Jump to content

Voting suppression drive by Republican party


Recommended Posts

After the 2020 presidential election the Republican party initiated a program of tightening election legislation in the states that it controls. I'm less interested in what it plays directly into Trump's "stolen election" agenda that is a deliberate lie not confirmed by any facts and thrown out of dozens of courts, however it does confirm his grip on the party. An open, modern and constitutional party would have examined the causes of the defeat, attempted to learn lessons and make positive changes. The Trump's party tacitly accepted the lie and started tweaking with the elections.

More interesting is how regular, rank and file Republicans explain and justify it to themselves? How more opportunities to vote, as long as it correct and secure, can be wrong, in this century? Why arbitrary, difficult to understand and justify to an objective, non-partisan observer restrictions like limiting voting on Sundays (Texas)?

Brennan Center for Justice tracked electoral changes in 14 states with 22 laws restricting election access in some way passed and more in the pipe. This can't be a coincidence. This is a concerted effort, a campaign.

"Election" is not a word, it is a key and critical democratic institution. In this century even dictatorships strive to keep a facade of legitimacy via some sort of "election". The instruments they use is limiting access to vote; and manipulating with the the results of the vote. Both have been tried and are being tried by Republican party now. And if the institution of election is eroded and degraded by the partisan efforts to the point of meaninglessness, what would be the effect on the democracy, even if it helps to win this one "election"?

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, myata said:

After the 2020 presidential election the Republican party initiated a program of tightening election legislation in the states that it controls. I'm less interested in what it plays directly into Trump's "stolen election" agenda that is a deliberate lie not confirmed by any facts and thrown out of dozens of courts, however it does confirm his grip on the party. An open, modern and constitutional party would have examined the causes of the defeat, attempted to learn lessons and make positive changes. The Trump's party tacitly accepted the lie and started tweaking with the elections.

More interesting is how regular, rank and file Republicans explain and justify it to themselves? How more opportunities to vote, as long as it correct and secure, can be wrong, in this century? Why arbitrary, difficult to understand and justify to an objective, non-partisan observer restrictions like limiting voting on Sundays (Texas)?

Brennan Center for Justice tracked electoral changes in 14 states with 22 laws restricting election access in some way passed and more in the pipe. This can't be a coincidence. This is a concerted effort, a campaign.

"Election" is not a word, it is a key and critical democratic institution. In this century even dictatorships strive to keep a facade of legitimacy via some sort of "election". The instruments they use is limiting access to vote; and manipulating with the the results of the vote. Both have been tried and are being tried by Republican party now. And if the institution of election is eroded and degraded by the partisan efforts to the point of meaninglessness, what would be the effect on the democracy, even if it helps to win this one "election"?

 

I'm hoping this will backfire.  If I knew some party was taking steps to ensure I wouldn't vote, I'd get there from my deathbed if I had to.

They'll claim an election is rigged if they lose one, of course, but it does seem that the more insane their caterwauling becomes, the more the party is able to find some real Republicans.  Eventually the RINOs will find themselves at Mar-a-Lago telling buffet guests how they were all ripped off while a band waits impatiently for them to **** off.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The Republicans are right....dead people, illegals, and felons should not be able to vote in elections.    Democrats disagree....

Well there isn't a single fact to back these claims as far as I know at least so what should they be called? And can a democracy be built and last, on that word?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not pro-Democrat in any way, and couldn't even always tell the principal difference between the two, isn't it though indicative in itself how partisan motives make some disagree on seemingly obvious matters such as open and free election where every citizen has a reasonable opportunity to vote? If and when the differences becomes more pronounced and important than the common and shared, isn't it the end of the shared no matter how it's justified and rationalized?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, myata said:

Well there isn't a single fact to back these claims as far as I know at least so what should they be called? And can a democracy be built and last, on that word?

 

There are documented instances to back these claims.   I have no problem with "suppressing" illegal votes, corrupt vote counts, mail fraud, etc.

Here is one of my favs:

Quote

A Canadian citizen who lives in Cheektowaga was accused Thursday of voting in more than 20 elections in the United States while illegally living here.

 

Shirley Anne Conners, 62, was arrested Thursday on making a false claim to U.S. citizenship to vote, according to the U.S. attorney’s office.

https://buffalonews.com/news/local/canadian-woman-accused-of-voting-in-more-than-20-u-s-elections/article_a0274a1e-149f-5364-a134-a12501095e29.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, myata said:

.... If and when the differences becomes more pronounced and important than the common and shared, isn't it the end of the shared no matter how it's justified and rationalized?

 

Political parties emphasize the differences over the shared by definition for political advantage.   Example: promises of election reform in Canada when nowhere after the Liberals returned to power.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Political parties emphasize the differences over the shared by definition for political advantage.   Example: promises of election reform in Canada when nowhere after the Liberals returned to power.   

