What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Voter Suppression (1 Viewer)

massraider said:
You read stories about making it harder for people to vote, but when you actually read all the ways they are trying to suppress the vote, it's crazy.  
Click to expand...
They know, just like the rest of us, the more people that vote, the worse it is for them.  It's been true my entire voting life (I'm 46).  The path of least resistance is to make voting harder.  The other option is to acknowledge their product sucks and it's probably time to change the wrapping AND the contents.  You know...actually doing their job!  Much easier to make it harder to vote against them.

 
The Commish said:
I'm not sure...observing the Trump rallies (yes, they are continuing to happen here) he has more support than he should :lol:  
Click to expand...
I see these guys on an overpass on 95 in Ft Pierce waving both a Trump flag and a F Biden flag. I don’t understand their reasoning, and frankly I don’t care to, because Trump was the worst president we’ve had.

 
Kal El said:
I see these guys on an overpass on 95 in Ft Pierce waving both a Trump flag and a F Biden flag. I don’t understand their reasoning, and frankly I don’t care to, because Trump was the worst president we’ve had.
Click to expand...
I think most of what I see at our Friday get together is now all the Qanon guys who were left.  Lots of "Not my pedophile" signs and signs referencing human trafficking etc.  

 
massraider said:
Here's just one state:

This seems like a bit more than "requiring an ID to vote".  Have you heard "many people on both sides of the aisle" warn anyone about the dangers of Sunday morning voting?

The goal should always be to make it as easy as possible for Americans to vote.  No restrictions? Of course not. 

I'd like to know how any kind of large scale fraud can happen with mail in voting.  
Click to expand...
Only thing on that list that's debatable is closing down early voting on Sundays. Even then it's more likely because they can't get volunteers to come in on a Sunday consistently or perhaps it's being suggested by a religious person who is believes Sundays are holy days. Not my thing but that would not surprise me. But that's something they can all discuss and negotiate on. 

Everything else seems perfectly fine to suggest. Not sure where the problem is. A vast majority of people vote on a single day out of the year and they find a way to get there to get it done. If there's an extra exception that a person needs to vote early or vote by mail in, I'm sure they can go through the steps to ensure that their vote is counted and verified.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
I think most of what I see at our Friday get together is now all the Qanon guys who were left.  Lots of "Not my pedophile" signs and signs referencing human trafficking etc.  
Click to expand...
As much as you guys spout about Qanon, you're in here yelling about boogeymen suppressing the vote. Who in the last 50 years of this country that has wanted to vote has not been allowed to (other than criminals and even then it's debatable if they want to vote)?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein said:
As much as you guys spout about Qanon, you're in here yelling about boogeymen suppressing the vote. Who in the last 50 years of this country that has wanted to vote has not been allowed to (other than criminals and even then it's debatable if they want to vote)?
Click to expand...
Link please.

Then we can address the strawman of "wanted to vote has not been allowed to"...

 
The Commish said:
Link please.

Then we can address the strawman of "wanted to vote has not been allowed to"...
Click to expand...
Link to what? The last couple posts you made about "They know, just like the rest of us, the more people that vote, the worse it is for them" as if that was evidence that they're suppressing the vote. 

 
Insein said:
Despite the obvious bias by the writer of that article, I didn't see anything wrong with what was being proposed.
Click to expand...
Republicans were fine with voting on Sundays for years. Then they lost 2 Senate seats. Now suddenly they don't want to allow voting on Sundays anymore. And they've offered no rationale or data showing that Sunday voting is somehow less secure than voting on other days.

 
Sea Duck said:
Republicans were fine with voting on Sundays for years. Then they lost 2 Senate seats. Now suddenly they don't want to allow voting on Sundays anymore. And they've offered no rationale or data showing that Sunday voting is somehow less secure than voting on other days.
Click to expand...
And I'm sure it will get voted down. 

 
Insein said:
As much as you guys spout about Qanon, you're in here yelling about boogeymen suppressing the vote. 
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a nice way to describe the GOP.  

To say that of the GOP Georgia proposals, ONLY early Sunday voting debatable is astounding to me.

Prevent election officials from mailing absentee ballots until four weeks before the election.

Prohibit counties from accepting outside funding for elections.

Require absentee voters to get their ballot envelope signed by a witness and enclose a copy of their photo ID with the ballot.
Click to expand...
None of these are even debatable, and are clearly a threat to free and fair elections, is that correct?

