Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 20 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5464

      The Constitution is very clear that STATES oversee elections.

      The Trash(D)Party also wants NATIONAL mail-in voting & NO voter I.D. in any of the 50 states.

      The Trash(D)Party cheated in every way possible to get POWER (hiding in basement Joe/Cumala)– and want to make their blight on election laws the norm moving forward.

      So sad what the Loserfgt(D)Party has become…

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 3851

      US Constitution 15th Amendment:

      The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

      Abridge definition: abridge to reduce the effect of a law, privilege or power.

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5464

      Roy proving he’s brainwashed.

      So, should we just let everyone drive vehicles- no license required??
      Totally open our borders- because “real countries” don’t have borders??
      There should be no Entry Exams to get into schools??

      Every LEGIT operation has “entry requirements”.

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 3851

      Yes there are requirements. You have to be an eligible voter. People voted by mail more than ever before because of Covid, and the elections were still the cleanest ever. There was no widespread fraud. The FBI said that. The courts confirmed that. There’s no reason that every eligible voter is not given every opportunity to vote. I’m all for using all resources to assure that nobody is voting illegally. But that didn’t happen. That is a myth create by Donald Trump and perpetuated by people who want to have an excuse to restrict the ability of Americans to vote. Trump stated that he was going to claim the election was rigged well before the election ever happened.

      I’m against unauthorized drop boxes in churches and so forth. We need to ensure that the ballot goes directly from the voter to the election office with no one touching it in-between. But we need to ensure that every eligible voter who wants to vote can vote without hindrance. You can’t require people to vote. But it should be easy to vote, not harder for some than it is for others.

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

      leave it to KKKChron to post this fictional take on #HR1 while his racist brothers block the black folk from voting on Sundays

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      The Constitution is very clear that STATES oversee elections.

      @Chron,

      True; however, the Constitution is designed in a way that permits it to have Amendments. If that weren’t the case, slavery would be a bit dicey of an issue, and then we would spend all of those hours in the Loaded SCOTUS. Also, women would lost the right to vote, as that “error” back in 1919 or so wouldn’t be an issue. 😎

      Just curious; however, when the US invades a sovereign nation, instills “Democracy” and require them to begin free, open and democratic elections, do they force that nation into devising an Electoral College, force them to enact a government that has been gerrymandered to the whim of the representative government, or do they just have those countries adopt democratic elections?

      I could be wrong. Usually am; however, I think the US understands that the Electoral College is archaic and filled with problems. They just won’t do anything about it.

      What, exactly, is wrong with a free and open election where a vote from each person carries equal weight in selecting the highest office in the country? There are still enough Red States to enable gridlock in the legislature that nothing will ever get done. 😎

      With the current system, why is it a valid argument that the majority of voters in most states don’t even need to vote, as the election in those states are called roughly eight seconds after the polls close. The only reason this is Enron being discussed now is because God was sleep at the switch, and Georgia and Arizona went Blue. We can’t have that. 😃

      When I lived in Maryland, I never had to vote. Everyone knows it will be Deep Blue. Despite the fact that Democrats do not comprise 9 out of every 10 voters in the state, the US Senate is carried, usually, by 90% of voters.

      Granted, there is one small technicality; however, I have a logical reason for that. Maryland currently has a “Republican” Governor; however, in true red states, he would be considered a liberal. This is why he was on Trump’s shit list, and when Trump was holding, Hogan did his own thing. If he were a Trumper, he would get roughly 10% of the votes in the state, all from chicken farmers in the Eastern Shore. 😃

      There are two reasons why Maryland occasionally elects a Republican, it’s for one of two reasons:

      First, there is the D.C. conundrum. A good number of peeps in Maryland resent the D.C. area electorate, (where all the money is in the state), do, if a Democratic candidate on the Gubernatorial Ticket is from the suburbs surrounding D.C., then a Republican can squeak in, as Maryland likes to elect their leaders from Balmer, and it’s surrounding counties.

      Secondly, there is the “Kennedy Effect”, which is an extension of Rule #1. So, basically, any Kennedy will lose. (Last example of this is when Kathleen Kennedy-Townsend lost the election.) This is an extension of Rule #1, due to the fact that the Kennedy family is still filthy rich, and as such, any Kennedy that owns a house in Maryland would live in Potomac, which is just a couple miles outside of D.C., and most houses there sell for $10m and up, thus allowing the Balmer Rule to kick in. This is limited to just state doctors, though, at the federal level, God couldn’t win a seat in the US Senate, if he ran as a Republican and his competition was Mollock. 😃

      There should be no Entry Exams to get into schools??

      Every LEGIT operation has “entry requirements”.

      OK, I’ll give you this one; however, allow me to play Devil’s Advocate. 😎

      I’m all for anyone who votes would need to pass a test on civics, political systems, and the effect of the two-party system as it exists within the US. They could also throw in a bunch of questions from the test required to become a US citizen. (Do they still have that?)

      Now, consider the fact that, outside of highly over-priced private schools, like the one I graduated from, do any public high schools still require any courses in Government, Politics, Civics, or anything that would educate people in the US system of government? I don’t think you see many places that require that anymore.

      That said, let’s say they start to require passing a test in order to have the right to vote. How many MAGA peeps do you think would pass that test? Like McConnell is fond of saying, “be careful what you wish for”. That test could wipe out a good number of registered Republicans, as it seems like the majority of college educated voters tend to be Democrat these days, at least in what polls usually claim during the election years. 😃

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      The Constitution is very clear that STATES oversee elections.

      man, the ignoarance here is breathtaking

      last I checked the states ratified a federal Constitution?

      maybe take the hood off, go down to the break rooms, push Jethro aside, get on a computer . . and look up VOTING RIGHTS ACT . . only on e of the most momentous pieces of legislation in our country’s history (even though, surprisingly, it didnt deal with polling stations . . LOL).

      The legislation you and your ilk have been trying to roll back for decades, recent success of which led to HR1

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5464

      Should 20,000 seat arenas be voting booths? No. So many places to do “hidden” things.

      You only have to cheat in 5 or so states to change the outcome of an election.

      DCMcCabe, i guess one of your points brings up a question: past amendments, should you change the Constitution (amendments) BEFORE you change the law? or vise versa??

      Homework assignment.

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      You only have to cheat in 5 or so states to change the outcome of an election

      you math skills are . . well, think about it genius.

      hint

      the closest state (GA) in 2020 was more than 22,000 vote difference?

      lmao

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 3851

      All 50 states certified the elections. Trumpers tried as hard as they could, but couldn’t find anything in any state. So they made shit up. You can’t win a court case by making shit up. The states that were close had Republican leadership. Pennsylvania. Arizona. Georgia. Wisconsin’s Republican appointed judges. The Republican led states certified the vote as fair, and then Trump rained all hell down on them for doing their job. Now those people who did their job are being systematically removed. Trump is the one who called up Raffensberger and told him to find votes. Now Trump is supporting that person’s opponent because he didn’t play ball. Trump is the one who will be on trial for trying to steal an election. Now the Republicans are trying to walk back voter access in Georgia and other states. The Republicans are the cheaters, so its pretty rich that they are the ones crying wolf on the voting rights legislation in Congress.

    • Charles

      Participant
      Post count: 321

      Voter suppression is the only thing the QOP has left.

      Demographics are going in teh wrong direction for them

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5464

      Trash(D)Party

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      Trash(D)Party

      guess that closes book on your math skills

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5464

      Secure Elections Matter.

      Just letting any trash vote multiple times is not acceptable.

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      So they made shit up

      many Trumpers here parroted that shot and now when the source (Powell) says its a lie . . crickets

      that is precisely why the word cocoon fits, the goal isnt truth or reality is PROTECTING a point of view

      at this point there is a laundry list of alt-right admitted liars, so long one cant capture them all but

      FauxNews
      Hannity
      Carlson
      A Jones
      S Powell
      L Wood

      and not a single Trumper (I believe?) even coming close to disavowing any of it? even with a freaking insurrection

      In fact the best example of the lunacy is that there are Trumpers here who screamed from their alt-right perches about a bunch of BS durig the election that has now been established to be Russian disinfo . . several times over. Add to that the Big Lie with Powella nd Trump. They actually watched Trump henchman use their official position to LIE about shit (eg DNI Ratcliffe) . . but still dont disavow it or Trump???