There's a natural limit to how far partisanship can be taken. Democracy will cease to exist and cannot exist if and when the elections, judiciary and justice system and other institutions start serving partisan interests. There's any number of examples of that in the world, and hardly anything new can be found there.

What is the meaning of an election if I only get to make the rules and decide on the results, like dicators and autocrats do? If Trumps wishes came true, institutions acted in partisan interests and changed the results of an election on groundless claims, plainly speaking, lies, would it still be a democracy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, myata said:

What is the meaning of an election if I only get to make the rules and decide on the results, like dicators and autocrats do? If Trumps wishes came true, institutions acted in partisan interests and changed the results of an election on groundless claims, plainly speaking, lies, would it still be a democracy?

 

The promises and failures of "democracy" existed long before Trump, and invoking his ideology and supporters only perpetuates the divide.   The U.S. is not a pure democracy (and neither is Canada)....by design.

Elections have been subjected to over-counts, under-counts, recounts, spoiled ballots, voter fraud, bribery, etc. since the very beginning.   There is no immaculate democracy...anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The promises and failures of "democracy" existed long before Trump, and invoking his ideology and supporters only perpetuates the divide.   The U.S. is not a pure democracy (and neither is Canada)....by design.

Elections have been subjected to over-counts, under-counts, recounts, spoiled ballots, voter fraud, bribery, etc. since the very beginning.   There is no immaculate democracy...anywhere.

myata is wrong anyways

autocrats don't decide the results & rules, those are all kept in place

what autocrats do is divide & conquer

 the Roman Emperors were not officially in charge, they were simply Princeps Civitatis, "First Citizens"

Imperator was a military rank, "Commander-in-Chief",  but they did not write rules nor decide results

it was all the manipulation of the masses by spectacle, otherwise known as Bread & Circuses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

There is no immaculate democracy...anywhere.

There's a difference between an imperfect democracy and no democracy. Not every and any imitation of a democracy, or decoration of a dictatorship with words like elections and president is an imperfect democracy. When a president gets to decide through his pocket party who won presidential election there's another word for that.

The difference is independent institutions, those that work and support common interests of all citizens rather than partisan ones. So the moment electoral officials and judges begin to follow the party line over the duty to the common interest, the democracy is gone. Partisan elections and partisan courts, Trumpists fervent wish and dream is the end of the democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, myata said:

There's a difference between an imperfect democracy and no democracy. Not every and any imitation of a democracy, or decoration of a dictatorship with words like elections and president is an imperfect democracy. When a president gets to decide through his pocket party who won presidential election there's another word for that.

 

"Democracy" in this context means far more than just the outcome of a U.S. presidential election (i.e. local, state, and federal offices).  Focusing on Trump as you have done only demonstrates obvious partisanship and political bias, the very thing you pretend to oppose.

The system is far older and bigger than Donald Trump, and will continue in its present form.

 

Quote

The difference is independent institutions, those that work and support common interests of all citizens rather than partisan ones. So the moment electoral officials and judges begin to follow the party line over the duty to the common interest, the democracy is gone. Partisan elections and partisan courts, Trumpists fervent wish and dream is the end of the democracy.

 

Trump...Trump...Trump....more of the same.   Democracy is not about the common interest, and never has been...that's why America has a constitution.   Don't pretend that a more perfect but flawed democracy existed before Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dougie93 said:

indeed, he has become like Emmanuel Goldstein from Orwell's 1984

the eternal enemy of Oceania

 

Anybody who pretends that democracy was in good shape before Donald Trump is clearly on a partisan mission, ignoring the history and context of American political/election history.    Trump exposed all the system faults that were accepted for political/party advantage, but now it's a problem ?    Please.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Anybody who pretends that democracy was in good shape before Donald Trump is clearly on a partisan mission, ignoring the history and context of American political/election history.    Trump exposed all the system faults that were accepted for political/party advantage, but now it's a problem ?    Please.....

it's getting dystopically bizarre now

it's like all you have to say to people is "Trump" and they divide & conquer themselves on the spot

literally Orwellian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

it's getting dystopically bizarre now

it's like all you have to say to people is "Trump" and they divide & conquer themselves on the spot

literally Orwellian

 

Trump pulled his pants down and mooned the American political system and entrenched interests.   The people lustily cheered him on, because "democracy" pissed them off long before Trump came on scene.

 

MAC3030-1024x728.jpg

Edited by bush_cheney2004
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, myata said:

After the 2020 presidential election the Republican party initiated a program of tightening election legislation in the states that it controls. I'm less interested in what it plays directly into Trump's "stolen election" agenda that is a deliberate lie not confirmed by any facts and thrown out of dozens of courts, however it does confirm his grip on the party. An open, modern and constitutional party would have examined the causes of the defeat, attempted to learn lessons and make positive changes. The Trump's party tacitly accepted the lie and started tweaking with the elections.

