GOP Moving the Goal Posts Just in Time For the 2012 Election

[CrusaderFrank]

There are many people who don't travel on airplanes. And I would consider it a safe bet that most FL residents aren't making a regular habit of trying to access buildings in NYC.

I don't know what life is like in your refrigerator box, but I'm sure you have to show photo ID to access a lot of buildings in FL.

No ID= no access = no vote.

And it's just too ******* bad

Then why did you bring up NYC?

Why did I bring up airplanes? Because you need to have ID, in fact I think it's failure to produce ID might be a crime in some places

 

[Inthemiddle]

Election DAY

Not Election Week

Election DAY.

It's once every 4 years and if you can't get yourself to the poll, that's too ******* bad

I see you failed to address anything I said. What is the purpose of shortening the early voting period? And what is the purpose of specifically carving out Sunday from the early voting period? How does that accomplish anything of the public benefit?

 

[Inthemiddle]

Why did I bring up airplanes? Because you need to have ID, in fact I think it's failure to produce ID might be a crime in some places

No, I said, why did you bring up NYC?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Election DAY

Not Election Week

Election DAY.

It's once every 4 years and if you can't get yourself to the poll, that's too ******* bad

I see you failed to address anything I said. What is the purpose of shortening the early voting period? And what is the purpose of specifically carving out Sunday from the early voting period? How does that accomplish anything of the public benefit?

Did you miss my "Election Day. Not Election Week" post?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why did I bring up airplanes? Because you need to have ID, in fact I think it's failure to produce ID might be a crime in some places

No, I said, why did you bring up NYC?

Because I live here jackoff and I have to show ID every time I enter my building.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Did you miss my "Election Day. Not Election Week" post?

What I missed was where you explain what public benefit is served. I'll wait. But not long. Either explain something of public benefit that is served, or concede it's nothing but slippery politics.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Because I live here jackoff and I have to show ID every time I enter my building.

And what does that have to do with Florida?

 

[kwc57]

Election DAY

Not Election Week

Election DAY.

It's once every 4 years and if you can't get yourself to the poll, that's too ******* bad

I see you failed to address anything I said. What is the purpose of shortening the early voting period? And what is the purpose of specifically carving out Sunday from the early voting period? How does that accomplish anything of the public benefit?

What's the purpose of extending election DAY? It happens every four years. Anyone too stupid to let election day sneak up on them is too stupid to vote.

 

[kwc57]

Voting is a privelege

What THE ****!?!?!?!?

When you go to your 8th grade Civics class after lunch today, have a talk with your teacher. Educating yourself to reality rather than ideology will serve you well in life. Here is some light reading to get your schooling started. Consider it a gift.

FairVote - The Right to Vote Amendment

"The right to vote is the foundation of any democracy. Yet most Americans do not realize that we do not have a constitutionally protected right to vote. While there are amendments to the U.S. Constitution that prohibit discrimination based on race (15th), sex (19th) and age (26th), no affirmative right to vote exists.

The 2000 Presidential Election was the first time many Americans realized the necessity of a constitutional right to vote. The majority of the U.S. Supreme Court, in Bush v. Gore (2000), wrote, "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States." The U.S. is one of only 11 other democracies in the world with no affirmative right to vote enshrined in its constitution.........."

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

"The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to."

A Right to Vote Amazingly, the Constitution fails to guarantee the most basic of Democratic rights

I'm waiting InTheMiddle.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Election DAY

Not Election Week

Election DAY.

It's once every 4 years and if you can't get yourself to the poll, that's too ******* bad

I see you failed to address anything I said. What is the purpose of shortening the early voting period? And what is the purpose of specifically carving out Sunday from the early voting period? How does that accomplish anything of the public benefit?

WHO CARES? It is the sole duty and right of the State Legislature to determine the amount of days, number of polling places, hours of operation and other regulations associated with voting. To include Federal Elections. The sole Federal requirement is that on the first Tuesday (UNLESS IT IS THE FIRST DAY OF THE MONTH) of November every State provide the citizens of that State the ability to vote in federal elections.

