Anonymous wrote:Not a Trumper here. I agree that Gerrymandering is bad and ideally would not happen. Clearly it's a problem with both parties.

Honestly, I don't buy the voter suppression and "democracy at stake" hyperbole. Anyone that wants to vote can vote, right? Yes, it might be inconvenient for some based on their work schedule, but that's always been the case. And In most places you can already vote by mail.

When I hear that democracy is at stake, I tune out because it's a huge exaggeration in my mind.

I'm open to argument, though. Can you change my mind?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The current voting bill the Senate is considering requires and standardizes voter ID, please update your talking points.

Please document. I have searched and cannot find it. If you mean a "sworn written statement under penalty of perjury" along with same day registration, that is hardly a photo ID.

“The new bill permits states to decide whether to require voter identification, but broadens the list of acceptable IDs for states that choose to require them. Under the new bill, states must allow utility bills and leases as well as student IDs and virtually any identification issued by a governmental entity to serve as an acceptable ID. In effect, the bill would require states with stricter ID laws to accept these documents as well, thereby reducing the disenfranchisement caused by strict ID laws in many red states.”
https://www.democracydocket.com/news/my-thoughts-on-manchins-compromise-bill/

That is not the bill that passed the House. And, I'm pretty sure it is the House bill that Schumer is trying to pass.

Anonymous wrote:Even though there was *checks notes* no voter fraud.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2006, the Voting Rights Act passed with a vote of 390 to 33 in the House and 98 to 0 in the Senate.

16 Rs who voted in favor are still in the Senate, but now won't engage at all in any voting rights issues. Why is that? Did something change?

In 2013 Shelby v Holder, the Supreme Court gutted the provision of the law requiring that states with histories of voter discrimination get approval from the Department of Justice before they changed their voting laws. Immediately, legislatures in those states, now dominated by Republicans, began to pass measures to suppress the vote.

One man's "voter suppression" is another man's "voter integrity."

What is wrong with Georgia having requirements similar to Delaware's which are much, much tougher?

What is wrong with requiring ID with absentee ballot? Just giving last four digits?

What is the impetus for Georgia making it harder to vote? Seriously, what is it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Last year polling places were closed in minority communities where constituents have no access to transportation. Long lines to vote discourage people who are poor from voting because they can't afford to spend so much time away from work.

You need to check out where those lines were. Most of them were in Democrat run cities with Democrat run voting boards.

LOL, most of them were in suburban counties controlled by white GOP officials but with very heavy AA populations - texas, ohio and GA are the biggest culprits of this.

Anonymous wrote:

Last year polling places were closed in minority communities where constituents have no access to transportation. Long lines to vote discourage people who are poor from voting because they can't afford to spend so much time away from work.

You need to check out where those lines were. Most of them were in Democrat run cities with Democrat run voting boards.

Anonymous wrote:Voting for citizens should be as easy and convenient as possible. Everyone should be granted time off from work to vote. I believe voting days should be national holidays. It's also more important to vote in local elections because it impacts you more. Polling places should be secure and near your home.

Last year polling places were closed in minority communities where constituents have no access to transportation. Long lines to vote discourage people who are poor from voting because they can't afford to spend so much time away from work.

I believe elections should be secure and ID should be required. Ids shouldn't have so many regulatory hurdles to to get. A free id card should be given to every citizen of a state upon reaching 18. A driver's license is different. I think your constitutional right to vote shouldn't be taken away for petty offenses. There are some offenses against humanity and the state that are worthy of losing your right to vote.

Voting is very important and should be protected. This county has a history of bombing polling places to prevent minorities from voting. There has also been disenfranchisement of women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2006, the Voting Rights Act passed with a vote of 390 to 33 in the House and 98 to 0 in the Senate.

16 Rs who voted in favor are still in the Senate, but now won't engage at all in any voting rights issues. Why is that? Did something change?

In 2013 Shelby v Holder, the Supreme Court gutted the provision of the law requiring that states with histories of voter discrimination get approval from the Department of Justice before they changed their voting laws. Immediately, legislatures in those states, now dominated by Republicans, began to pass measures to suppress the vote.

One man's "voter suppression" is another man's "voter integrity."

What is wrong with Georgia having requirements similar to Delaware's which are much, much tougher?

What is wrong with requiring ID with absentee ballot? Just giving last four digits?

Anonymous wrote:Republicans have closed tens of thousands of polling locations across the country, primarily in Democrat voting counties and cities. You wouldn't need drive-thru voting or mail-in voting if Republicans didn't shut down the physical polls.

Similarly, multiple states have now passed legislation that allows the state legislature to overturn any election results they don't like, including the state's Presidential results. Why are political elites overriding the voters?

This is a Republican-generated crisis.

Anonymous wrote:In 2006, the Voting Rights Act passed with a vote of 390 to 33 in the House and 98 to 0 in the Senate.

16 Rs who voted in favor are still in the Senate, but now won't engage at all in any voting rights issues. Why is that? Did something change?

In 2013 Shelby v Holder, the Supreme Court gutted the provision of the law requiring that states with histories of voter discrimination get approval from the Department of Justice before they changed their voting laws. Immediately, legislatures in those states, now dominated by Republicans, began to pass measures to suppress the vote.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Biden's comments about Republicans previously voting for voting rights simply illuminates how horrible the current "voting rights" bill is.
It isn't "voting rights." It is federalizing the elections.

Republicans don't want ballot harvesting and taxpayer money going to political campaigns.

It's the same effing bill. It shows how morally corrupt the GOP has become.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this issue is very important either way. I don't think it is a "crisis" (seriously?!) as the democrats claim and I don't think it is important as a security measure for our elections. It's a big yawn all around.