The Killing Of The United States of America

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
13,147
Reaction score
1,878
Points
245
Location
Virginia
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
The goal of the bill is to enable everyone who is eligible to vote the way they choose. I don't blame the GOP for being scared, they are a party that represents only a minority of voters so a free and open election is their deathknell.
you left out something.....you said free and open election. Now it is all about free, open and EASY election.

Those that dont want to deal with the inconvenience of voting, should not have their right to vote made easier.
So a working mother who has to pick up and feed her children or a young person working 2 jobs to get ahead, they're the ones that shouldn't have an easier path to voting?
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
28,176
Reaction score
13,660
Points
1,100
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
The goal of the bill is to enable everyone who is eligible to vote the way they choose. I don't blame the GOP for being scared, they are a party that represents only a minority of voters so a free and open election is their deathknell.
you left out something.....you said free and open election. Now it is all about free, open and EASY election.

Those that dont want to deal with the inconvenience of voting, should not have their right to vote made easier.
So a working mother who has to pick up and feed her children or a young person working 2 jobs to get ahead, they're the ones that shouldn't have an easier path to voting?
everybody has the same easy path to voting,,, what you want is a special path for some people,,,
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
13,147
Reaction score
1,878
Points
245
Location
Virginia
WRONG...i my opinion.

The democrats found a way to get the lazy ass people who did not want to get off the couch to vote because it aint worth their time...and God Forbid if they miss Oprah, and they certainly dont want to not be home when Publishers clearing house arrives with their flowers, balloons and check....and to them voting is a chore and not a privilege.......so lets make it easy...we will send you a ballot, send someone to your house to help you fill it out and take it to the mailbox for you....

and why?

Because you are a dumbass lazy individual who has better things to do than spend an hour voting.

Now...thats the fucking truth and anyone who argues has no idea what the fuck is going on in urban America.
Basically the same thing. People who have no idea of our country and politics generally have no interest in voting. Sure, they will vote if it's convenient enough: rides to the polls, multiple day voting, no lines to wait in, mail-in ballots. To take the time and effort into voting, they would sooner stay home.

So like I said, the commies found a way to get the politically ignorant to vote. The extent of their knowledge is Democrats are for the poor people and Republicans are for the rich. Besides, I'll vote Democrat because Democrat sounds like democracy, and I heard democracy is a good thing, right?

We Republicans will do anything to vote because we know and understand what's at stake here. If we have to drive a few miles to get to the polls, we'll be there. If we have to go out in terrible weather conditions, we'll do it. If we have to wait in line for an hour, we'll catch up on our Facebook posts or play video games. But one way or another, people who are knowledgeable of politics will be there to vote, and if only those people did vote, Democrats would never have leadership again in this country.
I vote based on my ideology and who has a plan moving forward for America. that I agree with

Others vote based on promises of cash and free goods and services.

If one disagrees with this they are clueless as it pertains to the American voter.
You mean like someone who offers us a wall that someone else will pay for? That kind of promise?
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
37,312
Reaction score
5,487
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Arizona admits its proposed changes to Navaho voting are to make it easier for them to win, even though they admit they could collect ballots in other ways. And the SC seems ready to ok it. So I'm not seeing your hyperbole as justified. The goal should be to get the most people to vote legally regardless of outcome. If that disadvantages the gop, that's the gop's fault in not having a better platform/policies and/or explaining to people why their platform is better for them. People are not stupid. Even QAnon people are not stupid. They behave in a way that rationally fits their desires. But we live in what is supposed to be a democratically elected repbulican govt.
I heard the Arizona clown last night. Gotta love it when they say the quiet part out loud!

“What’s the interest of the Arizona RNC in keeping, say, the out-of-precinct ballot disqualification rules on the books?" Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked, referencing legal standing.​
“Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats,” said Michael Carvin, the lawyer defending the state's restrictions. “Politics is a zero-sum game. And every extra vote they get through unlawful interpretation of Section 2 hurts us, it’s the difference between winning an election 50-49 and losing an election 51 to 50.”​

Well the SC seems fine with that. I can understand the Judicial philosophy. We had gerrymandering for centuries. The voting rights act was to ameliorate racial discrimination. AZ probably doesn't give a twit that the voter is Navaho or whatever race the person is who shows up at the wrong polling place. It just that those votes tend to be D. Roberts' view seems to be that the dems can do it to, if they ever manage to win some state legislatures. They sure do it in CA. But his view is that it's a political, not a judicial issue.

