iceberg
Diamond Member
- May 15, 2017
- 36,788
- 14,919
- 1,600
i try. i don't always succeed, but my views are to create an equal playing field both sides can use. to me that is how it should be. if you're out to gain an advantage and scream when the other side does the same, it leads to where we are today. not a fan of where we are today.
i do agree we all lead with our preferences. that's human nature. however, we can think too and ask ourselves if we're doing the right thing for all, or simply how we feel about a given situation. that is a choice we make when we talk with each other.
easy to see we don't always make the same choices. this is not a slam, but a simple fact of life.
both sides didn't follow the same set of precautionary rules, now did they? the side screaming the loudest broke their own "guidelines" when it suited a singular purpose in achieving their own goals above the good of all.True, there is a proper way. During the pandemic both parties put out changes that addressed how we vote in order to accommodate pandemic conditions.
Here's how states have changed the rules around voting amid the coronavirus pandemic
Voting is always confusing, but the coronavirus pandemic has made it even more so -- here's what you need to know about how voting has changed for the general election.abcnews.go.com
I believe only one state did not do so completely properly though no one bothered to challenge throughout the primaries or through the general election, until afterwards.
Fair and equitable - when it comes to voting, these conditions are met by:
1. There is no attempted disenfranchisement (remember NC's law, where the judge used the term "surgical precision")...of any legitimate voter.
2. It expands access to all people equally within the jurisdiction. For example all people can use drive through voting regardless of who they vote for.
3. It does not act to inhibit voting access or rights for any group.
That is reasonable don't you think?
"disenfranchise voters" - i hear about this far more than i see it. we must have wide open voting for people who can't simply get a ballot ahead of time in a proper vetted method and mail it in or show up days before up to the day of the election to vote.
who are these people that value their right to vote so highly that they refuse to make an effort to exercise that right?
like voter id's. we hear some people simply can't get them so they must be done away with. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? i've never seen a legit story of someone who couldn't get a voter id. if we do have these situations, then fine. let the local authorities help that person vote and take care of it. we don't need to open up 99% of the system for a so far mythical 1% who can't do it the way the rest can.
how far do we open things up for people who simply can't vote any other way available to them? sooner or later you need to say "get off your ass and go inside to get that burger".
again, not to say we don't need an overhaul of the voting system, but no; i do not see a need to open it up wide to make it so easy to vote and so hard to verify. when someone cheats, they cheat people trying to do it legally so to me, the system should have safeguards in it that simply don't include things like bringing ballots by the house via uber, which is where this could go. esp since the democrats are out to have anyone pick up votes anywhere.
how you don't see the potential abuse of this is beyond me.
expanding voting access - again; why? voting is a responsibility in as much as a right. to say we're expanding it to make it easier makes you sound all full of warmth and caring but the expansions done during 2020 were done for the lefts benefit, not all. and again, much of it done outside legal process of the state.
examples:
California 1
Can States and Courts Change Federal Election Voting Rules During A Pandemic? | American Center for Law and Justice
Numerous questions have arisen regarding whether federal election voting rules could change if the Coronavirus pandemic persists into the fall. Questions have focused on the power of states and judges to unilaterally change either the date or the manner of elections. First, the date of the...
aclj.org
we also have states mailing out ballots whether you asked for one or not. this desire to make voting as easy as microwave popcorn MUST ALSO KEEP SECURITY and integrity as their focus. in the IT world, the rules are simple. if you want to be secure, limit access.
saying "oh it will be fine, no one will abuse this" is bullshit, to me. not that *you* are saying it but that does seem to be the mindset of those wanting to crank this open.
in order to change your voting laws, you must go through your state legislature. THEY make the laws. not the gov, not the will of the people. this was bypassed time and time again and COVID was used as the excuse. the people using this excuse a double shitton of examples of where they simply ignore their own mandates when they don't like them.
these changes were to the benefit of one side. the left. extending dates to get votes in and so forth requires changes to laws and time and again this was done with the stroke of a pen, not their own constitutional process.
Changes to election dates, procedures, and administration in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
now, time and again the federal gov said changing these laws is STATE RIGHT to do how they wish. but as soon as they got "in power" - the feds must take over as states are incompetent.
Democratic voting bill would make biggest changes in decades
WASHINGTON (AP) — As Congress begins debate this week on sweeping voting and ethics legislation, Democrats and Republicans can agree on one thing: If signed into law, it would usher in the biggest overhaul of U.S. elections law in at least a generation.
apnews.com
funny how we go from fighting for state rights to taking them away as soon as it's convenient.
i do fully agree we're having a respectful conversation. thank you for that. the forum software also makes it much easier to break out replies. great change.
all that said, i am FOR revamping our voting process and procedures. but i also know NOW is the worst time to do it because it would require fair and balanced people to put together a platform that doesn't play favorites and respects all rights to vote, as any system should. but people have shown to have zero idea what a neutral platform is anymore as everything has been weaponized these days from voting, to gun rights, to where we pee. this is not the mindset of a culture that is needed to create an unbiased system for all to use.
simply put, we're not mature enough to do what we need to do. in my mind this simply means it will continue to be every man/woman/whoever you are for yourself and i 100% believe this is a shitty place to be and no good can come from single minded actions.
one thing that does cross my mind is however, make the process to vote the same as getting a gun. both are rights and both should be protected. invariably this idea starts firestorms with people because it interferes with their own wants and desires and/or plays on their fears.
we need changes, but those changes are a foundation for all; not an advancement for a single ideology.
