At this point, we know the differences are irreconcilable between libs and conservatives

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I look around and see liberals and conservatives agreeing on lots of things, these days.

And on the other side: the cult.

That's one thing the cult has done to America. Even liberals and conservatives are united on the opposite side of their bizarre paradigm (that has nothing to do with conservatism).

Conservatives see themselves as the dying breed. They are practically begging the GOPers to snap out of it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If I were you, I would not be trying to get rid of multi-day voting, mail-in voting, polls open late, etc. because the people who make use of flexible easy voting are not those lazy good for nothings who spend days watching their 75 TVs bought with government money. These people have all time in the world to vote. They don't mind standing in line at the polls.

The people who need and use flexible voting are people that travel a lot for business and pleasure, middle class moms and dads with multiple jobs, snowbirds who winter in Florida and Arizona, and the disabled who can't manage the long lines at polls. In short, the middle and upper class citizens. You might just find that you would be suppressing the vote you do not want to suppress.

Generally democrats are in favor of more flexible voting, certainly not because it serves the poor but because unlike so many republicans, democrats actually believe in democracy where everyone, rich or poor, black or white, education or uneducated has the right to vote for those who make the laws and rule their lives.

Many republicans today as never before are trying to transform America away from democracy to a system of autocratic rule where the wealthy and better educated vote and the poor, the subjugated, and uneducated have no voice in those who rule.

You know as well as I do we have always made accommodations for those truly unable to vote in person. What the Democrats want to do is extend that courtesy to those more than capable of voting in person because they are lazy good for nothings who won't vote unless it's that convenient. In doing so they are able to harness the politically ignorant that will always vote Democrat.

The Communists never make policy to better the people or country. With them it's party first--country second. That's why people from over 100 countries were flying or boating to Mexico to cross our border. Then Dementia would take those untested, un-vaccinated people and bus or fly them all across the country in the middle of the night. Yet when there was problems in Cuba Dementia stated every person that ends up on our shores from Cuba will be immediately returned back to their country. Why? Because they are more conservative minded people.

 

[Flopper]

You know as well as I do we have always made accommodations for those truly unable to vote in person. What the Democrats want to do is extend that courtesy to those more than capable of voting in person because they are lazy good for nothings who won't vote unless it's that convenient. In doing so they are able to harness the politically ignorant that will always vote Democrat.

The Communists never make policy to better the people or country. With them it's party first--country second. That's why people from over 100 countries were flying or boating to Mexico to cross our border. Then Dementia would take those untested, un-vaccinated people and bus or fly them all across the country in the middle of the night. Yet when there was problems in Cuba Dementia stated every person that ends up on our shores from Cuba will be immediately returned back to their country. Why? Because they are more conservative minded people.

You use the term "truly unable to vote". This is another key difference in the way democrats see voting versus republicans. Democrats are about inclusion where Republicans' are about excluding those who you believe are not smart enough to vote, can't get to polls by 6pm, can't walk 1 mile to a polling place, can't make it to the registrar's office by 2pm to cast an absentee ballot. Where democrats seek to make voting easier, republicans seek to make it harder. The idea of universal suffrage where all adult citizens have the right to vote is a key tenet of democracy and you find it abhorrent. I wish you guys would be honest and just admit how much you really hate democracy.

 

[Lisa558]

You use the term "truly unable to vote". This is another key difference in the way democrats see voting versus republicans. Democrats are about inclusion where Republicans' are about excluding those who you believe are not smart enough to vote, can't get to polls by 6pm, can't walk 1 mile to a polling place, can't make it to the registrar's office by 2pm to cast an absentee ballot. Where democrats seek to make voting easier, republicans seek to make it harder. The idea of universal suffrage where all adult citizens have the right to vote is a key tenet of democracy and you find it abhorrent. I wish you guys would be honest and just admit how much you really hate democracy.

What a bunch of sanctimonious crap!

If making it “easier to vote” is the goal - rather than maintaining the integrity of the election and preventing unethical ballot harvesting - why don’t we just have a (large) bank of phone workers who call registered voters, ask who they want to vote for, mark it down, and forward the tally?

An election should determine whom people want for president, NOT which side (hint: the Dems) can go door to door in urban areas and manipulate people so uninformed, or uninterested, or just stupid into voting for the Dem.

There’s a reason that election workers have to stay 50 feet outside the polling place rather than start “persuading” voters standing in line. Yet you want a system where Dems can go door to door and collect mail ballots from uninformed, and thus GULLIBLE, people?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You use the term "truly unable to vote". This is another key difference in the way democrats see voting versus republicans. Democrats are about inclusion where Republicans' are about excluding those who you believe are not smart enough to vote, can't get to polls by 6pm, can't walk 1 mile to a polling place, can't make it to the registrar's office by 2pm to cast an absentee ballot. Where democrats seek to make voting easier, republicans seek to make it harder. The idea of universal suffrage where all adult citizens have the right to vote is a key tenet of democracy and you find it abhorrent. I wish you guys would be honest and just admit how much you really hate democracy.