So, if the Dems can pass a law making it easier for ALL people to vote, more power to em.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,638
Reaction score
11,495
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
Was wondering how long before the anti-democracy crowd would be bitching about HR-1. It will probably pass. Have you picked your next country yet? Bye.
They want to make DC a state along with other odd laws. Will never pass in the senate.
Nope. If you had read my long post where some air head, wanted me to respond to the right wing talking points post, slanted their way those to ignorant of lazy to read a piece of legislation, you would have seen my comment, saying I do not care about that section and would just as soon DC stay as it is. I am not much of a throw the baby with the bathwater. Never, ever saw a piece of legislation (especially one as complicated as that, thought most are nowadays) that I agreed with every single line. Overall, I still support the bill. It will be tweaked and edited before this is over in the Senate. It goes a long way to requiring securities and accountabilities, and conformance performance across the country in regards to Federal elections, that were complained about by both sides during the 2020, including paper backup that can be viewed by the voter and cross referenced to the electronic count to insure the worst fear (voting machine programming shenanigans) to not take place. It codifies early voting times that is being curtailed in state legislatures, in the effort to keep the opposition party from voting. It makes registering to vote simpler and quicker for all that have trouble standing in line at some location (often DMV) to register or make changes to registration and make the voting database more accessible to states cross referencing voters that might try to register in more than one place. the bill does a host of thing and contribute to greater participation of the populous in voting, which is the basis of our democratically elected representative form of constitutional governance.

The fact is there is no such thing as a federal election. All elections without exception are State and lower elections. The only provision constitutionally is to allow the federal congress to set the date for the election, everything else is left to the States.

.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
39,718
Reaction score
13,720
Points
1,560
Location
Boston, MA

colfax_m

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2019
Messages
24,503
Reaction score
8,116
Points
465
The fact is there is no such thing as a federal election. All elections without exception are State and lower elections. The only provision constitutionally is to allow the federal congress to set the date for the election, everything else is left to the States.
Tell that to Texas who thought they had the right to tell other states how they could vote by suing in federal court.
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,638
Reaction score
11,495
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If you don't have something to actually contribute, get the fuck out of the thread. Reported.

.
What, is laughing not a valid response? Another rightie engaging in Cancel Culture™ again?
On topic content is required by the forum rules, you have yet to post anything remotely on topic.
You should have posted in Clean Debate Forum instead of Politics if you wanted thread purity.
Stop Whining :crying:

Read the rules for posting in zones 1 & 2. Here allow me to assist you in curing your ignorance . Note the portions in red.

To cut down on the abuse and to increase the quality/exchange in threads in the Politics Forum, it is imperative that we begin to eliminate "off topic" posts, aka trolling, in the Politics Forum. Below you will find examples of what is unacceptable and will be removed from the the forum.

Your Post Needs To Contain Relevant On Topic Content besides Your Flame. -Intense

Example 1.


*Mikey post a new thread in the Politics Forum titled: Obama is the Greatest Prez!!. His post reads:

Mikey: Obama is the greatest President. Not only did he pass Obama Care he....(Mikey continues to post his opinion/facts/links etc on why the POTUS is the greatest)

*Suzy Q decides she wants to participate

Suzy Q: Jerkoff, go fuck yourself (Off Topic, Troll post)

*Tommy decides he wants to participate as well.

Tommy: Ignore Mikey Suzy Q, he's a clueless dickhead (Off topic, Troll post)

*The thread continues on, evolves into other subjects that pertain to the OP and/or debate (as all threads do) and Tina wishes to jump in the fray. The debate has evolved into past presidents

Tina (addressing another member): Lincoln was a fraud! He....(off Tina goes into why Lincoln was a fraud)

*This pique's Stewart's interest and it moves him to post his rebuttal

Stewart: Fat whore go drown yourself (Off Topic, Troll Post)

These types of posts will be removed from the forum. They add nothing and serve no purpose. We ask members to report these types of abuses so that they may be removed promptly. DO NOT QUOTE THEM AND RESPOND IN SAME.

Mods are not here to babysit and members who become a nuisance in the Politics Forum by continuing to post these types of posts will be warned to refrain from posting these inflammatory remarks. If said member continues to post them, the mod staff will begin to move onto the 3 strikes. On the third strike, all posting privileges will be revoked and the member PERMANENTLY banned.

Lastly, we do not wish to squash the "spirited debate" that takes place in the Politics Forum but we ask that members add content. We'd rather members make their point and get out, but if members feel the need to throw in some colorful language and insults to their post please feel free. So there is no confusion the example below shows an acceptable post.

Example 2.

Mikey post a new thread in the Politics Forum titled: Obama is the Greatest Prez!!. His post reads:

Mikey: Obama is the greatest President. Not only did he pass Obama Care he....(Mikey continues to post his opinion/facts/links etc on why the POTUS is the greatest)

Suzy Q decides she wants to participate

Suzy Q: Jerkoff, go fuck yourself. Obama Care is nothing more than.......(and off she goes into picking apart Mikeys post by adding content rich in opinions/facts/links)

We'd like to see the rebuttal completely insult free, but thats how some choose to make their point.

REMEMBER, ADD CONTENT RELEVANT TO THE OP OR CURRENT TOPIC THAT THREAD HAS EVOLVED INTO. Insults and one liners meant to demean members or derail threads is NOT considered content.

-Use the Flame Zone if you wish to troll, insult and flame. That's what it's there for-

~Most people realize that politics and religion are the two major subjects that can inflame people the most; I'm sure everyone here would like to invite, encourage, and facilitate discussion to the maximum extent possible. To that end, a serious effort is being made to cut down on the inflamatory trolling without curtailing debate in the Political Forum. So, if you post a message that is nothing more than a personal attack, if the Mods find it or somebody reports it then it'll get deleted. But if you use what might be termed 'colorful language' as part of a response to another post that relates to the topic, then it stays even though a personal attack is included.

