GOP ballot bullshit

[gounion]

I'm pretty happy with the way my county handles elections. I know everyone on the staff, and they DO believe in making sure everyone has an easy time being able to vote, and not putting ANY bullshit restrictions or blocks in front of them, or tricks so they don't have to count their ballots.

They don't play the bullshit games other states do. It's soooo easy to register to vote and to make sure your registration is up to date. You can log on and see your ballot beforehand. The county even sends bi-partisan crews to local care homes to let everyone in them vote.

According to Politico, a federal appeals court overturned a PA state court that ruled that election officials couldn't count mail ballots where the voter forgot to write the date on the outside of the envelop, as long as the ballot was received on time.

Now why the FUCK would a judge say not to count it? It's just playing tricks.

Back in the day, I ran a number of union elections. We always did our level best to count the votes, as long as we could see the voter's intent. I remember on ballot where we had three ballots, and the mail voter was supposed to put the ballots into three blank envelopes, then put them into the bigger envelop with the voter info on separate tabs, and mail it. Well, one voter mailed each ballot separately. Well, we could tell that the voter just misunderstood the instructions. But heck, he spent his own money on the extra stamps (all return envelopes were postage paid). So, once we were done with all the mail ballots, we opened the three ballots, and without opening the folded ballots, we mixed them in with all the other ballots, ensuring the voter's privacy of their vote.

Why does the right make it as hard as possible to vote? Because they know the bigger the turnout, the worse it is for them.

They simply don't believe in the sanctity of the ballot. They don't believe in our democratic system.

[Glennfs]

If you were to change making it hard to vote to having voting standards you would be much closer to the truth.
Fact is the lower the standard the better for liberals. On voting and everything else. Standards are a liberals worse enemy

[ProfX]

The only standard there should be for voting is that the person is a citizen and is registered to vote in that voter district. And hasn't lost it for some reason (like currently being in federal prison).

There have been all kinds of attempts throughout history to put on extra hurdles. Poll taxes, literacy tests, grandfather clauses, can they sign their name, can they say how many jellybeans are in a jar. Up until the 1820s they needed to show a property deed. At the end of the day, while I certainly believe voting should be an informed decision, historically attempts to put restrictions on it have usually been for bad faith goals of group disenfranchisement.

On the question of methodology, and this ongoing strange rage against mail-in voting, all I can say is ... 5 states do all their elections SOLELY through mail-in voting, totally effectively, and with little or no voter fraud. It can be done - and securely and with integrity. You can fulminate against mail in voting all you want, I personally don't get why as a society we need to make it harder for disabled, elderly, or other people with limited mobility have a harder time voting.

[Motor City]

If you were to change making it hard to vote to having voting standards you would be much closer to the truth.
Fact is the lower the standard the better for liberals. On voting and everything else. Standards are a liberals worse enemy

Self serving standards to defeat the process

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSfTXaqo18o

gop and neoconservative democrats have become col Kurtz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BN3921owBQ

[carmenjonze]

If you were to change making it hard to vote to having voting standards you would be much closer to the truth.
Fact is the lower the standard the better for liberals. On voting and everything else. Standards are a liberals worse enemy

Whenever a white conservative speaks of these red state vote-suppression strategies in terms of "standards," it's just an old euphemism for "letting the niggers vote."

This is really classic 19th-20th c. white-supremacist disenfranchisement ideology.

Conservative whites of your state have an extremely nasty history of imposing this ideology. This whitesheet pointyhat wasn't even hiding it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Tillman - one of your governors.

Disenfranchising the African American: 1895 state constitutional convention

Throughout his time as governor, Tillman had sought a convention to rewrite South Carolina's Reconstruction-era constitution. His main purpose in doing so was to disenfranchise African Americans. They opposed Tillman's proposal, as did others, who had seen previous efforts to restrict the franchise rebound against white voters. Tillman was successful in getting the legislature to place a referendum for a constitutional convention on the November 1894 general election ballot.[111] It passed by 2,000 votes statewide, the narrow margin gained, according to Kantrowitz, most likely through fraud.[112] John Gary Evans was elected Tillman's successor as governor.[113]

Opponents sued in the courts to overturn the referendum result; they were unsuccessful. During the convention, Tillman hailed it as "a fitting capstone to the triumphal arch which the common people have erected to liberty, progress, and Anglo-Saxon civilization since 1890". To assure white unity, Tillman allowed the election of Conservatives as about a third of delegates. The convention assembled in Columbia in September 1895,[114] consisting of 112 Tillmanites, 42 Conservatives, and six African Americans.[115] Tillman called black disenfranchisement "the sole cause of our being here".[3]

Tillman was the dominant figure of the convention, chairing the Committee on the Rights of Suffrage, which was to craft language to accomplish the disenfranchisement. Constrained by the requirement of the federal Fifteenth Amendment that men of all races be allowed to vote, the committee sought language that though superficially nondiscriminatory would operate or could be used to take the vote from most African Americans.[116]

Tillman spoke to the convention on October 31. In addition to supporting the provisions of the draft document, he recalled 1876:

