ADVERTISEMENT

for the people

aTUfan

I.T.S. Athletic Director
Apr 18, 2011
8,617
754
113
la la land
same day registration? why?
.;
limits on campaign finance by deep pocket donors; corps ie. does that include unions and other dem friendly organizations?
 
same day registration? why?
.;
limits on campaign finance by deep pocket donors; corps ie. does that include unions and other dem friendly organizations?
We have same day registration in my (heavily Republican) state. It’s incredibly worthwhile. There’s no reason you should be forced, in this day and age of communication, to register multiple days in advance.
 
We have same day registration in my (heavily Republican) state. It’s incredibly worthwhile. There’s no reason you should be forced, in this day and age of communication, to register multiple days in advance.
how do you verify the application on the dayof.
you only have to register once, not for each election so why wait until the last minute.
 
how do you verify the application on the dayof.
you only have to register once, not for each election so why wait until the last minute.
I don’t know. Any form of identification that’s used. Heck, all that’s required to get a drivers license is a piece of mail addressed to you at your home address.

It’s none of your business why I wait so long. Maybe I’m busy because I’ve just bought a house or I’m taking care of a deceased relative’s estate or I just started a new job.
 
I don’t know. Any form of identification that’s used. Heck, all that’s required to get a drivers license is a piece of mail addressed to you at your home address.

It’s none of your business why I wait so long. Maybe I’m busy because I’ve just bought a house or I’m taking care of a deceased relative’s estate or I just started a new job.
its a post card!, ONE time.

otherwise on election day i can just go to the polling place, register and then vote. Then i can go to another and another
 
its a post card!, ONE time.

otherwise on election day i can just go to the polling place, register and then vote. Then i can go to another and another
And you can be prosecuted when you show up registered twice. I mean, if you want to try and fake your identity, I suppose you could, but your proof of identity has to come from the locale of the precinct you are in, so you’re going to have to get some identification from a 3rd person outside your district or have a fake id (which is tough with modern id’s) .

The thing you just refuse to realize is that manual voter fraud is impractical on a federal level. Cyber fraud (intercepting votes and altering counts or even getting registration data to make targeted ads) is much more dangerous to us.

BTW, a postcard isn’t more secure than registering day of.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TU_BLA
how do you verify the application on the dayof.
you only have to register once, not for each election so why wait until the last minute.
They don't verify it when you register beforehand. When I registered at my new address, I completed the form and turned it in. No other info or ID needed.
The reason same day registration is needed is to thwart the efforts of GOP Secretaries of States in various states who purge voters from the rolls because they haven't voted in every election they are eligible to do so. It is well known that certain demographics only vote in national or presidential elections. By purging voters, and mostly without notifying them, for not voting in a local school bond issue or some other minor election, you remove voters who are mostly unfriendly to the GOP. Voting is a right covered by no fewer than 3 amendments to the Constitution and mentioned more times in the Constitution. GOP led state legislatures are working to make it nearly impossible for some folks to vote. I'd argue that voting is a more protected right per the Constitution than owning or carrying a gun based on how many times voting is mentioned in the Constitution and how many times amendments have updated protecting the right to vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: astonmartin708
you are correct. it is a constitutional right to vote. but I have the right to ensure that my vote is not diminished or negated
 
you are correct. it is a constitutional right to vote. but I have the right to ensure that my vote is not diminished or negated
I mean, you really don’t have that right unless you’re referencing some specific article of one of the 60’s voting rights acts that I don’t know about. If you had that right, then Women would have been able to vote long before they actually could have.
 
so according to you, anybody can vote, and we are not allowed to verify if the the person is a citizen, is a resident of the state, county, city or precinct or registered in another precinct or worse dead.
 
so according to you, anybody can vote, and we are not allowed to verify if the the person is a citizen, is a resident of the state, county, city or precinct or registered in another precinct or worse dead.
Both the constitution and the voting rights acts are much more interested in how you may not abridge or restrict voting rights than how you guarantee voting power. The only way they address limitations to voting power, is making certain types of voting illegal (voting multiple times, falsifying registration, etc...) if you really want to guarantee equal voting power you would have to get rid of the electoral college and the senate. It would all be more or less all based on the actions of a people’s house (like parliament tends to be even though they have a mostly symbolic House of Lords)

Making sure that your dead neighbor isn’t voting doesn’t give a person nearly the same equality in voting as making sure that a person living in a district with 500,000 people doesn’t have the same representation in a chamber as people in a district with 10 million people. (The Wyoming senator delegation vs Texas senator delegation for example)
 
