I'll ask you the same thing I did in the other thread right after I say this FAKE NEWS.
What was the methodology and what questions were asked? A lot of people know nothing more about the bill but the name, if that. Fake poll, too.
Just curious, what provisions of the bill do you find troublesome? I mean I understand perfectly whyy Republicans, and Manchin, oppose the bill. But what problems do you see with it?
Basically everything. I do not want one party rule and that is what this bill really is about.
Who told you that? Specifically, what provisions within the bill would result in one party rule? There is one big problem with the bill for Republicans, and now Manchin. That problem has arisen in numerous bills as the Democrats continually attempt to insert it in legislation. Trump vetoed the Defense Bill because of it. It has nothing to do with voting rights.
You are lying. When the Federal government runs elections they will be more corrupt and partisan than ever.
The bill has no provisions for the Federal government to take over elections, maybe you can correct me. However, it does make election day a federal holiday, maybe that is why you are confused.
Bullshit.
So, you can't tell me what specific provisions of the bill you have a problem with. You can't explain how it will result in one party rule. Basically, you probably can't tell me a single provision within the bill. You are opposed because your "Massuhs" tell you to be opposed. They are opposed because, yet again, Democrats have inserted a provision to force Political Action Committees to publicly acknowledge the source of their funds. In a very real sense, that is precisely what you are fighting for, their right to keep their funding from public knowledge.
So I got to ask. How is that helpful for a functioning Republic? And to be honest, if it is not helpful for a functioning Republic, why is it so important to Republicans, and why is Manchin now all in against it as well? The truth is, Manchin does not want his constituents to know what he is fighting for. He believes they are all like you, too disengaged to actually examine the legislation, too lazy to actually attempt to think for yourself, and perhaps too stupid to understand the legislation even if you attempted to look over it. In short, he has no respect for you or his constituents.