Voter Suppression efforts in full swing


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,395
Reaction score
5,483
Points
113
Voting districts should be done using an algorithm to make them all as close to square as possible. It would be relatively simple to define how "square" a district is mathematically. The system would be impossible to game, something i hope everyone could support.
 



Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,707
Reaction score
4,634
Points
113
What in that bill is specifically unfair?
All it does is prevent voter discrimination. There’s nothing else. The only reason to oppose it is you hate John Lewis or want to outlaw minorities from voting.
 


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,395
Reaction score
5,483
Points
113
All it does is prevent voter discrimination. There’s nothing else. The only reason to oppose it is you hate John Lewis or want to outlaw minorities from voting.
Huh?
🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️

Guess if Deuce supports it I better...
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
59,424
Reaction score
15,085
Points
113
All it does is prevent voter discrimination. There’s nothing else. The only reason to oppose it is you hate John Lewis or want to outlaw minorities from voting.
So you can't tell us one thing wrong with it. It's just bad. Because Libs.
 








MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
30,990
Reaction score
7,961
Points
113
Voting districts should be done using an algorithm to make them all as close to square as possible. It would be relatively simple to define how "square" a district is mathematically. The system would be impossible to game, something i hope everyone could support.
Better yet, just get rid of districts altogether.

They aren't in the constitution. The founders never imagined such a scheme would be used.

They were cooked up to enable gerrymandering.
 






cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,524
Reaction score
2,754
Points
113
It’s not federal voting.
Voting in national elections should be standardized, period. If states want to bastardize their own elections to make authoritarianism the rule of the land in their state, like the Republicans are already doing in every state they hold, well, so be it. But when their cheating affects national politics, where their cheating affects who controls the country, that same cheating simply cannot be allowed.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,707
Reaction score
4,634
Points
113
Voting in national elections should be standardized, period. If states want to bastardize their own elections to make authoritarianism the rule of the land in their state, like the Republicans are already doing in every state they hold, well, so be it. But when their cheating affects national politics, where their cheating affects who controls the country, that same cheating simply cannot be allowed.
When cnc is wrong, he just puts his head down and barrels ahead. Voter id laws are authoritarianism!! They’re cheating! Bla bla bla. We don’t care. The question was asked how anyone could oppose federal control of elections and it was answered. There’s a lot more to this than “preventing voter discrimination”.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,196
Reaction score
6,931
Points
113
Voting in national elections should be standardized, period. If states want to bastardize their own elections to make authoritarianism the rule of the land in their state, like the Republicans are already doing in every state they hold, well, so be it. But when their cheating affects national politics, where their cheating affects who controls the country, that same cheating simply cannot be allowed.
Bat Sh!t Crazy. CRINGY
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,928
Reaction score
2,742
Points
113
Bat Sh!t Crazy. CRINGY
Ok, see I don’t understand this comment. You are free to disagree. Stating an argument would be informative and possibly even interesting. But this view is nowhere near “batshit crazy.” You seem to think there should be no national level rules for a national election.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,196
Reaction score
6,931
Points
113
Ok, see I don’t understand this comment. You are free to disagree. Stating an argument would be informative and possibly even interesting. But this view is nowhere near “batshit crazy.” You seem to think there should be no national level rules for a national election.
Voting in national elections should be standardized, period. If states want to bastardize their own elections to make authoritarianism the rule of the land in their state, like the Republicans are already doing in every state they hold, well, so be it. But when their cheating affects national politics, where their cheating affects who controls the country, that same cheating simply cannot be allowed.
Bat Sh!t Crazy
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,395
Reaction score
5,483
Points
113
Ok, see I don’t understand this comment. You are free to disagree. Stating an argument would be informative and possibly even interesting. But this view is nowhere near “batshit crazy.” You seem to think there should be no national level rules for a national election.
Spoof likes to rage over the aside, while avoiding the real point and topic. Typical deflection.
 


GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,928
Reaction score
2,742
Points
113
Bat Sh!t Crazy
Deflection. You seem to think there should be no national level rules for a national election. Is this the case? CincyGopher’s point is that there should be.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,196
Reaction score
6,931
Points
113
Deflection. You seem to think there should be no national level rules for a national election. Is this the case? CincyGopher’s point is that there should be.
Deflection? Really? I bolded the parts I found bat sh!t crazy. It was my use of “bat sh!t crazy” you objected to, no? I mean, “bat sh!t crazy” was my entire post.
- BTW: it isn’t a national election. It is 50 state elections that determine a national position. That is kind of the point with the electoral college.
 


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,395
Reaction score
5,483
Points
113
What was “the real point”? “Their cheating” was mentioned 3-times in one paragraph - but that wasn’t the take away? Okey Dokey.
Back to school for you...
🙄🙄🙄

Voting in national elections should be standardized, period.

That's the point. Yet you respond only to his rage blabbering that follows it.
Lol
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,196
Reaction score
6,931
Points
113
Back to school for you...
🙄🙄🙄



That's the point. Yet you respond only to his rage blabbering that follows it.
Lol
Oh, I see. I only responded to the 56 words after those 8 words. Yeah, that makes no sense. 🙄🙄🙄

Oh, I also responded on those 8 words in post #1855 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,196
Reaction score
6,931
Points
113
So some State Legislators are screwing up elections with new laws so the answer is to let US Legislators set rules for all States? Because nothing partisan happens there? Maybe they can throw it into a “human infrastructure” bill and pass it on reconciliation too. 🙄
 





Top Bottom