If the VOTERS of Florida disagree with their State legislature it is their duty, right and responsibility to vote them out in State Elections.

I have a question along the lines of your idiotic question. What was the PURPOSE of EXTENDING the voting days? Have you any studies documents or statistics that provide a credible claim that prior to the extension the State was somehow denying its citizens the right to vote in Federal elections? Have you any credible evidence, facts, statistics or studies that provide proof that shortening the voting period will deny anyone the opportunity to vote in Federal elections?

 

[Inthemiddle]

What's the purpose of extending election DAY? It happens every four years. Anyone too stupid to let election day sneak up on them is too stupid to vote.

Many states have made the choice to have early voting. There are various benefits. It accommodates people who have difficulty getting to the polls on election day based on disability. It also allows people to vote on a day off from work, thus it protects business from having to suffer as much lost productivity from its workers being absent for voting. It also protects citizens from employers who would violate the law by not allowing them such time to go vote. It also expedites the overall process, requiring less processing and counting on election day, delivering faster results.

But, your question is irrelevant and does nothing to answer my question. The fact is that EARLY VOTING EXISTS. The question is what public benefit is served by reducing the early voting period? And what public benefit is served by specifically removing Sunday from early voting?

 

[Inthemiddle]

When you go to your 8th grade Civics class after lunch today, have a talk with your teacher.....I'm waiting InTheMiddle.

Keep waiting.

 

[Londoner]

Look at the infamous Souther Strategy. The GOP literally came out of the New Deal wilderness by using Civil Rights backlash to capture the votes of southern white males. Disenfranchising southern blacks has always been a primary electoral strategy in the south, especially in places like Florida.

People don't get it. When Conservatism became a powerful activist movement in the 70s, they crafted themselves into a uber-powerful election machine. Movements don't care about the law. They don't care about the Constitution. They care about enforcing their values by any means necessary. If they have to sacrifice election law for a greater good, they will.

When Chaney and Bush meet in the war room to enact an agenda, they don't talk about fairness and justice. People don't get it. Republicans treat elections like war. The enemy is liberalism - and it must be stopped by whatever means necessary. Disenfranchising voters is not felt as a crime, it is felt as a necessary evil to realizing a better world. You need to understand how movements think and behave. They are at war. The Constitution be damned.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What's the purpose of extending election DAY? It happens every four years. Anyone too stupid to let election day sneak up on them is too stupid to vote.

Many states have made the choice to have early voting. There are various benefits. It accommodates people who have difficulty getting to the polls on election day based on disability. It also allows people to vote on a day off from work, thus it protects business from having to suffer as much lost productivity from its workers being absent for voting. It also protects citizens from employers who would violate the law by not allowing them such time to go vote. It also expedites the overall process, requiring less processing and counting on election day, delivering faster results.

But, your question is irrelevant and does nothing to answer my question. The fact is that EARLY VOTING EXISTS. The question is what public benefit is served by reducing the early voting period? And what public benefit is served by specifically removing Sunday from early voting?

If you are now claiming that extended voting periods are NEEDED for the public benefit, first you have to prove that is true. Further you need to cite for us some studies, statistics and facts that support a claim that one day as required by the Federal Government is not enough.

Then you need to provide us with studies, statistics and facts that provide evidence that a certain number of days are required, that certain specific days must be included and that a State is knowingly making laws to deny its citizens the right to vote.

 

[Inthemiddle]

WHO CARES? It is the sole duty and right of the State Legislature to determine the amount of days, number of polling places, hours of operation and other regulations associated with voting.

Uh, what is your issue? We're here to discuss politics. I've given my opinion that the GOP is playing dirty tricks with voting laws. And the best thing you can do is get into a tissy and say is "who cares it's their job."

 

[RetiredGySgt]

WHO CARES? It is the sole duty and right of the State Legislature to determine the amount of days, number of polling places, hours of operation and other regulations associated with voting.

Uh, what is your issue? We're here to discuss politics. I've given my opinion that the GOP is playing dirty tricks with voting laws. And the best thing you can do is get into a tissy and say is "who cares it's their job."

