I'm a rationale conservative - can you convince me voting rights legislation is needed?

[Anonymous]

Watch this interview with Dana DeBeauvoir, the Travis County TX (Austin) clerk - Texas is making it deliberately as hard as possible to order a mail-in ballot.

Texas made it illegal for state officials to help an individual with "by mail voting" under the penalty of a felony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree, I have no problem at all with voter ID -

IF it's free,
IF the DMV's are fixed,
IF you can walk in and get your ID the same day,
IF people don't have to take time off from work to get it,
IF people don't have to drive 40 miles to the nearest station to get it,
IF your identity can be established in a way that isn't overly restrictive, with commonly available documents,
IF the state offers free and expedient assistance to people who may have special circumstances, like they lost their birth certificate in a fire

I would be fine with ID if things like that can be met.

There are no states that do not offer free voter ID cards. Most offer mobile stations to issue IDs. Va DMVs offer Sat hours. This is the voter ID registration Virginia used prior. The voter registration form is more complicated. They offer free assistance if you need it. If all else fails, vote by mail. For goodness sake, look into what it takes before going into hysterics people. It really isn't the burden people are making it out to be.

https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/archive/voter-photo-id/ELECT-404-ID-VoPhoIDCardApp-Long.pdf

Read the whole thread. There are many, many people who voted for decades for whom these new restrictions are a significant burden.

+1

I’d like to ask the fact resistant Republicans on this thread: when Mitch McConnell and other elected Republicans give away the game that it’s only about voter suppression, do you not watch their videos or read their words? Is there any reason you continue to gaslight good Americans about this? Can you even admit to yourselves that you’re anti-democracy?

[Anonymous]

As it is, we’re subject to a tyranny of the minority. This is fascism, no matter how much Repubes want to back away from the term.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Saying the quiet part out loud

“African Americans are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans.”

Oh Black people are different from “Americans”?

#MitchPlease

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
+1

I’d like to ask the fact resistant Republicans on this thread: when Mitch McConnell and other elected Republicans give away the game that it’s only about voter suppression, do you not watch their videos or read their words? Is there any reason you continue to gaslight good Americans about this? Can you even admit to yourselves that you’re anti-democracy?

*Americans

They don't see all Americans as Americans. Just the white ones.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

Sorry..... this is hyperbole and crap.
Historians will note that despite Democrats calling this bill "voting rights" it is not about voting rights at all.
They will also note that Biden was unable to get two bills that the Democrats consistently referred to as "vitally important" across the line and the country didn't fall apart.
The tweet is unconvincing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

What is funny is that in less than a year all the Democrats here are going to be huge fans of the filibuster again and will claim anyone in favor of removing it is a fascist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

Sorry..... this is hyperbole and crap.
Historians will note that despite Democrats calling this bill "voting rights" it is not about voting rights at all.
They will also note that Biden was unable to get two bills that the Democrats consistently referred to as "vitally important" across the line and the country didn't fall apart.
The tweet is unconvincing.

Yes, and by embracing this breathtakingly stupid strategy Schumer has put 48 Democratic Senators on the record as supporting the removal of the filibuster.

We will very likely have a new president in less than three years, and that new president may be a Republican, and that new Republican president may control the senate by a seat or two.

By forcing this vote Schumer has greatly increased the odds of the filibuster being eliminated... while failing even to capitalize on its elimination.

If you were to go full Machiavelli you might argue that the filibuster will be eliminated at some point and so it might as well be your party that does it and takes advantage of having done so to ram some legislation through, but Schumer hasn't even achieved that. He has lowered the bar considerably for the Republicans to eliminate the filibuster and didn't even get a win out of it. All these idiotic tweets about the filibuster existing to support "white supremacy" are going to come back up too btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

Sorry..... this is hyperbole and crap.
Historians will note that despite Democrats calling this bill "voting rights" it is not about voting rights at all.
They will also note that Biden was unable to get two bills that the Democrats consistently referred to as "vitally important" across the line and the country didn't fall apart.
The tweet is unconvincing.

Yes, and by embracing this breathtakingly stupid strategy Schumer has put 48 Democratic Senators on the record as supporting the removal of the filibuster.

We will very likely have a new president in less than three years, and that new president may be a Republican, and that new Republican president may control the senate by a seat or two.

By forcing this vote Schumer has greatly increased the odds of the filibuster being eliminated... while failing even to capitalize on its elimination.

If you were to go full Machiavelli you might argue that the filibuster will be eliminated at some point and so it might as well be your party that does it and takes advantage of having done so to ram some legislation through, but Schumer hasn't even achieved that. He has lowered the bar considerably for the Republicans to eliminate the filibuster and didn't even get a win out of it. All these idiotic tweets about the filibuster existing to support "white supremacy" are going to come back up too btw.

Yep.

I also remember the Democrats using the filibuster to block the police reform bill proposed by Senator Tim Scott.

What the Democrats fail to remember (short memory here) is that just a couple years ago Trump was harping on the Senators to eliminate the filibuster to get some of his initiatives passed.
McConnell pushed back hard. He flat out said no. In fact, I don't recall any Republican Senators speaking up in support of doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

Sorry..... this is hyperbole and crap.
Historians will note that despite Democrats calling this bill "voting rights" it is not about voting rights at all.
They will also note that Biden was unable to get two bills that the Democrats consistently referred to as "vitally important" across the line and the country didn't fall apart.
The tweet is unconvincing.

Yes, and by embracing this breathtakingly stupid strategy Schumer has put 48 Democratic Senators on the record as supporting the removal of the filibuster.

We will very likely have a new president in less than three years, and that new president may be a Republican, and that new Republican president may control the senate by a seat or two.

By forcing this vote Schumer has greatly increased the odds of the filibuster being eliminated... while failing even to capitalize on its elimination.

If you were to go full Machiavelli you might argue that the filibuster will be eliminated at some point and so it might as well be your party that does it and takes advantage of having done so to ram some legislation through, but Schumer hasn't even achieved that. He has lowered the bar considerably for the Republicans to eliminate the filibuster and didn't even get a win out of it. All these idiotic tweets about the filibuster existing to support "white supremacy" are going to come back up too btw.

Yep.

I also remember the Democrats using the filibuster to block the police reform bill proposed by Senator Tim Scott.

What the Democrats fail to remember (short memory here) is that just a couple years ago Trump was harping on the Senators to eliminate the filibuster to get some of his initiatives passed.
McConnell pushed back hard. He flat out said no. In fact, I don't recall any Republican Senators speaking up in support of doing so.

The whole country has now seen that the Democrats want to eliminate the filibuster and that the only obstacle to their doing so is the lack of a couple votes. The Republicans can therefor assume that at some point down the road when the Democrats can pick up another couple seats in the Senate that they will eliminate the filibuster.

So if you are a Republican, why -not- eliminate the filibuster the next time it would be advantageous for you to do so? The Democrats are on record as wanting it gone and will presumably eliminate it if they ever get the votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

What is funny is that in less than a year all the Democrats here are going to be huge fans of the filibuster again and will claim anyone in favor of removing it is a fascist.

The contrary to that is the continued dispensation of the filibuster by the GOP when it is inconvenient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here you go, OP. Just what you wanted!

Sorry..... this is hyperbole and crap.
Historians will note that despite Democrats calling this bill "voting rights" it is not about voting rights at all.
They will also note that Biden was unable to get two bills that the Democrats consistently referred to as "vitally important" across the line and the country didn't fall apart.
The tweet is unconvincing.

Yes, and by embracing this breathtakingly stupid strategy Schumer has put 48 Democratic Senators on the record as supporting the removal of the filibuster.

We will very likely have a new president in less than three years, and that new president may be a Republican, and that new Republican president may control the senate by a seat or two.

By forcing this vote Schumer has greatly increased the odds of the filibuster being eliminated... while failing even to capitalize on its elimination.

If you were to go full Machiavelli you might argue that the filibuster will be eliminated at some point and so it might as well be your party that does it and takes advantage of having done so to ram some legislation through, but Schumer hasn't even achieved that. He has lowered the bar considerably for the Republicans to eliminate the filibuster and didn't even get a win out of it. All these idiotic tweets about the filibuster existing to support "white supremacy" are going to come back up too btw.

It wasn't "the removal of the filibuster" - it was a carve out to make it a talking filibuster. Let's please be accurate in what happened so when Mitch actually does eliminate it, we can be accurate about how we got there.