Republican voter suppression...
- Thread starter goldfly
- Start date
striker42
Well-known member
For those of you on the left who aren't worried about ballot harvesting and expanded absentee ballots, you're naive or else blinded by the fact that it favors your side at the moment. Do you trust Republicans so much that you can't conceive of a way in which your opposition could take advantage of the practice?
The worry I have with widespread absentee ballots and ballot harvesting is the erosion of the Australian ballot as well as the lack of poll watchers. When you cast your ballot in person, you go into a private booth and cast anonymously. Both parties are allowed to have people on hand to observe. When you fill out your ballot at home you could have someone there making sure you fill it out "correctly" and there are no poll watchers to ensure this doesn't happen.
The idea of people taking ballots and changing them or something like that isn't nearly as big of a worry for me as it is of the parties mobilizing at the grass roots level to incentivize, coerce, or otherwise pressure people into voting and into voting a certain way.
If you trust our political parties wont try to take advantage of this situation, you're fooling yourselves.
The worry I have with widespread absentee ballots and ballot harvesting is the erosion of the Australian ballot as well as the lack of poll watchers. When you cast your ballot in person, you go into a private booth and cast anonymously. Both parties are allowed to have people on hand to observe. When you fill out your ballot at home you could have someone there making sure you fill it out "correctly" and there are no poll watchers to ensure this doesn't happen.
The idea of people taking ballots and changing them or something like that isn't nearly as big of a worry for me as it is of the parties mobilizing at the grass roots level to incentivize, coerce, or otherwise pressure people into voting and into voting a certain way.
If you trust our political parties wont try to take advantage of this situation, you're fooling yourselves.
Does every voter in every county get the same amount?
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
This isn’t an explanation
When you want to explain it
I’ll continue with ya but your whataboutism and distraction points are a waste of time
I’m shocked you can’t comprehend my response.
I already did. Trying to slow walk you to understand.
Should have figured that would be impossible.
Perhaps the real issue GA should be addressing is an environment where the lines are so long that people feel the need to give out water.
I’m honestly okay with trading expanded voting for more voter ID requirements. I think there would be some reforms necessary to allow the very poor to more conveniently obtain the required ID or even make it digital in some way, but I’m not opposed to it. What am very much opposed to is making it harder to vote through reduced polling places/times or the current voting environment where larger population centers have serious barriers to voting. A national holiday or longer voting periods that include weekends would be a huge step forward.
10% support extending voting times and locations. Universal mail in ballots can never happen again. Any changes are a complete non starter unless it includes that. And obviously voter ID is a no brainer. Do whatever it takes to make sure everyone that requests an ID can get one.
I’m just not sure what’s the argument against these types of reforms.
Problem is you have people that don’t think giving additional benefits to certain voters doesn’t violate the constitution and in general invite suspicious activities.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/national-id-card-voter-fraud-solution/
This would be in line with what I’m thinking. I can’t imagine it would be that expensive in the long run to manage, and would seemingly solve a number of problems. I truly believe there are roadblocks to maintaining valid ID for those in big cities or those in poverty, which is why it becomes a trope to call ID laws racially motivated. Providing a free, federally managed solution would seem to resolve that disparity.
As for the objections, the most obvious answer is political positioning. Because of the disparity between rural and urban voting tendencies, any move aimed at making voting easier for those in larger cities will be enticing to Democrats and any move aimed at doing the opposite will be enticing to Republicans.
There are *some* barriers in more rural areas, but it’s still much easier in general. For instance, when I go to vote in my relatively small town, I can be in and out in 5 minutes including parking. I own a vehicle and can quickly make it to my DMV to renew my license, which isn’t even checked when I go to my polling place.
I don’t personally think most of the things like voter ID requirements or limiting polling stations are explicitly racist like many of my cohorts on the left do. What I do think is it’s intentionally done to depress turnout in areas that vote a certain way and the people making the laws don’t particularly care if it harms minority groups more than white voters. Something doesn’t need to have racist intentions to disproportionally affect minorities. Then the discourse jumps to RACISM and everyone retreats into their corners. If we turn it into a conversation about wealth and the unique needs of voters in larger cities, I think common ground would be easier to find.
Last edited:
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Devils advocate here. Hand out cookies laced with laxatives....... but seriously, following this logic they might make driving someone to go vote human trafficking.
This charge is so ridiculous I would go do it specifically intending to be arrested for it. This would be perfect for jury nullification.