How did we recover our liberty? By fraud and violence. We tried to overcome the thirty thousand majority by honest methods, which was a mathematical impossibility. After we had borne these indignities for eight years life became worthless under such conditions. Under the leadership and inspiration of Mart[in] Gary ... we won the fight.[117]

The adopted provisions, which came into force after the new constitution was ratified by the convention in December 1895, set a maze of obstacles before prospective voters. Voters had to be a resident of the state two years, the county one year, and the precinct for four months. Many African Americans were itinerant laborers, and this provision disproportionately affected them. A poll tax had to be paid six months in advance of the election, in May when laborers had the least cash. Each registrant had to prove to the satisfaction of the county board of elections that he could read or write a section of the state constitution (in a literacy or comprehension test), or that he paid taxes on property valued at $300 or more. This allowed white registrars ample discretion to disenfranchise African Americans. Illiterate whites were shielded by the "understanding" clause, that allowed, until 1898, permanent registration to citizens who could "understand" the constitution when read to them. This also allowed officials great leeway to discriminate. Even if an African American maneuvered past all of these blocks, he still faced the manager of the polling place, who could demand proof he had paid all taxes owed—something difficult to show conclusively. Conviction of any of a long list of crimes that whites believed prevalent among African Americans was made the cause of permanent disenfranchisement, including bigamy, adultery, burglary, and arson. Convicted murderers not in prison had their franchise undisturbed.[118]

Tillman defended this on the floor of the Senate:

In my State there were 135,000 negro voters, or negroes of voting age, and some 90,000 or 95,000 white voters.... Now, I want to ask you, with a free vote and a fair count, how are you going to beat 135,000 by 95,000? How are you going to do it? You had set us an impossible task.

We did not disfranchise the negroes until 1895. Then we had a constitutional convention convened which took the matter up calmly, deliberately, and avowedly with the purpose of disfranchising as many of them as we could under the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments. We adopted the educational qualification as the only means left to us, and the negro is as contented and as prosperous and as well protected in South Carolina to-day as in any State of the Union south of the Potomac. He is not meddling with politics, for he found that the more he meddled with them the worse off he got. As to his "rights"—I will not discuss them now. We of the South have never recognized the right of the negro to govern white men, and we never will.... I would to God the last one of them was in Africa and that none of them had ever been brought to our shores.[119]

No wonder you talk like this about voting. :problem:

[gounion]

If you were to change making it hard to vote to having voting standards you would be much closer to the truth.
Fact is the lower the standard the better for liberals. On voting and everything else. Standards are a liberals worse enemy

So you’re saying you would deny these people their vote. Got it.

[Glennfs]

So you’re saying you would deny these people their vote. Got it.

No I deny nobady their vote I just think we should have standards. For example I believe early voting is way out of control. But, you are fine with weeks of early voting.

[gounion]

No I deny nobady their vote I just think we should have standards. For example I believe early voting is way out of control. But, you are fine with weeks of early voting.

Should those people have been allowed to vote? Yes or no?

I think it’s started to come down to a standard of two weeks. That’s reasonable.

[Glennfs]

Should those people have been allowed to vote? Yes or no?

I think it’s started to come down to a standard of two weeks. That’s reasonable.

Of course what a ridiculus question. However we need standards. 2 weeks would be perfect but I doubt it will happen. Also no party should be able to know where the votes have come from prior to them being counted.

[gounion]

Of course what a ridiculus question. However we need standards. 2 weeks would be perfect but I doubt it will happen. Also no party should be able to know where the votes have come from prior to them being counted.

You haven't answered the question. Should the people's vote counted in this case? Yes or no?

[Libertas]

Speaking of GOP and bullshit and the URGENT situation we are in

https://politicalwire.com/2022/05/22/tr ... civil-war/

You are here: Home / Trump Legacy / Trump Shares Post Predicting Civil War
Trump Shares Post Predicting Civil War
May 22, 2022 at 9:16 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 109 Comments

Former President Donald Trump shared a post on his social media platform that appeared to propose or predict a civil war in the U.S.

Like I said a year ago before Jan 6 and was screamed at here by a few, MAGA and trump will kill thousands of us when they can.

[Glennfs]

You haven't answered the question. Should the people's vote counted in this case? Yes or no?

What part of course don't you understand.
Yes they should be able to vote as long as they are legally permitted to do so.
and
That is one of the dumbest questions you.ve ever written. On the other hand a bullshit question belongs on a bullshit thread.

[ProfX]

I haven't seen stats on it, but early voting in FL, is generally 2 weeks. I haven't seen many very good arguments against it. I guess there is the one where if some sudden late-breaking news on a candidate comes out in that period right before the election, you vote without knowing it. But geez, elections in the U.S. are too ridiculously long, anyway. People are hanging out in Iowa and New Hampshire 2 years early. What is it you can't possibly know about a candidate that doesn't come out until 2 weeks before? I do agree no information about early returns in early voting should be released until after the election, though.

I wasn't aware of many states having a period longer than that, but if someone has some actual information instead of rhetoric....

