Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

MLB moves All-Star game in response to GA voter laws


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

The point is if these rights are supposed to be guaranteed to everyone then making it more difficult to exercise those rights is a form of taking them away. Especially after an election that had a record turnout out that showed little to no fraud. 

The rights are guaranteed.  My voting rights are here and I show my ID.  I'm not sure why signing a card is now deemed "more difficult".  Sorry I don't accept that. 

And when you have no controls in place like ID or signature match how are you to ever know if there is fraud?  Of course you won't be able to show fraud when you don't match ID or signature.  That's a self fulfilling prophecy.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FairWarning said:

Should sports leagues, trade shows, conventions, etc start pulling out  to force states to be like another state?  

Honestly - I thought the conservatives fought for corporations to have a political voice in Citizens United.

 

How corporations, or groups, or leagues use that voice is really down to them, and what they perceive as their best interest.

 

But, states are free to ignore MLB, or other corporations when they try to exert pressure.  And, lets face it - if the public sides with the state - then the state feels no pressure.  If the public sides with the corporations - maybe the states should listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

 Especially after an election that had a record turnout out that showed little to no fraud. 

That's actually a good point. Why have all these voter changes when we just had an election with the most voters ever. Seems that's the way the people like/want it to be done.

  • Like 3
  • Thinking 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shula-holic said:

The rights are guaranteed.  My voting rights are here and I show my ID.  I'm not sure why signing a card is now deemed "more difficult".  Sorry I don't accept that. 

And when you have no controls in place like ID or signature match how are you to ever know if there is fraud?  Of course you won't be able to show fraud when you don't match ID or signature.  That's a self fulfilling prophecy.

What kind of fraud are you talking about?

A person has to register to vote.

When you actually go to vote - you have to give the name of a registered voter in that precinct.  You can't simply walk up, give a random name, and then vote.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Sinn Fein said:

What kind of fraud are you talking about?

A person has to register to vote.

When you actually go to vote - you have to give the name of a registered voter in that precinct.  You can't simply walk up, give a random name, and then vote.

 

 

No kidding.  But how do you know the person showing up is that same person?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Shula-holic said:

No kidding.  But how do you know the person showing up is that same person?

You don't know.

But there are two mitigating factors - its a prison-worthy crime to vote illegally.  (I seem to recall the case of a woman in Texas who voted illegally - used a provisional ballot as a felon I think - she ended up getting 5 years.)

 

Looked it up: 

On Election Day 2016, Crystal Mason went to vote after her mother insisted that she make her voice heard in the presidential election. When her name didn’t appear on official voting rolls at her polling place in Tarrant County, Texas, she filled out a provisional ballot, not thinking anything of it.

Ms. Mason’s ballot was never officially counted or tallied because she was ineligible to vote: She was on supervised release after serving five years for tax fraud. Nonetheless, that ballot has wrangled her into a lengthy appeals process after a state district court sentenced her to five years in prison for illegal voting, as she was a felon on probation when she cast her ballot.

Ms. Mason maintains that she didn’t know she was ineligible to vote.

 

The second mitigating factor - a single fraudulent voter will have no impact, and thus is not worth anyone's time or effort to even attempt.  To have a meaningful impact - you would need hundreds of voters - and its difficult to find hundreds of people willing to go to jail, and also find hundreds of registered voters who are not going to vote.

 

This is simply a non-issue.

 

Now, if you want to talk about hacking, and computerized vote manipulation, and ensuring that does not take place - I think you have a very firm ground in looking for new regulations/requirements.  Wasting all this time, money and effort on an issue that does not exist - is simply that - a waste of everyone's time at best, and voter suppression at worst.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

The rights are guaranteed.  My voting rights are here and I show my ID.  I'm not sure why signing a card is now deemed "more difficult".  Sorry I don't accept that. 

And when you have no controls in place like ID or signature match how are you to ever know if there is fraud?  Of course you won't be able to show fraud when you don't match ID or signature.  That's a self fulfilling prophecy.

It is lowering the number of places to vote and drop off ballots. Lowering the amount of time to vote. Showing ID everytime even after verifying your ID the first time.  

Edited by msudaisy26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Here in Florida your signature isn't verified against the one you used to register to vote.  It's verified against the paper you sign requesting the ballot in the first place.  Maybe that's the same where fish is...not sure, but in my state what he's saying is correct.

Let me see if I can help you:

2 hours ago, -fish- said:

I don't request an absentee ballot, because we only vote by mail and everyone that's registered gets a ballot in the mail.   I couldn't show someone an ID if I wanted to, because there is nowhere to do it.  So a federal voter ID requirement would never make sense. 

It makes the process much smoother, and there is zero evidence of voter fraud since it was instituted. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tonydead said:

Let me see if I can help you:

 

Thanks...hadn't read up much.

So he's vote by mail only....don't see the point in IDs there either.  That as the be-all-end-all that some want it to be wouldn't make the slightest difference to him.  It wouldn't for me here in Florida either. :shrug: 

Everything should be vote by mail or online IMO.  If people insist on "in person" use biometrics like a fingerprint.  This obsession with IDs is weird on a number of levels starting with the fact that the "fraud" we experience in our elections wouldn't be altered all that much by having an ID.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

You don't know.

But there are two mitigating factors - its a prison-worthy crime to vote illegally.

I didn't have to go past the second sentence because the first two sentences contradict each other.  

If you don't know you don't get caught, and it's not lost on me that Ms. Mason isn't an example of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tonydead said:

I didn't have to go past the second sentence because the first two sentences contradict each other.  

If you don't know you don't get caught, and it's not lost on me that Ms. Mason isn't an example of this.

:shrug:

Do you have any examples of people fraudulently voting by using someone else's registration?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Thanks...hadn't read up much.

So he's vote by mail only....don't see the point in IDs there either.  That as the be-all-end-all that some want it to be wouldn't make the slightest difference to him. 

See this is the problem people have with your postings. There were only 20 or so posts between yours and had you read them you you might understand that his signature is verified or his vote doesn't count.  That is equivalent to voter ID, it verifies the identity of the person casting the ballot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FairWarning said:

Most every Chicago election.  

I actually thought of Cook County - maybe somewhere in Louisiana - but my basic understanding of that level of fraud is that it involves actual ballot stuffing - not engaging people to vote on behalf of others.  Simply adding ballots to the count - with out attribution to any voters.

 

I don't think people appreciate just how big a group you would have to use to engage in the type of voter fraud people claim they are worried about.  Anytime you have a conspiracy of >1 you are exponentially higher risk of getting caught.  If you have hundreds of fraudulent voters - its a certainty that you would be caught eventually- if not immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Here in Florida your signature isn't verified against the one you used to register to vote.  It's verified against the paper you sign requesting the ballot in the first place.  Maybe that's the same where fish is...not sure, but in my state what he's saying is correct.

This is also false.  Link. Do you just make this stuff up?

Quote

During the 2018 midterm elections, 32,176 total vote-by-mail ballots were tossed out due to signature mismatch in Florida. A voter’s signature on their vote-by-mail ballot must match a single signature on file, usually from a driver’s license or state ID.

They are supposed to verify your signature twice, once when you sign the form to request your ballot and again when you turn in your ballot. 

Edited by tonydead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shula-holic said:

That's all this is really about.  And honestly, if this was any state other than GA who flipped in the last election and flipped control of the Senate, along with Stacey Abrams, this would be a non story and the game would be happening as always.  From the national level and Biden, Schumer, etc. this is more about HR-1 and trying to justify it.

:yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

The way I read IK, it seems like his view is that democratic governments only have an obligation to make voting reasonably accessible so that it isn't "too hard" for people to vote.  Obviously people can disagree about where that threshold line is. But my reading of IK is that governments are free to monkey around with voting requirements for basically any reason as long as they stay above that threshold line.

(snip)

IK seems to just want to talk about these laws in the abstract, without really discussing intent.  As long as a law doesn't make it "too hard" to vote it's fine, and the Georgia law doesn't make it too hard to vote in his estimation.  So it doesn't really matter why Georgia did this, as long as the final law is generally OK.

A few of my highly educated and brilliant colleagues created a situation that forced me to drop everything this afternoon to deal with it, so my apologies for vanishing off the face of the earth after you posted a nice reply.  Just chiming in to say that this is a very well-stated summary of where I'm coming from.  I appreciate it.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I actually thought of Cook County - maybe somewhere in Louisiana - but my basic understanding of that level of fraud is that it involves actual ballot stuffing - not engaging people to vote on behalf of others.  Simply adding ballots to the count - with out attribution to any voters.

 

I don't think people appreciate just how big a group you would have to use to engage in the type of voter fraud people claim they are worried about.  Anytime you have a conspiracy of >1 you are exponentially higher risk of getting caught.  If you have hundreds of fraudulent voters - its a certainty that you would be caught eventually- if not immediately.

Actually its more  dead people kept on the voting rolls.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, msudaisy26 said:

It is lowering the number of places to vote and drop off ballots. Lowering the amount of time to vote. Showing ID everytime even after verifying your ID the first time.  

Can you tell me how many dropboxes were in Georgia prior to the election of November 2020 which was altered due to the pandemic?  I don't think they've rolled back some previous standard but I'm open to hearing if I'm wrong there. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

Can you tell me how many dropboxes were in Georgia prior to the election of November 2020 which was altered due to the pandemic?  I don't think they've rolled back some previous standard but I'm open to hearing if I'm wrong there. 

I asked this question previously.  I don't think we got a straight answer other than, "RACISM!!!".

The point being that the left somehow thinks 94 is the new standard when previously it was most likely a LOT lower and there were no issues.  It's absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BladeRunner said:

I asked this question previously.  I don't think we got a straight answer other than, "RACISM!!!".

The point being that the left somehow thinks 94 is the new standard when previously it was most likely a LOT lower and there were no issues.  It's absurd.

I dont think you got that as a response either.  Why the misrepresentation of what people have actually said?

Its not all one issue...but a combo of both the original proposals and multiple parts of the law that people have a problem with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe Biden, the Uniter, continues to compare the recent Georgia voting law to Jim Crow law.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

And he is wrong in wrong in doing so.

Probably the biggest shock from his presidency so far hasd been the lack of unity.  This was something he spoke a lot about, really haven't seen much of it at al.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

Probably the biggest shock from his presidency so far hasd been the lack of unity.  This was something he spoke a lot about, really haven't seen much of it at al.

He’s done absolutely nothing to bring the country together, all campaign schtick and nothing more. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FairWarning said:

Probably the biggest shock from his presidency so far hasd been the lack of unity.  This was something he spoke a lot about, really haven't seen much of it at al.

You would think that Republicans would unify with Democrats over Covid aid and the infrastructure. But they haven’t. In truth it’s very difficult to have unity when one side believes that the election had an illegitimate result (in fairness this was true in early 2017 as well.) 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

And he is wrong in wrong in doing so.

Finally we agree on something...😃 you made my night and thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

You would think that Republicans would unify with Democrats over Covid aid and the infrastructure. But they haven’t. In truth it’s very difficult to have unity when one side believes that the election had an illegitimate result (in fairness this was true in early 2017 as well.) 

Here’s an idea that I read about recently.  Since we will take in countless immigrant children over the next 4 years, let’s remove the pork in infrastructure bill and add in money for immigrant integration policies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Here’s an idea that I read about recently.  Since we will take in countless immigrant children over the next 4 years, let’s remove the pork in infrastructure bill and add in money for immigrant integration policies. 

Or at least just refer to it as the “Infrastructure” Bill going forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stlrams said:

Here’s an idea that I read about recently.  Since we will take in countless immigrant children over the next 4 years, let’s remove the pork in infrastructure bill and add in money for immigrant integration policies. 

I could totally get on board with this. Depending on the details. 
See? You and me, we’re not the problem. Because even though I disagree with you much of the time, we both (and almost everyone reading this) have the same goal: doing whatever needs to be done to improve the USA, make us healthy and prosperous, etc. 

The problem is many of the politicians on both sides have a different goal: getting power, maintaining power, increasing power. Not all of them of course, but far too many of them. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Denver mayor really rubbing salt in the wound :lmao: LINK

“By some estimates, this event will mean more than $100 million impact to our local economy,” Denver Mayor Michael Hancock said during a news conference. “That’s incredibly good news for our small businesses, our restaurants, our hotels and our workers who have struggled and suffered through this pandemic.” Hancock said.

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, zoonation said:

Exactly.  They are not preventing anyone from voting.  Getting a current ID is not that hard.  But many won't do it.

Abrams team:  "you coming down to the polls this weekend to vote?"

"yeah my mom is going so I guess I'll go too."

Abrams team: "awesome! do you have a current ID?"

"No, we moved last year and I haven't got around to it."

Abrams team: "Well, you need to go get that sorted out before you can vote."

"No thanks, I'm good."

Abrams team:  "well, you can still vote if you bring a bill with your current address on it."

"I don't pay the bills, my parents do."

 

How did he get his ID in the last state? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Denver mayor really rubbing salt in the wound :lmao: LINK

“By some estimates, this event will mean more than $100 million impact to our local economy,” Denver Mayor Michael Hancock said during a news conference. “That’s incredibly good news for our small businesses, our restaurants, our hotels and our workers who have struggled and suffered through this pandemic.” Hancock said.

You know as an aside it’s kind of amazing the economic impact of a single game. It’s one that I almost never watch and I’m a pretty big baseball fan. I don’t watch the NBA all star game or Pro Bowl either. 
That being said, Coors Field makes the Home Run Derby really intriguing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

Can you tell me how many dropboxes were in Georgia prior to the election of November 2020 which was altered due to the pandemic?  I don't think they've rolled back some previous standard but I'm open to hearing if I'm wrong there. 

I don't know that and they probably did roll out more drop boxes for Covid. Guess what... It came with a great side effect. Most votes ever.  So why go back to the old way if something worked?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Denver mayor really rubbing salt in the wound :lmao: LINK

“By some estimates, this event will mean more than $100 million impact to our local economy,” Denver Mayor Michael Hancock said during a news conference. “That’s incredibly good news for our small businesses, our restaurants, our hotels and our workers who have struggled and suffered through this pandemic.” Hancock said.

I personally can't blame him for running with the ball here.  Some of the benefits he's touting are the very ones we were debating how much the people in Atlanta truly lost just the other day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, timschochet said:

I could totally get on board with this. Depending on the details. 
See? You and me, we’re not the problem. Because even though I disagree with you much of the time, we both (and almost everyone reading this) have the same goal: doing whatever needs to be done to improve the USA, make us healthy and prosperous, etc. 

The problem is many of the politicians on both sides have a different goal: getting power, maintaining power, increasing power. Not all of them of course, but far too many of them. 

I agree that in the long run it would be money better spent.  Smarter people than me can come up with a plan but vocational education, schooling that promotes English etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Denver mayor really rubbing salt in the wound :lmao: LINK

“By some estimates, this event will mean more than $100 million impact to our local economy,” Denver Mayor Michael Hancock said during a news conference. “That’s incredibly good news for our small businesses, our restaurants, our hotels and our workers who have struggled and suffered through this pandemic.” Hancock said.

Moving all star game to an area that’s 76% white in Denver area with more restrictive voting laws from Georgia which has 51% black population in Atlanta area.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stlrams said:

I agree that in the long run it would be money better spent.  Smarter people than me can come up with a plan but vocational education, schooling that promotes English etc..

I particularly agree with your last point. As you know I’m very much pro-immigrant and pro-undocumented immigrant (perhaps more than anyone else in this forum), but one place that I part ways with Latino activists is their insistence that Spanish receive equal standing with English in the public schools that these students attend, I believe that when they push for this they are hurting the interests of those children, who would benefit much more if they were forced to immerse in an English only environment. 

My own father arrived in this country at age 14 speaking no English, and was forced to attend an all English speaking high school. By the time he attended college he spoke English fluently because he was forced to. If he hadn’t been, I think his chances at an economically successful life in this country would have been severely limited. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, msudaisy26 said:

I don't know that and they probably did roll out more drop boxes for Covid. Guess what... It came with a great side effect. Most votes ever.  So why go back to the old way if something worked?

If you don't know then why would you say Georgia law is now suddenly draconian and taking away people's rights?  I think to make that statement you'd have to know the answer.  Otherwise this seems like you are selecting Georgia due to it being the state that happened to be the tipping point in the Senate and flip from red to blue in the Presidential election.  There were never these concerns prior and the law they have passed appears to have added dropboxes to pre-Covid numbers and even required counties to have them whereas in the past they didn't. 

Again, if I'm factually wrong on the dropboxes in Georgia prior to Covid, I stand to be corrected.  But if not, and people were fine somehow with Georgia law before, this seems like there has to be another motive such as HR-1.  

Are you also interested in punishing New York and Alabama since our laws are more restrictive?  Again, if not, then why not?

 

 

Edited by Shula-holic
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

It is lowering the number of places to vote and drop off ballots. Lowering the amount of time to vote. Showing ID everytime even after verifying your ID the first time.  

