Florida.

thank goodness we're seeing honesty !!  has nothing to do with helping felons (there are no ex-felons, once a felon always a felon) and it has nothing to do with the states that will assuredly go Biden .... it has to do with location and getting votes for Biden

Democrat's will get more votes - the money being spent = more Democrat votes

and ya'll think that's ok ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

you don't think location in a highly contested state mattered? Bloomberg has never donated to pay felons before, why now 6 weeks before an election that he desperately wants Trump to lose ?

 

Are there any other states in which felons have their voting rights withheld until such fines are paid?  If not, then I don't see how one can ask why this hasn't been done in other states.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

thank goodness we're seeing honesty !!  has nothing to do with helping felons (there are no ex-felons, once a felon always a felon) and it has nothing to do with the states that will assuredly go Biden .... it has to do with location and getting votes for Biden

Democrat's will get more votes - the money being spent = more Democrat votes

and ya'll think that's ok ? 

Yup!

 

If it was up to me, I would let everyone vote.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:
18 hours ago, [scooter] said:

These ex-felons are less likely to be African-American, and more likely to be Republican. That would be good for Trump.

So, despite all the talk about Bloomberg vowing spend money to defeat Trump, this move actually has an ulterior benefit for Bloomberg: if Trump wins, then it will almost certainly lower his tax bill. $16 million would be a tiny investment to avoid Biden's inevitable tax hike.

So, this is basically win-win for Bloomberg.

you're saying the majority of the felons Bloomberg paid the fines were are white GOP MAGA hat wearers ? 

seriously ?

No, of course not. The sentence clearly says "more likely to be Republican". It said nothing about hats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

you don't think location in a highly contested state mattered? Bloomberg has never donated to pay felons before, why now 6 weeks before an election that he desperately wants Trump to lose ?

You seem overly worried by this.

Bloomberg wants Trump to lose.  He is using his money in a way he thinks will increase the chances of that happening.

Are you saying Bloomberg has no right to help Biden?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

You seem overly worried by this.

Bloomberg wants Trump to lose.  He is using his money in a way he thinks will increase the chances of that happening.

Are you saying Bloomberg has no right to help Biden?

Do we have even know how much was his money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

You seem overly worried by this.

Bloomberg wants Trump to lose.  He is using his money in a way he thinks will increase the chances of that happening.

Are you saying Bloomberg has no right to help Biden?

I think that this is the best post of this thread...it admits why this is happening (as opposed to some of the other replies pretending it is not the reason) and it is very much legal so all is good .

Edited by Boston

Share this post


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

thank goodness we're seeing honesty !!

Pay closer attention maybe?  It's only been said here a dozen times and counting :shrug:

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

has nothing to do with helping felons (there are no ex-felons, once a felon always a felon)

:lmao:  Ok...I don't know why this made me laugh but it did.

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

and it has nothing to do with the states that will assuredly go Biden

Most of those states (if not all of them) don't have rules taking away your right to vote because you were convicted of a felony, so why would it have much to do with them?  :confused:

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

it has to do with location and getting votes for Biden

close...it has to do with allowing more people their right to vote....whether they vote or not or vote for who I want them to vote for isn't as important to me as them being able to vote.  And, yes, I understand the suppression by the GOP because generally speaking, the more people that vote the more that helps the Dems.  That's on the GOP, not the voters trying to vote.

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

Democrat's will get more votes - the money being spent = more Democrat votes

I don't know the make up of the felons being helped here.  Perhaps you have a spreadsheet with all of them and analysis you can share with us?  Either way, this isn't the concern for me as a firm believer in "the more people who vote the better".

1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

and ya'll think that's ok ? 

At this point I feel like I'm a broken record....yes, I'm ok with more people voting.  This has really become a weird hill to die on.  In short, a Democrat is using their money in a way they think is going to help their guy win (by getting more people access to the voting booths).  In turn the GOP sends their money to politicians to make sure they do what is necessary to help their guy in by making sure policy is in place to suppress voter turn out or make it difficult to vote.  This isn't new...it's a tug-o-war that's been going on for decades.  I don't get all the "outrage" over this honestly.  

Edited by The Commish
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

thank goodness we're seeing honesty !!  has nothing to do with helping felons (there are no ex-felons, once a felon always a felon) and it has nothing to do with the states that will assuredly go Biden .... it has to do with location and getting votes for Biden

Democrat's will get more votes - the money being spent = more Democrat votes

and ya'll think that's ok ? 

I don't believe in poll taxes. 

Share this post


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

Yup!

 

If it was up to me, I would let everyone vote.