Both the constitution and the voting rights acts are much more interested in how you may not abridge or restrict voting rights than how you guarantee voting power. The only way they address limitations to voting power, is making certain types of voting illegal (voting multiple times, falsifying registration, etc...) if you really want to guarantee equal voting power you would have to get rid of the electoral college and the senate. It would all be more or less all based on the actions of a people’s house (like parliament tends to be even though they have a mostly symbolic House of Lords)

Making sure that your dead neighbor isn’t voting doesn’t give a person nearly the same equality in voting as making sure that a person living in a district with 500,000 people doesn’t have the same representation in a chamber as people in a district with 10 million people. (The Wyoming senator delegation vs Texas senator delegation for example)
without the ec, a person could get election by about 6 states( 44 states would have no say). talk about we the people.

as for district population, im sure the people in wyoming dont want aoc, feinstein, m waters, the squad, ... speaking for them and deserve a their own and equal voice.
 
without the ec, a person could get election by about 6 states( 44 states would have no say). talk about we the people.

as for district population, im sure the people in wyoming dont want aoc, feinstein, m waters, the squad, ... speaking for them and deserve a their own and equal voice.
The constitution says “We the people” not “we the group of affluent property owners”

The PEOPLE in 44 states would have the same amount of say in who would be president that literally everyone else would.

It would basically make places such as Wyoming or Montana similar to Scotland and Wales in the UK. They can vote in a block in parliament and they can be a determining swing vote in a Prime Minister establishing a coalition government, but they aren’t going to lead the policy decisions of the country as a whole, nor should they, because the vast majority of people live around London. When combined with ranked choicE voting it makes representation (and voting power) much more equitable across the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: watu05
and in those 6 states about 10 cities would be enough. easier to stuff ballot boxes in 10 cities than 50 states
 
according to the bill who can and who can't contribute to a campaign? limit? private, public, individuals, charities, pacs, independents
 
you are correct. it is a constitutional right to vote. but I have the right to ensure that my vote is not diminished or negated
Sure you are, as we all are. The narrative of massive voter fraud is 100% a scary sounding catch phrase that has 0 credibility and almost as few instances of actual occurrences. As a matter of fact, in the past election, there were fewer than 100 cases of actual voter fraud...and once investigated, most of those were shown to be perpetrated by Trump friendly voters.

The last large scale instance of voting irregularities and fraud were found in North Carolina in the special election (can't remember if it was governor or senate) where county clerks were found withholding ballot boxes with uncounted ballots from precincts known to be Dem friendly.

When someone has the balls to do an actual investigation in Florida, Maine, and Kentucky, I bet we find massive irregularities to the benefit of Susan Collins, Mitch, and Dip:crap: DeSantis.

We all want safe and secure elections...but please tell me how offering a bottle of water to someone standing in an 8 hour line diminishes the security of the election. There is no electioneering allowed in these lines and I'm all for asking anyone pushing a certain candidate while handing out water to be asked to leave. The laws being passed have nothing to do with securing the voting process...it has all to do with dissuading people from voting.
 
in congress
when Republicans vote with Democrats, its called bipartisan.

when Democrats vote with Republicans, they are criticized.

if the members of congress can only vote along party lines, then we only need 2, one from each side
Actually when GOP members vote or agree with Democrats, they are labeled traitors and black-listed within their own party. See Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowksi, and Mitt Romney. And there are quite a few more moderate GOPers in the House who are being targeted by QAnon in primaries for their seats.

I don't agree with how Manchin and Synema are being portrayed by the far left wing of the party (I don't agree with everything the far left wing of the party is pushing). I believe Manchin and Synema are both representing their constituents in such a way taht is consistent with what their constituents hold to, Synema especially, as Arizona is not as far right as the GOP wants as evidenced by the fact that McCain was the Senator there for a long long time. And both Synema and Kelly are more moderate in their politics and that's pretty much where Arizona lives in the political spectrum. The fact that Arizona is pushing some false narrative of voter fraud when both national elections and the Synema election went to Dems should tell the state legislature there that politics there is more moderate than what they are pushing. The audit is ridiculous and a waste of money and some of these far right QAnon legislators in the more urban/suburban areas of Arizona will probably lose their seats this next election over this nonsense. Florida, Georgia, and Texas are next in line as well.
 
the would be more honest if they called it "for the democrats"
or bbb "building bidens boondogle"
or the new voting rights bill "voiding Republican ballots"
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT