Hundreds of mail-in ballot applications are being rejected under Texas’ new voting rules

Why? It speaks directly to the issue. In order for the ID to be a valid part of these new Texas voter restrictions, voters need the place to use them. Otherwise, this whole debate is pointless. These Texas voter suppression laws requiring ID and S.S. are worth nothing, if the place to use them is no longer there.

Think about this for a minute. Hundreds of polling places closed down in minority areas, and now Texas Republicans are demanding ID and S.S. numbers, for what? To try and vote in a place that no longer exists? :laughing0301::laughing0301::laughing0301: I'm not against ID and S.S., but if there isn't a place to use it, like, wtf is the point? Texas has reduced its voting populations down to centers that cater to Republicans. The ID and S.S. scheme is a facade.

You have yet to complete the discussion on ID requirements. You want me and others to discuss something outside SB1, fine, just start another thread. If you do it with finesse you may have my support. Do it with the same juvenile methods and you just look like a friggin idiot. So far, you get the friggin idiot trophy.
 
Isn't the entire point of an absentee ballot that you don't have access to a polling place?

You still have to fill it out correctly.

Good point. We have had 2 cases of voter fraud starting in 2018. Both were bagged due to improper ID. I think the 2018 fraud should be getting out of prison soon.
 
Mother Jones. Another lying leftist puke bucket. I know. I used to subscribe and then I grew a brain.
And yet, no counter argument in sight from you. You really are a loser; At least 1,688 polling places closed in southern US, as gutting voting rights act hits hard, report says To be exact, since 2018, 1688 polling places closed. This is how the Right can seriously impact minorities, not to mention the 400 voter suppression tactics. The Right, truly has abandoned their country over party. And the party doesn't even exist any more.
 
Isn't the entire point of an absentee ballot that you don't have access to a polling place?

You still have to fill it out correctly.
You do understand, that some of the bills now limit absentee ballots right? Why? Can you cite one good reason why it should be limited, barring the fact that Dejoy has also gutted the post office in recent years? It seems to me, days should be added, not reduced, right? Explain to us all why the days should be reduced?

As for the polling place, why were these 1688 polling places closed in mostly minority areas? Do you know? Have you ever wondered why? Do you care?
 
You do understand, that some of the bills now limit absentee ballots right?

Anyone requesting an absentee ballot should be, by definition, absent.

That is, physically unable to attend a polling place.

Because of the extremely high potential for fraud in postal ballots, any safeguards to certify authenticity of both the ballot and the voter's qualification to vote are justified.

Parties are free to, and often do, provide free transportation to voters who have difficulty reaching designated polling places.
 
Good point. We have had 2 cases of voter fraud starting in 2018. Both were bagged due to improper ID. I think the 2018 fraud should be getting out of prison soon.
It's not a good point, because these Republican states have reduced the days for absentee voting. Why? You're telling me, that Republicans closed down 1688 polling places in minority areas, replaced that burden with absentee voting, only to reduce the days for absentee voting? :laughing0301: :laughing0301: :laughing0301: When does the Republican obstruction to voting stop? You folks have a problem with being too obvious over your intentions. It's really pathetic. Hopefully the justice department will get a handle on all this ridiculous cheating by the cult party.
 
Anyone requesting an absentee ballot should be, by definition, absent.

That is, physically unable to attend a polling place.
We'll, with 1688 polling places closed in minority areas, voters will need lot's of days because the polling places are not there.

Because of the extremely high potential for fraud in postal ballots, any safeguards to certify authenticity of both the ballot and the voter's qualification to vote are justified.
Except for one thing, the word you used is "potential." Republicans have gone to great lengths to limit voting for minorities over a "potential" that hasn't happened.

Parties are free to, and often do, provide free transportation to voters who have difficulty reaching designated polling places.
Bull shit! Not if you live out in the middle of no where; Plans to close all but one polling place in a rural Georgia county reverberate through a battleground state But in a community with little reliable public transportation, "the poor and marginalized people won't be able to vote because, bottom line, they won't be able to get to the polls," said the Rev. Christopher Johnson, the head of the Greater Augusta's Interfaith Coalition -- one of the groups fighting the change.
This is why your argument has no standing with reality.

And one other thing, by definition, these people are absent, because the polls are absent. That door needs to swing open both ways.
 
Last edited:
Anyone requesting an absentee ballot should be, by definition, absent.

That is, physically unable to attend a polling place.

Because of the extremely high potential for fraud in postal ballots, any safeguards to certify authenticity of both the ballot and the voter's qualification to vote are justified.

Parties are free to, and often do, provide free transportation to voters who have difficulty reaching designated polling places.
You still have not answered my questions from post #107? Still waiting.
 

Why would English papers print a story about American politics that US papers aren't printing?

Could it be they have an agenda? As the English liberal rag, 'The Guardian', did in 2004 when they sent a mass mailing to swing state voters urging them not to vote to re-elect President Bush?
 
Not if you live out in the middle of no where

If you make the conscious choice to live "in the middle of nowhere', you cannot expect others to go out of their way to make your life more convenient.

How about the burden on poll watchers who would be forced to travel to "the middle of nowhere" to guarantee an election free of shenanigans?

Or, is banning poll watchers the goal here? Like the last election.
 
Republicans have gone to great lengths to limit voting for minorities over a "potential" that hasn't happened.

I have never been burgled or had my car stolen ... however, I still lock my house and car because the potential is ALWAYS there.

I'm sorry if my concern for potential crime makes it inconvenient for potential criminals. However, if that is how they choose to earn their living, that is something they will have to consider.
 
Why would English papers print a story about American politics that US papers aren't printing?

Could it be they have an agenda? As the English liberal rag, 'The Guardian', did in 2004 when they sent a mass mailing to swing state voters urging them not to vote to re-elect President Bush?
See how weak, uninformed, and unprepared you are to lock horns over the facts? They all succumb to their own failures sooner or later. Had that article been untrue, the Right wing rag sites would have eaten it alive. Problem is, they can't. You know why? Because the Guardian isn't the only site posting it.

And you still haven't answered my other questions. LOL! You are looking quite diluted here already. But please, do continue trying to defend the indefensible.
 
Last edited:
208 is not hundreds. And I agree, that is the reason then they should be rejected with a letter of rejection explaining why. But what it doesn't say is the total number. Is that in the hundreds, in the thousands or the hundreds of thousands. Doesn't sound like there is a problem here. Please get your victim card validated and put it back in your wallet.
208 IS hundreds.
 
If you make the conscious choice to live "in the middle of nowhere', you cannot expect others to go out of their way to make your life more convenient.

How about the burden on poll watchers who would be forced to travel to "the middle of nowhere" to guarantee an election free of shenanigans?

Or, is banning poll watchers the goal here? Like the last election.
I sure can. I can demand that my county have enough polling places to accommodate. I pay fucking taxes, and not everyone is rich enough to live in town. Your argument sucks to high heaven. That's a piss poor excuse not to have polling places. If they can't provide the means, then people in rural areas shouldn't be paying taxes.

As far as poll watchers go, many of them are performing shenanigans with intimidation. I hold no stock in those folks at all. That's your grift, not mine.
 

Forum List

Back
Top