I wouldn't  I think when a person kills another human or rapes a child or something, they are lucky that voting is one of the only things they lose. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Boston said:

I think that this is the best post of this thread...it admits why this is happening (as opposed to some of the other replies pretending it is not the reason) and it is very much legal so all is good .

Buying votes is illegal in Florida.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anecdotal, but in my experience, people who are in the "system" tend to lean left, as they want more handouts.......I'm sure this was part of bloomberg's calculation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am honestly surprised that several of you are so casually ok with people buying votes. Considering you choose to live in a free country and you want equal representation, I would think you would be opposed to a scenario where you could be marginalized or negated completely by a person with a lot of money. 

If the complete opposite were true, that is, if it were completely legal to put your vote up on Ebay, we would live by the complete rules of literally a few dozen powerful figures, some which may not even be in our country. I can't imagine not protecting against that vehemently. Otherwise we may all as well slaves to a master with money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Snotbubbles said:

Buying votes is illegal in Florida.

Thankfully, that’s not happening.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Snotbubbles said:

Buying votes is illegal in Florida.

Buying court fines is not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Manster said:

Anecdotal, but in my experience, people who are in the "system" tend to lean left, as they want more handouts.......I'm sure this was part of bloomberg's calculation

Studies have already shown that Florida ex-felons skew to the right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Studies have already shown that Florida ex-felons skew to the right.

Well then maybe he should've done this on the left coast.....never been to Florida

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Manster said:
4 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Studies have already shown that Florida ex-felons skew to the right.

Well then maybe he should've done this on the left coast.....never been to Florida

This law only exists in Florida. That's why Bloomberg is doing it in Florida.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Shutout said:

I am honestly surprised that several of you are so casually ok with people buying votes. Considering you choose to live in a free country and you want equal representation, I would think you would be opposed to a scenario where you could be marginalized or negated completely by a person with a lot of money. 

If the complete opposite were true, that is, if it were completely legal to put your vote up on Ebay, we would live by the complete rules of literally a few dozen powerful figures, some which may not even be in our country. I can't imagine not protecting against that vehemently. Otherwise we may all as well slaves to a master with money. 

While the idea that this is "buying votes" keeps getting repeated, I think you're missing the point that the posters who approve of this action don't consider it buying votes at all.

I could just as easily write "I am honestly surprised so many of you are casually OK with poll taxes".  That wouldn't be fair because I assume you don't consider the idea that the person's right to vote being contingent upon paying a fine to be a poll tax.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So voters in Florida say it's ok for felons to have their voting rights restored. The Florida Republican legislation says wait a not until you pay your fines. Some people donate to a fund to help pay those fines and now the Republicans are bent out of shape over getting the fines paid?

Edited by Mile High
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

While the idea that this is "buying votes" keeps getting repeated, I think you're missing the point that the posters who approve of this action don't consider it buying votes at all.

I could just as easily write "I am honestly surprised so many of you are casually OK with poll taxes".  That wouldn't be fair because I assume you don't consider the idea that the person's right to vote being contingent upon paying a fine to be a poll tax.

It's not missed. It is in there to underscore the statement because while a lot of people are sheepishly, tongue-in-cheek, wink, wink, nod, nod and saying "its not about buying votes", we all know it is exactly about buying votes.  You guys don't have to lie to me to be my friend :). 

We are all smart here. we understand (and some have actually paraphrased it here) that Bloomie has a trump stump up his butt and wants VENGEANCE....MWUHAHAHA.  And we know why he's doing it in Florida.And why he's doing it on the edge of a tightly contested presidential race...in a tightly contested state....that is up for grabs.  And that's he has never shown concern towards this group before ever at any other time. 

It is like that old saying that says "when they tell you, 'it's not about the money'...it's ALWAYS about the money!"

I mean, if the guy had just randomly done this before at any other non-election time, in any other place...then, ok.  Or even if he was doing now...in, I don't know...New York where he actually has a connecting history...or even California that is of no strategical VOTING interest.  Ok.  

But we all know what's going on.  And Florida lawmakers do too.

With all that being said, He won't get into trouble.  This was just the republicans wanting to say "we see you". At most, it will be used to parlay to something else at some other time as a reminder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Shutout said:

It is like that old saying that says "when they tell you, 'it's not about the money'...it's ALWAYS about the money!"

The irony of your statement here is that Bloomberg has more to lose financially under a Biden administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

This law only exists in Florida. That's why Bloomberg is doing it in Florida.

So why the hell did he do it if criminals in Florida skew right?  Maybe it's incentive to vote for the party who gives you stuff?  I mean he's buying votes any way you slice it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, [scooter] said:

The irony of your statement here is that Bloomberg has more to lose financially under a Biden administration.