This is amazing to me.  

 
Insein said:
Link to what? The last couple posts you made about "They know, just like the rest of us, the more people that vote, the worse it is for them" as if that was evidence that they're suppressing the vote. 
Click to expand...
Found the problem....thanks :thumbup:  

The evidence that they are trying to suppress the vote is in things like removing voting options, removing places to drop off ballots etc.  

 
The Commish said:
Found the problem....thanks :thumbup:  

The evidence that they are trying to suppress the vote is in things like removing voting options, removing places to drop off ballots etc.  
Click to expand...
If a party has to resort to such tactics instead of putting forth a candidate that will actually bring in voters, that’s a problem for them.

 
massraider said:
I don't think that's a nice way to describe the GOP.  

To say that of the GOP Georgia proposals, ONLY early Sunday voting debatable is astounding to me.

None of these are even debatable, and are clearly a threat to free and fair elections, is that correct?

This is amazing to me.  
Click to expand...
They are clearly debatable because you are debating that they are needed. I'm not hearing your argument as to why they are not good ideas though?

 
The Commish said:
Found the problem....thanks :thumbup:  

The evidence that they are trying to suppress the vote is in things like removing voting options, removing places to drop off ballots etc.  
Click to expand...
Updating voting laws to make them more secure is not suppressing the vote. I don't see any voting options being removed (aside from the Sunday one which will probably not pass if it's been there for years without a sufficient reason why). Even then that is not "suppressing the vote." What percentage of voters can't vote now because a Sunday option for early voting was removed?

You are used to the mantra that any law change in relation to elections is "suppressing the vote" if it requires changes to the system. By that logic we could say the vote was "suppressed" here in PA as many counties suddenly changed voting machines this past election after decades of using the same tried and true methods. Many voters were confused and took a lot longer to make sure they voted correctly. Even then some didn't feel comfortable that their vote was cast correctly. Is that voter suppression in your opinion?

 
who was the Republican that flat out admitted a few years back that the point of all of the voter ID laws was to suppress Democratic votes?

 
joffer said:
who was the Republican that flat out admitted a few years back that the point of all of the voter ID laws was to suppress Democratic votes?
Click to expand...
Who was the Democrat that said he had put together the biggest voter fraud organization in history? They should get together and hang out. Probably have.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Insein said:
joffer said:
who was the Republican that flat out admitted a few years back that the point of all of the voter ID laws was to suppress Democratic votes?
Click to expand...
Who was the Democrat that said he had put together the biggest voter fraud organization in history? They should get together and hang out. Probably have.
Click to expand...
If you have to use a slip of the tongue to make your case, it's usually a sign that the case wasn't very strong and that you should gracefully bow out of the discussion.

I mean, you may as well have said Who was the Democrat who claimed there were 57 states?

 
CPAC voter fraud speaker says there are "probably" people threatening to kill their grandfathers over absentee ballots: "OK Grandpa, if you don’t vote the way we want, you’re not going to get your insulin this afternoon."
Click to expand...
Hmmm.

I had not considered the potential for fraud among Woke, Murderous Grandchildren.  

May need to reevaluate.  

 
Sea Duck said:
If you have to use a slip of the tongue to make your case, it's usually a sign that the case wasn't very strong and that you should gracefully bow out of the discussion.

I mean, you may as well have said Who was the Democrat who claimed there were 57 states?
Click to expand...
Exactly.

 
Insein said:
Updating voting laws to make them more secure is not suppressing the vote.
Click to expand...
It is when the "updating" is done in a suppressing way :shrug:

Insein said:
I don't see any voting options being removed (aside from the Sunday one which will probably not pass if it's been there for years without a sufficient reason why).
Click to expand...
Then pay attention.  

Insein said:
What percentage of voters can't vote now because a Sunday option for early voting was removed?
Click to expand...
Don't know....I've never made a comment on this board regarding Sunday voting.  Ask those discussing it.

Insein said:
You are used to the mantra that any law change in relation to elections is "suppressing the vote" if it requires changes to the system.
Click to expand...
No...I'm not.  I'm using the "mantra" that laws changed in a manner to make it difficult to get ballots or get ballots returned easily is suppressing the vote.....definitely not ANY law change.  Probably read what I've posted rather than trying to fit me into some preconceived narrative you've already decided on.  Either that or just don't respond to me.  That'd probably be better.  