      Is there even a single post here from a pro-Trumper calling Bs on any of these topics?

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 5464

      Power Grab by the LoserfgtDems

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      KKKChron’s got nothing

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      DCMcCabe, i guess one of your points brings up a question: past amendments, should you change the Constitution (amendments) BEFORE you change the law? or vise versa??

      Homework assignment.

      @Chron,

      Sorry, I had a crap ton of errands today, so I apologise for not responding sooner. 😎

      As far as changing the Constitution, that would be cool Koetter it up to you. I was just pointing out why there are some flaws in your proposals. The extreme, vast majority of legislation rarely changes the Constitution. A Constitutional Amendment is incredibly difficult, requiring a very high number of votes in the Senate, as well as then getting a vast majority of the states, (38? I really can’t recall at this second, but it’s high), to ratify the Amendment. In fact, TBH, that’s why it rarely happens. Sometimes amendments that are shorter are sometimes hardest to pass. (You can’t really attach Pork to something like that, so individual legislators can’t throw things in to help their states, and Congress loves Pork, on all sides of the aisle, and even out in the hallway. 😃)

      Example: back in ‘74, iirc, the Equal Rights Amendment was supposed to be, I think, the twenty-seventh? Amendment. The entire amendment was roughly just over twenty words. Something to the effect that: “All citizens shall have equal rights under the law, regardless of sex”. Yeah, that’s a bit of a paraphrase, but it is accurate in the intention.

      (Cont.) Now, consider that this is 1974. The country was still in Vietnam, and that world, in all honesty, is now gone. Those twenty-some words evoked all kinds of fear-mongering, including some legislators saying that if women were considered equal under the Constitution, then it would lead to all forms of terrible outcomes. The biggest argument pushed was that the military could no longer keep women out of combat. Now, consider current times. Women have been in combat in a good deal of the wars in the Middle East. (Granted, I am not aware if a woman can be an 11 Bravo; however, no one wants to be a grunt. 11 Bravo is what you do, or did, if you completely blew the ASVAB’s. It’s not an ideal MOS). Additionally, women have been on or near the battlefields a number of times in history. They just couldn’t be a grunt, and storm up a hill blasting the enemy with a Carbine.

      (Cont. 2) IMHO, I’m looking back, I doubt that Thinking like that could ever fly Annette in the US these days. In reaction, a very high number of states passed what amounted to a mini-ERA, at the state level. Just last year, in 2020, Virginia became the final state required to enact the ERA. As such, the ERA should now be in the Constitution; however, Virginia ratified the amendment beyond its expiration date. So, as such, it’s currently in limbo. Congress can extend the time limit, retroactively, and the ERA would finally be in the Constitution, forty-seven years after it was proposed. Who knows what will happen? It’s still up in the air, afaik.

      Going further, afaik, the Voter Rights Act of 1964 is not in the Constitution, it’s just a law that has been on the books since I was in elementary school. (I could be slightly incorrect. I don’t really keep up with Amendments to the Constitution. I’m pretty sure that there’s only been a few at most, though).

      Roe v Wade was not a constitutional amendment. It’s a court decision that set precedent for abortion rights.

      Brown v Education, 1954?, which ended segregation in public schools was a court decision. Ultimately, it led, in part, to the Civil Rights Act; however, afaik, that isn’t even an amendment in the Constitution.

      And so forth.

      My point: Election laws have changed over time, and isn’t really identical to what was originally written almost 250 years ago; however, the process has evolved over time. The Electoral College, IMHO, is archaic and really has no place in modern society. It is flawed, and no longer serves it’s original intention.

      Another point: Senators were not originally elected by the people, it were appointed by the state that they would represent. Shall we go back to that? I’m pretty certain very few people would want a return of that. People have grown accustomed to voting cut their own representatives to the Senate. I’m pretty certain the modern process has bipartisan support.

