PleaseBlitz Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share Posted January 9, 2018 Yea, you may be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Important Supreme Court case about Ohio and voter supression tactics that could affect all states. https://www.yahoo.com/news/one-america-apos-key-voting-104704102.html We have to fight this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 29 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said: Important Supreme Court case about Ohio and voter supression tactics that could affect all states. https://www.yahoo.com/news/one-america-apos-key-voting-104704102.html We have to fight this. I agree. This is a big one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 9, 2018 Share Posted January 9, 2018 Congressional maps to be redrawn in NC by January 29th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 11 hours ago, Cooked Crack said: I wonder who Trump is going to endorse. Arizona primary is going to ridiculous. Martha McSally is going to take it. 11 hours ago, No Excuses said: Alabama all over again. Two wingnuts + weak establishment candidate. Arpaio is going to win the primary in a freaking landslide. Trump will probably back him. The Arizona GOP primary isn't until September. Arpaio is going to be a headline machine just like Roy Moore. This is going to be a total ****show. McSally is a strong traditional conservative candidate. (Damn nationalist populists call all the non alt-righters establishment). She hasn't even announced yet and is having a strong poll showing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 12 minutes ago, nonniey said: She hasn't even announced yet and is having a strong poll showing. Literally means nothing right now since she’s likely tested against crazy person like Kelli Ward. Arpaio is probably the most popular GOP figure in Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 11 minutes ago, No Excuses said: Literally means nothing right now since she’s likely tested against crazy person like Kelli Ward. Arpaio is probably the most popular GOP figure in Arizona. He's not even close to being the most popular in Arizona. Arapaio lost his last election in Maricopa County, if he can't win there, I can't see how he stands a snowballs chance statewide. Additionally, the crazies will split their vote between Ward and Arapaio but the two together won't get 50% anyway. BTW full disclosure McSally is my representative and have talked with her a couple of times. 6 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: Important Supreme Court case about Ohio and voter supression tactics that could affect all states. https://www.yahoo.com/news/one-america-apos-key-voting-104704102.html We have to fight this. Did you read the article? How much more reasonable could Ohio have been???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 32 minutes ago, No Excuses said: Literally means nothing right now since she’s likely tested against crazy person like Kelli Ward. Arpaio is probably the most popular GOP figure in Arizona. I dunno. The tea partiers in Arizona like crazy racists when they are in law enforcement, but the culture war is not raging nearly to the Alabama level when it comes to other issues. I think Arpaio will get trounced if he runs (as he should be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 26 minutes ago, nonniey said: Did you read the article? How much more reasonable could Ohio have been???? How about they don't purge rolls after only 6 years of not voting. It totally a voter suppression move. If someone hasn't moved but simply hasn't voted, there is ZERO reason their name should be purged from voting rolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Hersh said: How about they don't purge rolls after only 6 years of not voting. It totally a voter suppression move. If someone hasn't moved but simply hasn't voted, there is ZERO reason their name should be purged from voting rolls. But they didn't do that- they purged rolls after 6 years of not voting and repeated notifications and requests for response. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, Hersh said: How about they don't purge rolls after only 6 years of not voting. It totally a voter suppression move. If someone hasn't moved but simply hasn't voted, there is ZERO reason their name should be purged from voting rolls. Well, I can think of one reason. 4 minutes ago, nonniey said: But they didn't do that- they purged rolls after 6 years of not voting and repeated notifications and requests for response. I don't think that matters (or should matter). But I guess that is what the case is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, nonniey said: But they didn't do that- they purged rolls after 6 years of not voting and repeated notifications and requests for response. They purged him after six years of not voting. The notifications shouldn't even be sent after such a short time. A voter shouldn't have to do a damn thing if they haven't moved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 minute ago, Hersh said: They purged him after six years of not voting. The notifications shouldn't even be sent after such a short time. A voter shouldn't have to do a damn thing if they haven't moved. Especially since there stll is absolutely zero evidence of a problem with "fake voters" showing up at the polls and affecting an election. None. It doesn't happen. It's too easy to get caught and it doesn't produce enough votes. It's a myth that conservative media has spread in order to justify reducing ballot access. Even Old Mayor Daley in Chicago didn't steal votes that way, and he died in the 1970s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 5 hours ago, nonniey said: But they didn't