Republican voter suppression...

sturg33 said:
Nsacpi makes two contradictory arguments all the time.

One the one hand... he says the election of Trump was the single greatest threat to democracy in our lifetime's... that his election was busted all norms of our republic and should be opposed at all costs.

On the other hand... he says he supports all the voters who got him elected

It's my opinion that if you hold the first viewpoint, then it is quite logical to want a different outcome in an election, by hoping less people vote for Trump, or more people voting for HRC.

----------------------------------------

I want fewer idiots voting who support restricting people's rights. I want fewer idiots voting who believe we should lock ourselves down from the scary virus. I want fewer idiots voting who think Walmart should pay cashiers $43 a hr.

Of course, what I want and what I think people have the right to do are two different things.
Click to expand...

for once you haven't mischaracterized my position

i hold participatory democracy in sufficiently high regard to be willing to take my chances on the election of someone like very poorly chose one...take my chances that sufficient numbers of my fellow citizens could be persuaded to remove him from office...i have no interest in suppressing turnout among Trump voters, even though i strongly disagree with them
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
bump

in some ways it is highly commendable you come out and say it
Click to expand...

That’s the crux of what I’m saying. Just say it if that’s what you think. Don’t exercise the rest of the world into trying to engage in a phony argument. Because there are two different arguments here, and I’d think that the better one is “more people should vote” vs. “fewer people should vote.” It’s the more important one. The other is an abstruse, abstracted, fragmented argument about state and local voting statutes. Just say what you mean.
 
nsacpi said:
for once you haven't mischaracterized my position

i hold participatory democracy in sufficiently high regard to be willing to take my chances on the election of someone like very poorly chose one
Click to expand...

That's fine. But if you told me we could avoid an Adolph Hitler dictatorship by less low-informed voters participating... I'd be rooting for that outcome.
 
Julio3000 said:
That’s the crux of what I’m saying. Just say it if that’s what you think. Don’t exercise the rest of the world into trying to engage in a phony argument. Because there are two different arguments here, and I’d think that the better one is “more people should vote” vs. “fewer people should vote.” It’s the more important one. The other is an abstruse, abstracted, fragmented argument about state and local voting statutes. Just say what you mean.
Click to expand...

What I mean is... requiring an ID and asking people to stand in line for 20 minutes every couple of years would probably result in a decent amount of people who are uninterested in putting forth the effort. I'm not interested in people who can't be bothered to to put forth a tiny sliver of effort dictating the rights of others.
 
So I guess what you’re suggesting, based on your stated preferences, is that any electoral outcome that you don’t support is tantamount to a Hitler-style dictatorship.

Good argument.
 
sturg33 said:
What I mean is... requiring an ID and asking people to stand in line for 20 minutes every couple of years would probably result in a decent amount of people who are uninterested in putting forth the effort. I'm not interested in people who can't be bothered to to put forth a tiny sliver of effort dictating the rights of others.
Click to expand...

Hmm. Well, I guess I could take issue with the premise, but it’s more interesting to me to ask why you think that waiting in line for 20 minutes is the norm for everyone.
 
Julio3000 said:
So I guess what you’re suggesting, based on your stated preferences, is that any electoral outcome that you don’t support is tantamount to a Hitler-style dictatorship.

Good argument.
Click to expand...

No, that is not what I'm saying.

Nsacpi says Trump is the greatest threat to our democracy... if you're telling me we could avoid that threat by a bunch of rednecks not voting, I'd say that's a net positive.
 
If the majority vote for slavery, well I guess that's just democracy at work! Shame on me for not wanting racists to vote for slavery
 
Julio3000 said:
So I guess what you’re suggesting, based on your stated preferences, is that any electoral outcome that you don’t support is tantamount to a Hitler-style dictatorship.

Good argument.
Click to expand...

Just to go with the Hitler bit a little, I think the point where Germans failed was in accepting the erosion and ultimate destruction of democratic norms after the election. No one can have the foresight to see that this would be the outcome of an election. But once it became the outcome (along with all the other things the Nazis did) then the moral obligation to resist by all available means becomes clear.

But it is never clear ahead of an election that making voting more difficult will produce a better outcome. And as I said participatory democracy is important enough to override all such short-term tactical considerations.
 
If memory serves, many on the left were thrilled that the Dems won both Senate seats in GA... but the data is pretty clear that the reason for those victories were because many Trump supporters decided to sit out bc they listened to the defeated loser.

So are the people happy with election results from GA morally bankrupt?
 
sturg33 said:
If the majority vote for slavery, well I guess that's just democracy at work! Shame on me for not wanting racists to vote for slavery
Click to expand...

That’s quite a straw man. Again, if you deploy your stated arguments in favor of limiting the franchise because of any American election in your lifetime, you’re equating any outcome to a Hitler-esque democracy.
 
I mean, otherwise you’re just making it a purely pie in the sky hypothetical...which seems kind of silly.
 
sturg33 said:
If memory serves, many on the left were thrilled that the Dems won both Senate seats in GA... but the data is pretty clear that the reason for those victories were because many Trump supporters decided to sit out bc they listened to the defeated loser.

So are the people happy with election results from GA morally bankrupt?
Click to expand...

oy
 
sturg33 said:
If memory serves, many on the left were thrilled that the Dems won both Senate seats in GA... but the data is pretty clear that the reason for those victories were because many Trump supporters decided to sit out bc they listened to the defeated loser.

So are the people happy with election results from GA morally bankrupt?
Click to expand...

I’m not sure what you’re saying here, but it seems your equating being alienated from voting as being equivalent as being administratively prevented from voting.
 
Julio3000 said:
I’m not sure what you’re saying here, but it seems your equating being alienated from voting as being equivalent as being administratively prevented from voting.
Click to expand...

Yeah see the reason we are talking in circles is because you have this weird delusion that I support preventing anyone from casting their votes.

I don't.

I fully support any legal citizen's ability to vote
 
sturg33 said:
Winning an election because voters decided not to vote. We should all be ashamed...
Click to expand...

I would submit for your consideration that an outcome based upon apathy or "free choice" to sit out an election is very different from one where measures are taken to suppress or intimidate one side from voting.
 
nsacpi said:
I would submit for your consideration that an outcome based upon apathy or "free choice" to sit out an election is very different from one where measures are taken to suppress or intimidate one side from voting.
Click to expand...

OK... then again, there's no point in continuing the discussion.

Giving someone 12 days to vote is not suppression. It's not intimidation.

The accusation that it is nothing but bigotry of low expectations
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top