More interesting is how regular, rank and file Republicans explain and justify it to themselves? How more opportunities to vote, as long as it correct and secure, can be wrong, in this century? Why arbitrary, difficult to understand and justify to an objective, non-partisan observer restrictions like limiting voting on Sundays (Texas)?

Brennan Center for Justice tracked electoral changes in 14 states with 22 laws restricting election access in some way passed and more in the pipe. This can't be a coincidence. This is a concerted effort, a campaign.

"Election" is not a word, it is a key and critical democratic institution. In this century even dictatorships strive to keep a facade of legitimacy via some sort of "election". The instruments they use is limiting access to vote; and manipulating with the the results of the vote. Both have been tried and are being tried by Republican party now. And if the institution of election is eroded and degraded by the partisan efforts to the point of meaninglessness, what would be the effect on the democracy, even if it helps to win this one "election"?

 

Voter ID laws are supported by 75% of the American public, including large majorities of Black and Hispanic voters.  Voter ID laws aren’t anti-Democracy, they’re important to ensure the sanctity of elections.  And removing dead people and people that have moved to other states from voter rolls is important.  It ensures that ballots are only sent out to residents of a state someone actually resides in, and to people that are still alive.  I honestly have no idea how anyone can be against these logical positions.

And in states that require identification to vote, FREE identification is provided for by the particular states.  Once again so everybody understands, FREE identification is provided by the states.  That’s more than we have in Canada!  This is all much ado about nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I'm hoping this will backfire.  If I knew some party was taking steps to ensure I wouldn't vote, I'd get there from my deathbed if I had to.

They'll claim an election is rigged if they lose one, of course, but it does seem that the more insane their caterwauling becomes, the more the party is able to find some real Republicans.  Eventually the RINOs will find themselves at Mar-a-Lago telling buffet guests how they were all ripped off while a band waits impatiently for them to **** off.

You need professional help.  Voter ID laws don’t ensure you won’t vote, it’s to ensure you are legally allowed to vote, and you are who you say you are.  FREE identification is provided to anyone that doesn’t have any.  It’s about as logical as possible.  And hoping it will backfire?  It’s supported by 75% of the American public.  You’re in the fringe minority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Trump pulled his pants down and mooned the American political system and entrenched interests.   The people lustily cheered him on, because "democracy" pissed them off long before Trump came on scene.

 

MAC3030-1024x728.jpg

Indeed, and he's the only option available who will go against the Establishment in any way at all

he's the jester who will say the emperor has no clothes

and furthermore, the Woke are a bunch of America hating commies in sheep's clothing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dougie93 said:

Indeed, and he's the only option available who will go against the Establishment in any way at all

he's the jester who will say the emperor has no clothes

and furthermore, the Woke are a bunch of America hating commies in sheep's clothing

Trump was, and is, just a con man.  If there is anything anti-establishment about him at all, it's designed to enrich him.

I never could understand the maga-hatted hillbillies who thought he was on their side.  He dropped them like a hot rock after they tried to take the Capitol building for him on January 06.  Hell, even I was embarrassed by his capitulation, and I have nothing but contempt for the man.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Trump was, and is, just a con man.  If there is anything anti-establishment about him at all, it's designed to enrich him.

Trump's political career did not enrich him, quite the opposite, it was quite costly for him

as for being a con man, so what? all politicians are con men, Trump just did it better than his opposition

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Trump...Trump...Trump....more of the same.   Democracy is not about the common interest, and never has been...that's why America has a constitution.   Don't pretend that a more perfect but flawed democracy existed before Trump.

We see what we want to see. This is not about Trump but the erosion of democratic institutions that will cause, logically and inevitably, degrading of the democracy itself. The Republican party could have censored Trump not his critics, it was their choice. They could have fixed the problems in the party not tweak with the election to reduce voting.

Funny now to equate critique of a political person for very clear and factual transgressions (like "we won the election", "find me the xyz votes") with partisanship. In other, different countries it could be called personality cult, see no evil in mine. Take China for an example. Everybody knows who will be the president and w the courts will decide. Isn't that what trumpists want? Funny how one can hate it and worship (as Trump's cult) at the same time. But sure someone mentioned Orwell here, that's nothing new either.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Trump's political career did not enrich him, quite the opposite, it was quite costly for him

as for being a con man, so what? all politicians are con men, Trump just did it better than his opposition

I would have to say that I have never heard that to be the case.  In fact, I think Trump profited greatly while he was President, given he never really gave up any of his business holdings.  Then there's all the money the wide eyed election fraud believers sent him to fight for justice.  I seem to remember most of that going into a box under his bed.

It's very true that all politicians have done things they should be ashamed of.  If you think that Trump having done more of them than any other politician is somehow a virtue, I would have to disagree.

And, he's such a complete arsehole too.  I mean, that's got to count for something.

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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,714
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    wopsas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...