      I’m just sayin’, peeps have to evolve. This ain’t 1776 anymore, the Constitution was to be a living document, and I don’t think many people would want a return to how this country worked waaaaaaay back then. (The Pony Express got rid of horses, and now the USPS, have replaced horses with odd little vehicles, and really embarrassing short pants.) 😎

      Another example of change: My father, maybe not in the 1930’s, but by the time he was six or so, carried a shotgun to school each day. (Loaded and ready to fire). I wonder if they had a “shotgun check” in the cloak room. 😃 The difference, was my father went to elementary school in Ontario, Canada, and there was a very real possibility of encountering a bear on the daily walk to school. Ya think that would fly in today’s world? Canada, back then, wasn’t evens country yet. It gained sovereignty in 1949. The country was still under British rule, and people born back then were subjects to the crown.

      Like I said, ya gotta evolve at some point. What was “normal” in 1940 Canada has kinda fell by the wayside. 😎

      As far as establishing some form of test in order to vote, I’m all for it, but like I said, I expect that that will have impact on all voters. With the current state of affairs, do we really want to expand “election fraud” to include what works amount to cheating on the SATs? Would Trump pass the test? 😃

      As mentioned, In all for election reform; however, that is something much easier said than done.

      Again, sorry for the late response.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • Roy

      Participant
      Post count: 3851

      Direct election of Senators was an amendment.

      If somebody voted multiple times that should be stopped, but that is not mass election fraud that would change the outcome of an election. Did somebody fill out his dead Grandma’s ballot for her? That probably happened once or twice. Did Dominion change election results? No. That was a lie. Did somebody turn in piles of fake ballots? No, that turned out to be AC parts in that truck. No mass fraud happened, or it would have been found out. Every court in the land threw out Trump, because it was just political grandstanding.

      You want fair elections? That’s all anybody wants. And that’s what we got. The idea that the election was not fair is a myth, and its being used to perpetrate a crime on the American people as states roll back voting rights.

    • DCGoth

      Participant
      Post count: 1473

      Direct election of Senators was an amendment.

      @Roy

      Thanks for confirming that. I was aware of the change; however, I was really busy yesterday and wasn’t really up to the research. I was hoping someone would give me the correct info. While I’ve taken a number of courses, high school and college, on US political systems, and some poli-sci, those courses were all maaaaany moons ago.

      Personally, I think that the history of how the selection of Senators has evolved is a good point to emphasise that Election Law shouldn’t be considered written in stone from 1776, and that there have been a number of times where reform has happened in the past. I feel it shows that the Constitution was intended to be a living document, and that was taken into account when it was originally drafted. I seriously doubt that anyone back then expected the document to stagnate and remain unchanged.

      You want fair elections? That’s all anybody wants. And that’s what we got. The idea that the election was not fair is a myth, and its being used to perpetrate a crime on the American people as states roll back voting rights.

      I completely agree, and you make good points. The 2020 election was, IMHO, one of the most honest elections in my lifetime. All of this Bullshit was started by Trump, probably a year or two before the actual election, and then perpetuated by Trumpers and alt-right media sources, as they had been told for a couple years that it was not valid if Trump lost, which is absurd. Had Trump not continued to throw raw meat to “the base”, I honestly feel that the people who fed into that mindset were able to maintain that line of thinking despite facts to the contrary being very apparent. They just wanted that false narrative to be true, despite evidence to the contrary.

      TBH, if there should be election reform, I think a good starting pint would be to begin with how 2020 was handled and build from there. IMHO, the only people who want to suppress voter access to the polls are those who need that false narrative to win elections. I’m not even sure the Republicans even had a definitive platform.

      When I was first able to vote, back during the “Disco Sucks” era, there were no motor voter laws, not same day registration, and, afaik, no early voting. I can’t imagine anyone that would want to return to that as the status quo. Voting should be encouraged, not suppressed.

      I’d rather have a beer bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.


       

    • KarmaPolice

      Participant
      Post count: 2520

      Voting should be encouraged, not suppressed.

      of course it should

      the more people who vote the more representative the government

      the problem for the GOP is that they are trying to hold on the the positions of the past, which appeal to fewer and fewer people so they need fewer and fewer voters . . of a certain type

Viewing 20 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.