It has nothing to do with hating democracy. We voted for generations like this, why is it a problem now? It has nothing to do with inclusion. If I can go to the polls to vote, you should too unless you have a medical condition, you're out of town that day, or otherwise have no ability to make it to the polls.

If the lazy good for nothings voted Republican, you'd see how fast the Democrats would no longer be inclusive.

 

[Flopper]

It has nothing to do with hating democracy. We voted for generations like this, why is it a problem now? It has nothing to do with inclusion. If I can go to the polls to vote, you should too unless you have a medical condition, you're out of town that day, or otherwise have no ability to make it to the polls.

If the lazy good for nothings voted Republican, you'd see how fast the Democrats would no longer be inclusive.

My friend, plenty of lazy good for nothings do vote republican. However, that doesn't bother me one bit. If you are an American citizen you should have the right to vote and you should vote and we should not be creating barriers to make it difficult to vote.

Suppressing voting under the guise of protecting the sanctity of the ballot has been around since colonial days when land owners argued that if non-property owners have the right to vote we will lose control of who is voting. When blacks got the right vote, it was agued that they would flood the polling places and vote illegally because no one can tell them apart. And when women were given the vote it was argued that since they aren't smart enough to vote, they will vote according to their husbands wishes making our elections unfair.

 

[Flopper]

What a bunch of sanctimonious crap!

If making it “easier to vote” is the goal - rather than maintaining the integrity of the election and preventing unethical ballot harvesting - why don’t we just have a (large) bank of phone workers who call registered voters, ask who they want to vote for, mark it down, and forward the tally?

An election should determine whom people want for president, NOT which side (hint: the Dems) can go door to door in urban areas and manipulate people so uninformed, or uninterested, or just stupid into voting for the Dem.

There’s a reason that election workers have to stay 50 feet outside the polling place rather than start “persuading” voters standing in line. Yet you want a system where Dems can go door to door and collect mail ballots from uninformed, and thus GULLIBLE, people?

We need controls on who votes but those controls should not drive millions of legal voters from voting. For various reason we have slowly been adding to controls on voting and procedural changes making voting more and more difficult for some voters It is not worth suppressing hundreds of thousands of legal voters to stop a few illegal votes. For example:

Voter ID requirements. Election officials use false claims of rampant voter fraud to justify strict requirements like a photo ID, often aimed at suppressing the votes of people of color and younger voters.

Lack of language access. The English-language requirements of the past may be gone, but voting rights groups regularly receive reports that local jurisdictions are not translating materials or offering language assistance as required by law, proving a persistent barrier to increased voting among language minorities in the Asian American and Latino communities.

Voter roll purges. Under the guise of reviewing voter rolls to remove duplicate names, the names of deceased individuals, or those with standing felony convictions, officials have undertaken indiscriminate “purges” of voter lists in recent years, deleting millions of eligible voters’ names, often with a disproportionate impact on communities of color.

Polling place closures/consolidations. A recent USA Today analysis found that election officials have closed thousands of polling places, largely affecting communities of color. For example, in Chicago’s Cook County, which has the largest non-Hispanic black population in the country, election administrators closed or moved 95 polling places.

Lack of funding for elections. A lack of funding inhibits the ability of localities to manage elections that ensure everyone’s vote counts equally. Some of these problems came to the fore during the 2000 presidential election in Florida, where the recount process shined a spotlight on issues ranging from flawed ballot designs to voting machines that overheated and failed.

Provisional ballot requirements. Federal law allows voters whose eligibility is in question to use a provisional ballot to be counted once the voter is confirmed eligible. However, localities set their own rules in how many provisional ballots to print and training poll workers on processing them, resulting in eligible voters being turned away or their ballots discounted.

Reduced early voting. States and localities have long used early voting to reduce Election Day crunch and open up the process to prospective voters bound by work or other commitments. Faith-based groups have also used early voting for nonpartisan get-out-the-vote efforts. Recently, officials across the nation have curtailed early voting, largely hitting communities of color.

Reduced voting hours. Like limiting early voting, reducing voting hours can make voting less convenient, and even impossible, for many voters. Low-income and working-class people often have less freedom to arrive late or leave early from work, or to take a break from their shifts in the middle of the day. Parents with inflexible childcare arrangements can be similarly impacted.