There are not less places to vote. They lowered the num ber of drop boxes because Covid won't be a thing in the next elections as it was in 2020 and therefore are not needed.  There is MORE time to vote now than before. Showing ID is required to get a mail in ballot where before you only needed a signature. This was not only a poor form of verification but very time consuming for clerks to have to compare hundreds of thousands of signatures to original voting applications that may be years old.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

If you don't know then why would you say Georgia law is now suddenly draconian and taking away people's rights?  I think to make that statement you'd have to know the answer.  Otherwise this seems like0 you are selecting Georgia due to it being the state that happened to be the tipping point in the Senate and flip from red to blue in the Presidential election.  There were never these concerns prior and the law they have passed appears to have added dropboxes to pre-Covid numbers and even required counties to have them whereas in the past they didn't. 

Again, if I'm factually wrong on the dropboxes in Georgia prior to Covid, I stand to be corrected.  But if not, and people were fine somehow with Georgia law before, this seems like there has to be another motive such as HR-1.  

Are you also interested in punishing New York and Alabama since our laws are more restrictive?  Again, if not, then why not?

 

 

I never said that. I commented on your trust and others trust taking away rights because people didn't prioritize voting the way you and I do. You have moved thr goal posts all the way to this point. 

Because I don't know every state's voting laws and don't have the time to learn them all or really want too. I also don't think it is reasonable to ask anyone to know them all or have outrage about everything. Just because Georgia is subject doesn't mean I am not against things in New York or Alabama. I also don't have to bring up everything wrong in every state. 

However, if they are restricted for dumb reasons then yes I am against it. No matter who it benefits. 

More people voting is good. More people active is good. I also support any person , group of people,  business or corporations  right to take their business else where of they don't like rules they set or follow. I don't care if it is something as small as a personal boycott of a pizza place or an entire organization boycotting a state or country because of their laws/practices. It is our rights as Americans. 

 

Edited by msudaisy26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, msudaisy26 said:

I never said that. I commented on your trust and others trust taking away rights because people didn't prioritize voting the way you and I do. You have moved thr goal posts all the way to this point. 

Because I don't know every state's voting laws and don't have the time to learn them all or really want too. 

However, if they are restricted for dumb reasons then yes I am against it. No matter who it benefits. 

More people voting is good. More people active is good. I also support any person , group of people,  business or corporation right to take their business else where of they don't like rules they set or follow. I don't care if it is something as small as a personal boycott of a pizza place or an entire organization boycotting a state or country because of their laws/practices. It is our rights as Americans. 

 

Taking away rights is a very heavy statement in my opinion.  That's kind of like calling someone racist or a bigot, it's an awful accusation.  Maybe you disagree but I feel pretty strongly about that.

I merely asked you to back up your accusation about the state of Georgia removing rights from people.  If you're making the accusation, to me you should be able to contrast what they did before when everything was ok, or at least not to the point of problematic enough for all this rancor, say 2016, to this law and how this is worse.  If you complained about Georgia in 2016 prior to all this then I think that's sufficient to show consistency.  If you didn't though, in my opinion it's reasonable to ask you what is different about this law from 2016 law that takes away people's rights.  That's not moving the goalposts, that's simply asking you to justify a statement, a statement that is a hefty accusation.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, msudaisy26 said:

I don't agree that your trust or anyone's trust should affect anyone's rights. No matter how little they prioritize that right. 

 

2 minutes ago, Shula-holic said:

Taking away rights is a very heavy statement in my opinion.  That's kind of like calling someone racist or a bigot, it's an awful accusation.  Maybe you disagree but I feel pretty strongly about that.

I merely asked you to back up your accusation about the state of Georgia removing rights from people.  If you're making the accusation, to me you should be able to contrast what they did before when everything was ok, or at least not to the point of problematic enough for all this rancor, say 2016, to this law and how this is worse.  If you complained about Georgia in 2016 prior to all this then I think that's sufficient to show consistency.  If you didn't though, in my opinion it's reasonable to ask you what is different about this law from 2016 law that takes away people's rights.  That's not moving the goalposts, that's simply asking you to justify a statement, a statement that is a hefty accusation.

Here is my first post. Get offended all you want. You brought us here.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

You would think that Republicans would unify with Democrats over Covid aid and the infrastructure. But they haven’t. In truth it’s very difficult to have unity when one side believes that the election had an illegitimate result (in fairness this was true in early 2017 as well.) 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/joe-biden-vows-to-unite-america-as-president/ar-BB1aNak3

 

“I pledge to be a president who does not seek to divide, but unify, who doesn’t see red states and blue states, but only sees the United States,”

  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...