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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not just Alabama and Louisiana

Good news today from Georgia: a federal judge struck down Georgia’s racial gerrymander and ordered the legislature into a special session to fix them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one rational can defend this.

OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one rational can defend this.

OP?

Can’t you read, PP? OP can’t force himself to slog through 45 pages!! It’s too much for him!!!

But for sure people in Democratic areas should have to wait for hours to vote while Republican areas have five times as many machines. That’s not a big ask at all and it doesn’t mean that there’s anything inherently unfair.

[Anonymous]

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/17/924527679/why-do-nonwhite-georgia-voters-have-to-wait-in-line-for-hours-too-few-polling-pl

[Anonymous]

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/05/23/texas-voting-polling-restrictions/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one rational can defend this.

OP?

Can’t you read, PP? OP can’t force himself to slog through 45 pages!! It’s too much for him!!!

But for sure people in Democratic areas should have to wait for hours to vote while Republican areas have five times as many machines. That’s not a big ask at all and it doesn’t mean that there’s anything inherently unfair.

This question doesn't require OP to read all 45 pages.

[Anonymous]

Seems like all the voting maps that get shot down by the courts provide more than enough evidence. Just pull them up and take a look at what they are doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one rational can defend this.

OP?

Can’t you read, PP? OP can’t force himself to slog through 45 pages!! It’s too much for him!!!

But for sure people in Democratic areas should have to wait for hours to vote while Republican areas have five times as many machines. That’s not a big ask at all and it doesn’t mean that there’s anything inherently unfair.

This question doesn't require OP to read all 45 pages.

Oh, I was writing with the thickest of sarcasm. OP obviously dipped out early when this thread began proving that yes, voting rights legislation is needed.

Not that we’ll get that as long as the GOP has power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems like all the voting maps that get shot down by the courts provide more than enough evidence. Just pull them up and take a look at what they are doing.

It would seem like that would be sufficient evidence, wouldn’t it? Frankly I get the feeling that OP might be one of those “Life long Democrats” on another thread: a bad faith actor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like all the voting maps that get shot down by the courts provide more than enough evidence. Just pull them up and take a look at what they are doing.

It would seem like that would be sufficient evidence, wouldn’t it? Frankly I get the feeling that OP might be one of those “Life long Democrats” on another thread: a bad faith actor.

I agree. Anyone truly “rational “ or even truly “conservative “ wouldn’t need to be convinced.
Unfortunately “rational”, “rationale” (sic), and “conservative “ have all been used to mean very different things by this current generation of MAGA Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like all the voting maps that get shot down by the courts provide more than enough evidence. Just pull them up and take a look at what they are doing.

It would seem like that would be sufficient evidence, wouldn’t it? Frankly I get the feeling that OP might be one of those “Life long Democrats” on another thread: a bad faith actor.

I agree. Anyone truly “rational “ or even truly “conservative “ wouldn’t need to be convinced.
Unfortunately “rational”, “rationale” (sic), and “conservative “ have all been used to mean very different things by this current generation of MAGA Republicans.

I sometimes wonder why Republicans even start threads like this. It only serves to show how uninformed they are, and how uninformed they want to stay.

And I seriously marvel at the audacity, “it’s too many pages to read.” He can skip the last few if he wants. It’s mostly people making fun of him.

[Anonymous]

“We have no way to know if that 3,400 [illegally purged voters] is actually correct," Shawn Weneta, a policy strategist with the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, said. "When they acknowledged the mistake, they said it was only 270 people. Well three weeks later, they say it's more than 10 times that number."
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/31/youngkin-virginia-voting-felons-restore-rights-election

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“We have no way to know if that 3,400 [illegally purged voters] is actually correct," Shawn Weneta, a policy strategist with the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, said. "When they acknowledged the mistake, they said it was only 270 people. Well three weeks later, they say it's more than 10 times that number."
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/31/youngkin-virginia-voting-felons-restore-rights-election

The GOP wants to choose their voters.

[Anonymous]

not a coincidence

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

not a coincidence

Anything to say, OP, or are you unwilling to take in new information?