You have made a claim against a political party but have failed to provide one shred of evidence to back up your clam. Where are the statistics that support your claim that democrats are more adversely effected by x number of days to vote? Where are your credible studies that 7 days is somehow detrimental to the ability of democrats to vote any more then Republicans or any other political party? YOU made the claim back it up with actual FACTS.

 

[Inthemiddle]

If you are now claiming that extended voting periods are NEEDED for the public benefit, first you have to prove that is true.

1) I never claimed that they were necessary. I said that that decision had already been made to establish early voting, and I asked what public benefit was served by reducing it, and by specifically eliminating Sunday. My question is, "Is there a public benefit served, or is this nothing more than an attempt to manipulate the voting process to favor a GOP outcome?"

2) If you'd been paying attention, I did offer several reasons how the public is served through early voting. They certainly fall short of showing early voting as a necessity. But they do demonstrate a benefit that is gained.

3) Proving a necessity in early voting is not itself necessary. The fact is that early voting already exists. Maybe it's not necessary for it to exist, but I'm asking what public benefit is served by reducing it in this manner. Why is it so hard for you all to answer a simple question?

Further you need to cite for us some studies, statistics and facts that support a claim that one day as required by the Federal Government is not enough.

I don't have to cite anything because I never made the claim you're trying to say I did. I merely asked what is the public benefit in reducing the already extant early voting period, and specifically eliminating Sunday?

Then you need to provide us with studies, statistics and facts that provide evidence that a certain number of days are required, that certain specific days must be included and that a State is knowingly making laws to deny its citizens the right to vote.

Again, I don't need to provide anything. I am asking what public benefit is being served by reducing the already extant early voting period and by specifically eliminating Sunday?

Why is it so hard to get an answer to a simple question?

 

[Seawytch]

The FACTS are that voter ID laws DO disenfranchise some voters. In recent weeks we've heard from at least two or three elderly individuals that have had a difficult time getting photo IDs.

So, to those in favor or these restrictive voter ID laws, how many voters are you willing to disenfranchise with these laws to combat the voter fraud that isn't occurring? What's your acceptable ratio?

Voter fraud that isnt occurring.

We know that is a line of BS.

you are so concerned about disenfranchisement never stopping to consider that a single fraudulent vote is disenfranchisement.

As stated, in recent weeks there have been two documented incidents of elderly voters having difficulties getting the required photo IDs. Name two recent incidents of convicted voter fraud where IDs would have kept the fraud from occurring.

 

[kwc57]

When you go to your 8th grade Civics class after lunch today, have a talk with your teacher.....I'm waiting InTheMiddle.

Keep waiting.

I accept your surrender on your misunderstanding of voting "rights". If you need additional schooling son, there are plenty here who know what they are talking about. Feel free to ask instead of making an ass out of yourself.

 

[grunt11b]

I'm wondering how many people have actually read the article, and why everyone is focusing in on the ID issue. In my mind, it's the least of issues. I, personally, don't really have an issue with requiring photo ID at the polling location.

What I find problematic is that the new rules FL created to reduce the early voting period, and especially elimination of voting on the Sunday before election day. What is the rational basis for this? It is obviously an attempt to thwart any effort by Obama to repeat his Souls to the Polls tactic which worked so well for him. And THAT is shameful, to create new voting laws specifically in an attempt to preempt a particular candidate's political prowess. Clearly, the Florida GOP is abusing its role in an attempt to eliminate votes for Obama.

I agree that the nationwide trends that we're seeing do indicate that the GOP is trying to manipulate the voting process when state legislatures should be concentrating on the real issues their respective states face. It reminds me of the 2002 gerrymandering that took place in Texas. There as no need to redistrict again, but they did it anyway. Why? The sole reason was to manipulate the system in favor of the GOP. Politics is one thing, but this kind of stuff is disgraceful. It's no wonder so many people say that the GOP is party before country. While that's true for the Democrats also, it seems like the GOP outpaces the Dems on that issue leaps and bounds.

It doesn't matter what the rules are, they apply to everyone equally, I think this may be the issue that you are having with it, that it applies equally to everyone. As long as it applies equally to everyone, I have zero issues with it.