Poorly trained poll workers. Poll workers need good training to follow the right policies like properly checking IDs, giving language assistance, identifying voter intimidation, and offering provisional ballots. Yet a lack of funding, coupled with a lack of commitment to making voting welcoming and convenient, means poll workers are poorly equipped to do their jobs.

Partisan election administrators. Our country’s highly decentralized election system hands the responsibility for managing elections to state and local administrators, some of them partisan officials with a clear interest in election outcomes favorable to their parties and candidates. Too often, this results in efforts to suppress the votes of groups that might be viewed as opponents.

Creation of at-large local offices to dilute minority vote. An at-large election covers voters across a city or county, in contrast to smaller district elections, which can often result in higher representation for people of color since votes are not diluted by an area-wide population. As a result, some officials create at-large districts to limit the influence of minority communities.

11 Barriers to Voting | Voting | Carnegie Corporation of New York

Legislators in states that have a long track record of voter suppression often implement laws and engage in activities that make it harder for certain segments of the population to vote. Here are some of the most common ways voting …

www.carnegie.org

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I look around and see liberals and conservatives agreeing on lots of things, these days.

And on the other side: the cult.

That's one thing the cult has done to America. Even liberals and conservatives are united on the opposite side of their bizarre paradigm (that has nothing to do with conservatism).

Conservatives see themselves as the dying breed. They are practically begging the GOPers to snap out of it.

When do plan on embracing liberal ideology, child?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

My friend, plenty of lazy good for nothings do vote republican. However, that doesn't bother me one bit. If you are an American citizen you should have the right to vote and you should vote and we should not be creating barriers to make it difficult to vote.

Utter bull. If lazy good for nothings voted Republican you'd see how fast Democrats would be trying to find ways to stop them. Just look at how these inner-city people vote, in the 90% plus range Democrat. These are uneducated people that certainly don't know anything about politics. Then there was the idea of letting kids vote as young as 16. What 16 year old knows anything about politics? 16 year olds are concerned about the newest rock band that came out or if a boy should ask a girl out that he's had his eyes on for the last couple of weeks. Very few understand politics or care about issues, that's why the Democrats wanted them to vote.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

When do plan on embracing liberal ideology, child?

Ah, you need the link to my fan club site again, where you can talk about me all you like. PMed. You're welcome.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Ah, you need the link to my fan club site again, where you can talk about me all you like. PMed. You're welcome.

I'm sure sorry you have never been able to achieve adequacy, Fort Fundamentallist.

 

[Lisa558]

Utter bull. If lazy good for nothings voted Republican you'd see how fast Democrats would be trying to find ways to stop them. Just look at how these inner-city people vote, in the 90% plus range Democrat. These are uneducated people that certainly don't know anything about politics. Then there was the idea of letting kids vote as young as 16. What 16 year old knows anything about politics? 16 year olds are concerned about the newest rock band that came out or if a boy should ask a girl out that he's had his eyes on for the last couple of weeks. Very few understand politics or care about issues, that's why the Democrats wanted them to vote.

Exactly! The fact that Dems were pushing for children to be able to vote shows they WANT voters who are uninformed and subject to being manipulated.

 

[Flopper]

Utter bull. If lazy good for nothings voted Republican you'd see how fast Democrats would be trying to find ways to stop them. Just look at how these inner-city people vote, in the 90% plus range Democrat. These are uneducated people that certainly don't know anything about politics. Then there was the idea of letting kids vote as young as 16. What 16 year old knows anything about politics? 16 year olds are concerned about the newest rock band that came out or if a boy should ask a girl out that he's had his eyes on for the last couple of weeks. Very few understand politics or care about issues, that's why the Democrats wanted them to vote.

The presumption is that people who are living off the government, support easier access to voting, oppose military spending, supports legalizing drugs, believes in open borders, and are not Christian vote democrat. And I agree but the fact is very few people who vote democrat support all those supposed democrat agendas just as very few people who republican support all republican agendas. I have a sister in-law who had 7 kids, never worked a day her life, lives off government support, and would never vote democrat because of the abortion issue.

Eight of the 10 most federally dependent states are Republican, while seven of the 10 least federally dependent states are Democratic, which suggests that overall Republican states are more dependent upon federal assistance than Democratic ones.

Are Republican States More Federally Dependent?

A new report reveals the great variation of federal dependency across the states. But drawing the line between federal and state responsibility is not easy.

www.governing.com

 

[g5000]

After just a little over one year we are living the reality of a completely failed president and his party. Whatever could go wrong has gone wrong and continues to go worse and there is no sign of it letting up. Still, while one side is saying - See? Just look around and listen to our president try and talk!, the other side is finding ways to defend this shit show. If the media was even a little bit honest, some of these people would realize how bad it is, but I think most would still cling to some alternate lib reality any way they could.