Insein said:
By that logic we could say the vote was "suppressed" here in PA as many counties suddenly changed voting machines this past election after decades of using the same tried and true methods. Many voters were confused and took a lot longer to make sure they voted correctly. Even then some didn't feel comfortable that their vote was cast correctly. Is that voter suppression in your opinion?
Click to expand...
If there were voters who felt their questions weren't properly answered as to how the process was going to work, I can absolutely see the argument that it's an attempt to suppress a vote.  If people didn't take the time to ask a question to get clarification that's on them.  I have no idea what the details were there in PA.  If you have a good source that covered the issues, I'd like to read about them.  My family is up there, didn't like the fact that people could vote by mail all of a sudden, but didn't express any of the confusion you suggest here.  They said it was pretty straight forward.  If they can figure it out......

 
You know what would be a super secure way to vote?  Everyone who wants to vote has to have an elected official vouch for their identity by writing and signing a sworn affidavit just before that person votes in front of them.  Then that voter has to give a fingerprint in their own blood on the voters roll.   This way, we can go back and verify by fingerprint and DNA to ensure that the voter and the elected official weren't lying.  You want secure vote, right? That's what matters most, right?

 
Insein said:
Only thing on that list that's debatable is closing down early voting on Sundays. Even then it's more likely because they can't get volunteers to come in on a Sunday consistently or perhaps it's being suggested by a religious person who is believes Sundays are holy days. Not my thing but that would not surprise me. But that's something they can all discuss and negotiate on. 

Everything else seems perfectly fine to suggest. Not sure where the problem is. A vast majority of people vote on a single day out of the year and they find a way to get there to get it done. If there's an extra exception that a person needs to vote early or vote by mail in, I'm sure they can go through the steps to ensure that their vote is counted and verified.
Click to expand...
Trying to eliminate Sunday voting is outright racist. 

>>The “Souls to the Polls” movement began in Florida during the 1990s. The concept was to organize caravans after church service on the Sunday prior to Election Day to transport Black congregants to early voting locations. By the early 2000s, the NAACP, Black denominations and other organizations had transformed “Souls to the Polls” into a national movement.<<

https://theconversation.com/the-black-church-has-been-getting-souls-to-the-polls-for-more-than-60-years-145996

 
The Z Machine said:
You know what would be a super secure way to vote?  Everyone who wants to vote has to have an elected official vouch for their identity by writing and signing a sworn affidavit just before that person votes in front of them.  Then that voter has to give a fingerprint in their own blood on the voters roll.   This way, we can go back and verify by fingerprint and DNA to ensure that the voter and the elected official weren't lying.  You want secure vote, right? That's what matters most, right?
Click to expand...
4 in 5 Americans support voter ID laws Gallup

Requiring all voters to provide photo identification at their voting

Favor: 80%

Oppose: 19%

Last year, Harvard Business School conducted a study analyzing voter turnout in the United States over an eight-year period. The researchers look at how voter ID laws affect the ability of minority Americans to turn out at the polls and cast their votes.

Harvard Study

The study revealed that “Strict ID laws have no significant negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any subgroup defined by age, gender, race, or party affiliation.”

Researchers also found that voter ID laws “do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites.” 

 
The Z Machine said:
You know what would be a super secure way to vote?  Everyone who wants to vote has to have an elected official vouch for their identity by writing and signing a sworn affidavit just before that person votes in front of them.  Then that voter has to give a fingerprint in their own blood on the voters roll.   This way, we can go back and verify by fingerprint and DNA to ensure that the voter and the elected official weren't lying.  You want secure vote, right? That's what matters most, right?
Click to expand...
Biometrics has always been a reasonable (and probably THE safest/securist) option, but guess which group just happens to be opposed to that  :lol:  

 
Philo Beddoe said:
Researchers also found that voter ID laws “do not decrease the participation of ethnic minorities relative to whites.” 
Click to expand...
I wonder if that is why they have moved on to stifling mail in voting, early voting, and shutting down polling sites in minority neighborhoods.

These are the kind of questions we'll never have the answer to. 

 
Sea Duck said:
If you have to use a slip of the tongue to make your case, it's usually a sign that the case wasn't very strong and that you should gracefully bow out of the discussion.

I mean, you may as well have said Who was the Democrat who claimed there were 57 states?
Click to expand...
I immediately thought Tommy Tuberville changed parties. 