It falls to the Mods to make the call as to whether or not a given post is close enough to be considered 'on topic' or not. Or whether the 'colorful language' is sufficient to be termed a personal attack. It's at our discretion, and we try to balance your right to say what you want with the best interests of everybody else and the USMB as a whole. No doubt we'll make a few decisions that somebody won't like; please know that we are doing the best and most conscientious job we can.~

.
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
37,312
Reaction score
5,487
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
The fact is there is no such thing as a federal election. All elections without exception are State and lower elections. The only provision constitutionally is to allow the federal congress to set the date for the election, everything else is left to the States.
Tell that to Texas who thought they had the right to tell other states how they could vote by suing in federal court.
It's also untrue. The Fed Govt is empowered by the const to regulate federal elections.

Although the Elections Clause makes states primarily responsible for regulating congressional elections, it vests ultimate power in Congress. Congress may pass federal laws regulating congressional elections that automatically displace (“preempt”) any contrary state statutes, or enact its own regulations concerning those aspects of elections that states may not have addressed.
Interpretation: Elections Clause | The National Constitution Center
 

alang1216

Pragmatist
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
13,147
Reaction score
1,878
Points
245
Location
Virginia
everybody has the same easy path to voting,,, what you want is a special path for some people,,,
Everyone should have an easy path, except that the GOP is making it ever harder to vote.
#1) Show up at a place to vote
#2) Present an ID
#3) Vote

Why is this difficult?
The 'Show up at a place to vote' can be a burden if you're many miles away, say you're on an Indian reservation. Closing places so there are fewer of them is also a burden.

An attorney for Arizona's Republican Party offered a blunt reason for his presence defending the state's voting restrictions before the Supreme Court on Tuesday: The measures disadvantage Democrats.
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
28,176
Reaction score
13,660
Points
1,100
everybody has the same easy path to voting,,, what you want is a special path for some people,,,
Everyone should have an easy path, except that the GOP is making it ever harder to vote.
they are calling for exactly what we've had for hundreds of yrs,,,

take your ID and go to the voting booth on voting day,,,
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
28,176
Reaction score
13,660
Points
1,100
The fact is there is no such thing as a federal election. All elections without exception are State and lower elections. The only provision constitutionally is to allow the federal congress to set the date for the election, everything else is left to the States.
Tell that to Texas who thought they had the right to tell other states how they could vote by suing in federal court.
when are you going to stop lying,,

those other states illegally changed their rules at the last minute,,
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,638
Reaction score
11,495
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
The goal of the bill is to enable everyone who is eligible to vote the way they choose. I don't blame the GOP for being scared, they are a party that represents only a minority of voters so a free and open election is their deathknell.

That's the reason they elect State legislatures, it not the job of the feds. But low information voters such as yourself, don't seem to know what the Constitution actually says on the topic.

.
 

AzogtheDefiler

The Pale Orc
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2018
Messages
39,718
Reaction score
13,720
Points
1,560
Location
Boston, MA
everybody has the same easy path to voting,,, what you want is a special path for some people,,,
Everyone should have an easy path, except that the GOP is making it ever harder to vote.
#1) Show up at a place to vote
#2) Present an ID
#3) Vote

Why is this difficult?
The 'Show up at a place to vote' can be a burden if you're many miles away, say you're on an Indian reservation. Closing places so there are fewer of them is also a burden.

An attorney for Arizona's Republican Party offered a blunt reason for his presence defending the state's voting restrictions before the Supreme Court on Tuesday: The measures disadvantage Democrats.
Open more places? AZ has two Democrat senators. Can’t blame the GOP if there aren’t enough voting places, right?
 

WTH_Progs?

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
6,152
Reaction score
4,464
Points
1,940
If the Democrats are allowed to pass and implement this bill, you will have two choices, accept the loss of everything this country has ever stood for, or prepare for the second American Revolution.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of what's in HR-1 that I've seen. Please read the complete report before commenting. Thanks in advance.


.
SHOCKING
 
OP
OKTexas

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
52,638
Reaction score
11,495
Points
2,070
Location
Near Magnolia, TX
I've got your "stupid vote" hanging Fascist.
The poorly educated voted Rump.
Oh please with these phony commie statistics. I never went to college, but have family members that have. When we get together at family gatherings, even my college educated cousins tell me I know more about politics than they could ever hope for.
Stats are stats Ray. It is a fact that college educated people are smarter than high school dropouts such as yourself and the others who voted for Donald. But your anecdotal evidence is duly noted, and flipped into the circular file. ;)

Wow, more commie lies. Years of education are not indicators of intelligence. As you grow up, you might figure that out.

.
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
51,077
Reaction score
12,959
Points
2,180
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Please read the report folks. I think it contains things that even the most ardent commiecrats would object to.

.
I am beginning to think the commiecrats can't read, and everything is racist to them, even Dr. Seuss.
Even when they can read, they think evil garbage like this is a great idea, because they believe it will happen to OTHER people, not to them. They've never learned the lesson of Robespierre, because most of them have no idea who he was.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top