[gounion]

What part of course don't you understand.
Yes they should be able to vote as long as they are legally permitted to do so.
and
That is one of the dumbest questions you.ve ever written. On the other hand a bullshit question belongs on a bullshit thread.

It's not dumb. You still haven't answered it. The LAW says they can't. The court intervened, and said they could.

Where do YOU stand?

[carmenjonze]

No I deny nobady their vote I just think we should have standards.

Your “standards” are the same “standards” as the disenfranchising conservative whites that preceded you.

Too bad you guys weren’t so concerned about “standards” when you guys implemented grandfather clauses to benefit yourselves at our expense.

You guys have never cared about “standards” in voting unless it’s to restrict access to the ballot by others, especially African Americans, whose voting bloc remains the most significant barrier to your vicious domestic policies.

You also apply the vote-suppression mentality to Latinos, whom a lot of you simply consider to be “illegals” used by the Dems. This rhetoric, too, is from post-Reconstruction white conservatism.

But hey, at least you guys no longer go out night riding people just for trying to register in the greatest democracy in the world, ever

For example I believe early voting is way out of control. But, you are fine with weeks of early voting.

Well you believe a lot of socially-perverted, heinous things, so why should anyone care about your so-called standards when it comes to voting? They’re out of the post-Reconstruction era.

White conservatives are proven to have literally LETHAL “beliefs” about free access to the franchise. Your history of legalized voter suppression over the decades poisons this topic still in 2022, because you still retain the same ideas.

Why, it’s as if you guys can’t come up with anything original, ever.

[carmenjonze]

It's not dumb. You still haven't answered it. The LAW says they can't. The court intervened, and said they could.

Some of the most infamous and destructive anti-Black laws ever imposed by conservative whites have been about voting. Like Glennfs does to this very day, they were marketed as “standards.”

White cons routinely mass-murdered and killed people over it and sent thousands to jail for protesting for the right. Ohhh but they’re so concerned about “standards,” tho. :problem:

[carmenjonze]

When a conservative white person utters the phrase “they should be able to vote as long as they are legally permitted to do so,” be prepared to defend yourself.

This is the reason Fannie Lou Hamer kept a shotgun in her house, and why groups like the Deacons for Defense and Justice had the backing of MLK. Legal vote suppression is so important to conservative whites, they killed for it.

[gounion]

Tell us Glenn what those standards should be.

[Libertas]

When a conservative white person utters the phrase “they should be able to vote as long as they are legally permitted to do so,” be prepared to defend yourself.

This is the reason Fannie Lou Hamer kept a shotgun in her house, and why groups like the Deacons for Defense and Justice had the backing of MLK. Legal vote suppression is so important to conservative whites, they killed for it.

There is no voter fraud other than a couple here and there and ALL of those voted twice for trump or voted for trump in states they couldnt, etc.

The stats on this are ridiculous that ANYONE would ever utter anything about "as long as you are legally allowed"...so con, what you are saying is the Woman carrying her two small children on her back, thru treacherous rivers and extreme hot mountains, to come into America, legally or not, risks her life to get here and THEN decides to risk it ALL and vote illegally? Do you think ANY immigrant in that situation has EVER done that?

You make me SICK

Not to mention that Woman who came here has worked harder just to be here than any of us INCLUDING YOU will ever do.

[carmenjonze]

There is no voter fraud other than a couple here and there and ALL of those voted twice for trump or voted for trump in states they couldnt, etc.

All of them.

Conservatives can't win unless they cheat.

The stats on this are ridiculous that ANYONE would ever utter anything about "as long as you are legally allowed"...so con, what you are saying is the Woman carrying her two small children on her back, thru treacherous rivers and extreme hot mountains, to come into America, legally or not, risks her life to get here and THEN decides to risk it ALL and vote illegally? Do you think ANY immigrant in that situation has EVER done that?

You make me SICK

Not to mention that Woman who came here has worked harder just to be here than any of us INCLUDING YOU will ever do.

Yes he really believes this.

Conservative whites have been taught that the immigrant woman with the little kids working an under-the-table sh#tty job cleaning their filthy houses, looking after their miserable children, fending off sexual abuse and rape attempts by the perverted Strom Thurmond impregnators of the house, is only here for the Democrats to tell them how to vote.

This is how stupid these white supremacists like Glennfs think we nonwhites and/or recent immigrants are.

Here he is defending great replacement theory and old-school eugenicist anti-immigrationism. viewtopic.php?p=25222#p25222

[Tucker Carlson] was specifically speaking about how the democratic party wants free thinkers who are on elected or leadership positions replaced with people like you.
Who never question or oppose anything put forth by the left.

People died to get a voting system like this country's. It wasn't just African Americans who died to get it, it was a whole lot of other people. They died because conservative whites killed them.

Meanwhile, men like this aren't even embarassed to hide their contempt for the American franchise, because they can't legally limit the vote to white property-owning males only (complete with actual people included as "the property.")

Conservatives have such a low opinion of what this country has thanks to peoples' sacrifices. They have such a low opinion of themselves as offspring of immigrants, so they crap all over the latest immigrants.

African Americans and Native Americans have been watching these people do this weird thing to themselves for centuries.