 
Pretty good framing here:

Ezra Klein@ezraklein

While Democrats are debating the best way to make sure Republicans can be heard in the Senate, Republicans in the states are passing legislation meant to silence Democratic voters across the country.
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dawgtrails said:
Gerrymandering is such a scam.

There are:

5,299,096 Democrats registerd in FL.

5,188,520 Republicans registered in FL.

16 GOP, 11 Dems in the House. May become 21-8. 
Click to expand...
Every state is this way.  Illinois is currently 13-5, could well become 14-3.  Very few states are going to be proportional.  I would say in FL either Republicans are just doing that well with independents or some .independents are actually unregistered Republicans as they control the state government there.  Follow Dave Wasserman on Twitter if you want to see an analysis state by state of what each party in control can do with the new redistricting.  I agree it's a shame it's this way, leads to lots of safe districts and radical ideologies because the primary and appealing to the base is the only way to win these districts.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shula-holic said:
Every state is this way.  Illinois is currently 13-5, could well become 14-3.  Very few states are going to be proportional.  I would say in FL either Republicans are just doing that well with independents or some .independents are actually unregistered Republicans as they control the state government there.  Follow Dave Wasserman on Twitter if you want to see an analysis state by state of what each party in control can do with the new redistricting.  I agree it's a shame it's this way, leads to lots of safe districts and radical ideologies because the primary and appealing to the base is the only way to win these districts.  
Click to expand...
I agree that it is not a rep/dem thing. But IL has 3.5 million registered democrats compared to 2.4 million republicans. So while it is certainly skewed, it is skewed in the correct direction at least. 

 
dawgtrails said:
I agree that it is not a rep/dem thing. But IL has 3.5 million registered democrats compared to 2.4 million republicans. So while it is certainly skewed, it is skewed in the correct direction at least. 
Click to expand...
No doubt IL is a blue state.  I think FL numbers are probably more R.  Seems the state has been R held the last few cycles and got more red this past cycle.  I'd guess the reality is that some of those independents or unregistered voters are truly more R than independent in FL so I suspect the reality is that the majority of FL voters are actually slightly tilting Republican.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shula-holic said:
No doubt IL is a blue state.  I think FL numbers are probably more R.  Seems the state has been R held the last few cycles and got more red this past cycle.  I'd guess the reality is that some of those independents or unregistered voters are truly more R than independent in FL so I suspect the reality is that the majority of FL voters are actually slightly tilting Republican.
Click to expand...
The presidential results are 51% republican. That is probably reflective of the split.

 
Insein said:
Despite the obvious bias by the writer of that article, I didn't see anything wrong with what was being proposed. More security and scrutiny over how mail in ballots are handed out and how they should be accepted should be welcome to those that want free and fair elections. Especially since all it took in most states was a signature to be accepted. The address itself didn't even have to be the current address for the voter or even be real in some states. I would think everyone would agree that we want to verify that the person signing the ballot is the person casting the vote and that they're only doing it one time right?

Same with requiring an ID to vote. How hard is that? Most nations around the world require some form of ID to prove you are who you say you are and are registered to vote. There's nothing suppressive or restrictive about that at all. That's just basic election security.
Click to expand...
I have 2 photo ids. My drivers license and passport. What type of photo Id would those who don’t drive or travel to other countries have? I am ok with having a discussion about photo ids but I think it should be paid for by each state. I also have concerns that the elderly, poor or handicapped etc might find the process difficult.

I also think that each state should have no excuse absentee ballots for no other reason to help alleviate the problem of standing in long lines on Election Day.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dawgtrails said:
I agree that it is not a rep/dem thing. But IL has 3.5 million registered democrats compared to 2.4 million republicans. So while it is certainly skewed, it is skewed in the correct direction at least. 
Click to expand...
75 miles dictate the entire state.  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Axios: Democrats Fear MAGA Republican Kari Lake Could Be Arizona's Next Governor (10/21/22 01:52 PST)
Replies
18
Views
776
Snotbubbles
Snotbubbles
A
Republican Officials In New Mexico County Refuse To Certify Election Results
2
Replies
61
Views
1K
roadkill1292
roadkill1292
GordonGekko
Oregon’s Gubernatorial Battleground: Phil Knight's Big Nike Money Vs Extremist Identity Politics (10/23/22 12:29 PST)
Replies
4
Views
398
quick-hands
quick-hands

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top