There are no conservatives in power any more. There has not been for a very long time.

 

[g5000]

Here's a sample of why our differences are irreconcilable:

"The Democrats spend too much!"

The failure to hold Republicans accountable for their own overspending is the sure sign of partisan hackery that we just can't seem to get past.

 

[Flopper]

The presumption is that people who are living off the government, support easier access to voting, oppose military spending, supports legalizing drugs, believes in open borders, and are not Christian vote democrat. And I agree but the fact is very few people who vote democrat support all those supposed democrat agendas just as very few people who vote republican support all republican agendas. I have a sister in-law who had 7 kids, never worked a day her life, lives off government support, and would never vote democrat because of the abortion issue.

Eight of the 10 most federally dependent states are Republican, while seven of the 10 least federally dependent states are Democratic, which suggests that overall Republican states are more dependent upon federal assistance than Democratic ones.

Are Republican States More Federally Dependent?

A new report reveals the great variation of federal dependency across the states. But drawing the line between federal and state responsibility is not easy.

www.governing.com

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's a sample of why our differences are irreconcilable:

"The Democrats spend too much!"

The failure to hold Republicans accountable for their own overspending is the sure sign of partisan hackery that we just can't seem to get past.

Problem 1 is spending. Problem 2 is what they are spending the money on. Rand Paul puts out a yearly report of wasteful spending. This was last years:

Rand Paul Outlines $54 Billion in ‘Outlandish’ Government Waste in Annual Festivus Report | National Review

Among Paul’s instances of waste were several health studies, including more than $36 million spent on studying why stress makes hair turn gray.

www.nationalreview.com

I think it was the late Walter E Williams that put it best: I'm going to run for a seat in Congress. My platform will be I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The presumption is that people who are living off the government, support easier access to voting, oppose military spending, supports legalizing drugs, believes in open borders, and are not Christian vote democrat. And I agree but the fact is very few people who vote democrat support all those supposed democrat agendas just as very few people who republican support all republican agendas. I have a sister in-law who had 7 kids, never worked a day her life, lives off government support, and would never vote democrat because of the abortion issue.

Eight of the 10 most federally dependent states are Republican, while seven of the 10 least federally dependent states are Democratic, which suggests that overall Republican states are more dependent upon federal assistance than Democratic ones.

Are Republican States More Federally Dependent?

A new report reveals the great variation of federal dependency across the states. But drawing the line between federal and state responsibility is not easy.

www.governing.com

Which is a completely stupid metric given the fact the most population of any state resides in major cities. For example we are a purple state but some consider us red since we usually have a RINO Republican Governor and our state legislature is red. We have one Republican Senator and one very far left Democrat Senator. Our state voted for Trump and DumBama both elections. But.......all our populated areas (major cities) are blue: Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown, Dayton, Cincinnati, Toledo, Columbus are all blue.

The cost of living in blue states is ridiculous. You would be better off living in my area making $12.00 an hour than you would be living in NYC making $20.00 an hour. When you make more you will pay more in federal taxes. That's why the states to cry the loudest when Trump implemented his home loan write-of at one million dollars were people in the blue states. Here, we had no problem with it because you can live in a very nice home in a very nice neighborhood for around $350,000. If you spend any time watching HGTV, the cost of living is very obvious.

 

[g5000]

Problem 1 is spending. Problem 2 is what they are spending the money on. Rand Paul puts out a yearly report of wasteful spending. This was last years:

Rand Paul Outlines $54 Billion in ‘Outlandish’ Government Waste in Annual Festivus Report | National Review

Among Paul’s instances of waste were several health studies, including more than $36 million spent on studying why stress makes hair turn gray.

www.nationalreview.com

I think it was the late Walter E Williams that put it best: I'm going to run for a seat in Congress. My platform will be I will bring no money back to my state. Would you vote for me?

Spending is not what is dividing us. What divides us is that no one cares when their own party overspends, and yet they get mad at the other party for overspending.

Hypocrisy is dividing us.

As for Rand Paul, sheeeee-it. He's waaaay under the mark. I point out $1.4 trillion of wasteful annual spending on a regular basis on this forum.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Spending is not what is dividing us. What divides us is that no one cares when their own party overspends, and yet they get mad at the other party for overspending.

Hypocrisy is dividing us.

As for Rand Paul, sheeeee-it. He's waaaay under the mark. I point out $1.4 trillion of wasteful annual spending on a regular basis on this forum.

Spending takes place no matter who has leadership. If we are going to spend, let us spend money on things that better the country, not vote buying like the Democrats do.