Riiiiiiiight.......I'm sure he's giving $100 million to Biden just for the greater good.....to take down the evil trump....I'm sure it won't benefit him financially at all....🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Shutout said:

I mean, if the guy had just randomly done this before at any other non-election time, in any other place...then, ok.  Or even if he was doing now...in, I don't know...New York where he actually has a connecting history...or even California that is of no strategical VOTING interest.  Ok. 

There are no other states with this circumstance.  This particular state has never had this particular circumstance before.  It is literally impossible for him to do this anywhere but the one place and time it was done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Buying court fines is not.

The Florida AG disagrees.  It is illegal to “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another in casting his or her vote."  So normally, paying a court fine wouldn't run afoul of the statute except Bloomberg is paying fines for this purpose (from a Bloomberg memo): “We have identified a significant vote share that requires a nominal investment,” the memo read. “The data shows that in Florida, Black voters are a unique universe unlike any other voting bloc, where the Democratic support rate tends to be 90 per cent to 95 per cent.”  So his paying the fines in connection with his intended purpose at a minimum triggers an investigation into the legality of this payments.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

While the idea that this is "buying votes" keeps getting repeated, I think you're missing the point that the posters who approve of this action don't consider it buying votes at all.

I could just as easily write "I am honestly surprised so many of you are casually OK with poll taxes".  That wouldn't be fair because I assume you don't consider the idea that the person's right to vote being contingent upon paying a fine to be a poll tax.

Not an appropriate analogy.  A convicted felon shouldn't be allowed to vote until his debt is paid to society.  Part of that debt is fines and restitution.  Those are part of their sentences and not something that is tacked on in order to be able to vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Snotbubbles said:
37 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Buying court fines is not.

The Florida AG disagrees.  It is illegal to “directly or indirectly give or promise anything of value to another in casting his or her vote." 

The key phrase here is "casting"; Bloomberg does not have any sort of guarantee that these people will cast a vote for Biden. Hell, he doesn't even have a guarantee that they'll even vote. Plus, Florida's voter registration deadline is 11 days away, so it's likely that a significant number of these ex-felons won't even get registered in time to vote this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

The irony of your statement here is that Bloomberg has more to lose financially under a Biden administration.

You would be kidding yourself saying that if you are talking taxes on the rich.  The ultra-wealthy aren't like the average citizen. He isn't looking at a weekly direct deposit stemming from a 9-5 job. Their wealth is tied up in stock and securities and land and ownership in intellectual assets, etc.  All those things have very clever tax shelters that protect them. It is a commonly misunderstood thing when people get behind candidates that promise to "tac the rich".  What they really mean is tax the middle-class. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

There are no other states with this circumstance.  This particular state has never had this particular circumstance before.  It is literally impossible for him to do this anywhere but the one place and time it was done.

Interesting. I honestly did not know that there is nowhere in the United States that this type of tactic in some variation has never been possible to attempt. thank you for that piece. 

With that being said, this does make me think if it is new and never tested it may be a very good candidate to be tightened up, like a bad loophole. Generally speaking, if there is no rule prohibiting it then good on him for being clever. 

However, to quote the great jeff Goldblum "“YEAH, BUT YOUR SCIENTISTS POLITICIANS WERE SO PREOCCUPIED WITH WHETHER OR NOT THEY COULD THAT THEY DIDN’T STOP TO THINK IF THEY SHOULD.” 

Actions like this have the potential to weaken the proverbial bedrock of our republic. Our founding fathers were obsessed with creating checks and balances in our country's government to prevent any one side's ambitions from being able to overwhelm another's ambitions. Neutralizing the voice of one is authoritarian, something the colonists didn't care much for and something Trump usually gets accused of but, in practice, is happening on the other side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Manster said:
34 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

This law only exists in Florida. That's why Bloomberg is doing it in Florida.

So why the hell did he do it if criminals in Florida skew right?  Maybe it's incentive to vote for the party who gives you stuff?  I mean he's buying votes any way you slice it.

Bloomberg is doing this solely to poke Trump. He only donated enough money to pay off the fines of 32,000 felons, which is less than 2% of ex-felons in Florida. It's a drop in the bucket, designed more to maximize Trump outrage than to maximize Democrat votes.

In the study that I linked upthread, political scientists concluded that if ALL ex-felons in Florida got the right to vote, then the Democrat advantage -- if it happened at all -- would be no more than 8000-48,000 total votes. And that's based on restoring the voting rights of 1.7 million felons. But, for 32,000 felons, that alleged advantage would be as low as 150 votes.

As I've said many times in this thread, Bloomberg is not getting much bang for his buck here. This is all for show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2020 at 9:19 AM, Boston said:

 but if so Kamala and crew will bail you out...i

This was way, way worse and I hope it comes up in the debate.  She helped bail out child molesters, abusers, violent felons, among many others.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Boston said:

I think that this is the best post of this thread...it admits why this is happening (as opposed to some of the other replies pretending it is not the reason) and it is very much legal so all is good .

I think most believe it will help Biden yes...not sure anyone is denying that part.  But to think this organization is not doing things to help people vote being the reason (and it is)...you are crazy.  Bloomberg is trying to counter the GOP focus on fewer people voting (and they are doing so thinking its best for the GOP).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sand said:

This was way, way worse and I hope it comes up in the debate.  She helped bail out child molesters, abusers, violent felons, among many others.  

The 8th Amendment weeps.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Snotbubbles said:

Not an appropriate analogy.  A convicted felon shouldn't be allowed to vote until his debt is paid to society.  Part of that debt is fines and restitution.  Those are part of their sentences and not something that is tacked on in order to be able to vote.

This was pretty much Rich's point wasn't it? You don't agree with the analogy because you reject the underlying premise. Just like others would reject the premise of buying votes, because there are presumably no conditions about voting tied to the fines be paid. 

Edited by Arsenal of Doom
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

While the idea that this is "buying votes" keeps getting repeated, I think you're missing the point that the posters who approve of this action don't consider it buying votes at all.

I could just as easily write "I am honestly surprised so many of you are casually OK with poll taxes".  That wouldn't be fair because I assume you don't consider the idea that the person's right to vote being contingent upon paying a fine to be a poll tax.

Because it quite literally is not buying votes.

 

Edited by sho nuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shutout said:

Interesting. I honestly did not know that there is nowhere in the United States that this type of tactic in some variation has never been possible to attempt. thank you for that piece. 

With that being said, this does make me think if it is new and never tested it may be a very good candidate to be tightened up, like a bad loophole. Generally speaking, if there is no rule prohibiting it then good on him for being clever. 

However, to quote the great jeff Goldblum "“YEAH, BUT YOUR SCIENTISTS POLITICIANS WERE SO PREOCCUPIED WITH WHETHER OR NOT THEY COULD THAT THEY DIDN’T STOP TO THINK IF THEY SHOULD.” 

Actions like this have the potential to weaken the proverbial bedrock of our republic. Our founding fathers were obsessed with creating checks and balances in our country's government to prevent any one side's ambitions from being able to overwhelm another's ambitions. Neutralizing the voice of one is authoritarian, something the colonists didn't care much for and something Trump usually gets accused of but, in practice, is happening on the other side.

I think Bloomberg et.al. found a way to create a check and balance against authoritarian government. It's important to look at the history of what happened here.  As I understand it, this is what happened:

- Florida voters voted, via referendum, that ex-felons would have their voting rights restored

- Florida governor and legislature, in response to the referendum, created new legislation preventing the voting rights from being restored until said ex-felons repaid fines, court fees, etc.

- Assorted groups sued, and the legislation was upheld earlier this year

- In many cases, the Florida government refused to provide information on what fines were actually owed, thereby preventing voting entirely (I'm here to pay my fine, how much?  We're not sure.  OK, so I can vote?  No, not until your fine is paid.)

- Bloomberg et.al. contributed to charitable organizations that had sprung up to pay the fines and go through procedures to force the government to determine the fines

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

Bloomberg is doing this solely to poke Trump. He only donated enough money to pay off the fines of 32,000 felons, which is less than 2% of ex-felons in Florida. It's a drop in the bucket, designed more to maximize Trump outrage than to maximize Democrat votes.

In the study that I linked upthread, political scientists concluded that if ALL ex-felons in Florida got the right to vote, then the Democrat advantage -- if it happened at all -- would be no more than 8000-48,000 total votes. And that's based on restoring the voting rights of 1.7 million felons. But, for 32,000 felons, that alleged advantage would be as low as 150 votes.

As I've said many times in this thread, Bloomberg is not getting much bang for his buck here. This is all for show.

Again...did he actually donate that much?  The articles are all that he stepped in and made fundraising calls...that many prominent people donated to the coalition raising this money.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think Harris donating to an anti-bail group is the comp.

Trump donating to Fla AG Bondi’s campaign and then the AG dropping an investigation into the Trump University scam is the comp.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s also worth remembering that Trump not only pardoned a Florida felon but also forgave *all his fines & penalties, thereby ensuring he would be able to vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.