do that- they purged rolls after 6 years of not voting and repeated notifications and requests for response. Why should it be harder to retain the right to vote than to purchase and keep guns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Burgold said: Why should it be harder to retain the right to vote than to purchase and keep guns? Last I checked I have to apply every time I buy one and provide ID.....and allow the govt to review the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, twa said: Last I checked I have to apply every time I buy one and provide ID.....and allow the govt to review the info. You register to vote. You ought to register to be a gun owner and register your votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Burgold said: You register to vote. You ought to register to be a gun owner and register your votes. you must register to vote because they must divide you into districts and such by law determined by location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 2 minutes ago, twa said: you must register to vote because they must divide you into districts and such by law determined by location. And if we interpreted the Constitution (correctly) we must register our guns so that we can be divided into a well-regulated militia by location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Burgold said: And if we interpreted the Constitution (correctly) we must register our guns so that we can be divided into a well-regulated militia by location. you mean if we ignored the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Oy.....here we go again, people "fighting the good fight" for the sake of fighting instead of using their brains to avoid having to fight. If the Dems/left/libs/whatever are so convinced that the Rep/right/cons/whatever are so egregiously acting to deny voting access in order to stack the deck in their favor, what do you think would actually yield results instead of just outrage-driven ad clicks? A: Gnashing your teeth, clutching your pearls, weeping, rolling on the floor holding your breath until you turn blue? B: Harnessing all that passion and supposedly superior numbers to actually DO something like going door to door and assisting all those disenfranchised people to register and vote? I get it, I really do, I watch and read and research a huge chunk of my free time to try and stay informed, and tbh I see the same things people use as examples of voter suppression and denial of the vote, and IMO this is the single worst thing happening in this country right now (NOTE: I stated IMO=In my opinion ie. an opinion, a subjective assessment of my view that in no way is thrown out as bait for yet another tiresome, time-wasting opportunity to argue about it). If it is so obvious, so blatant, so horrific and such a threat to the sheer existence and survival of the species as some want to cry from mountaintops, then get off your lazy ass, put down the keyboard, put down that idiot IPhone toy, stop mouldering on FB, and DO something useful! Express your patriotic duty as a citizen and pitch in, chip in gas money or offer rides, ring the old lady's doorbell across the street and talk to her about it, help others navigate the paperwork, shepherd grandpa through the DMV, you know, action. Be a verb, not just another adjective. I swear to God, one of the things that makes me go from zero to ARE YOU ****ING KIDDING ME??!? in 2.2 seconds is this reflexive whine from people, damned near everybody at some point or another, where they say "Somebody ought to do something!", as if just uttering those magic words is work, speaking the magic spell gets things done. It doesn't. I keep wondering exactly who or what this magical, mystical "somebody" is supposed to be that is going to breeze in and wave a magic wand to set everything right. The ghost of James Madison? Constitutional aliens from a UFO? Demons summoned from a pentagram on the garage floor with a 10 pt plan in their claw? It feels like the vast majority of people are just waiting to watch, and have no genuine intention of doing anything beyond keeping the remote and the popcorn handy. This is the problem, and its our problem, we caused it and we let it happen and we wallowed in our comfortable ignorance while it came to pass, and the only consolation is that we have the power and the mechanisms to fix it. But we are going to have to be the ones to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 10 hours ago, nonniey said: Did you read the article? How much more reasonable could Ohio have been???? Is there a reason they couldn't issue him a provisional ballot? (Realistically, is there any reason anybody couldn't be issued a provisional ballot with the idea that if they prove they are legally eligible to vote after the fact that their vote will be counted?) Even put the burden on the person to prove the eligible to vote after the fact. Here's your ballot. Vote and then you have to show up where ever by the end of the day with paper work X, Y, and Z for your vote to be counted. The other thing is he didn't vote in the off year elections and missed one Presidential election. That's not really that abnormal. Make it 8 years (2 Presidential elections). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 9 hours ago, nonniey said: He's not even close to being the most popular in Arizona. Arapaio lost his last election in Maricopa County, if he can't win there, I can't see how he stands a snowballs chance statewide. Additionally, the crazies will split their vote between Ward and Arapaio but the two together won't get 50% anyway. BTW full disclosure McSally is my representative and have talked with her a couple of times. Well here’s the latest poll numbers I have no doubt that Arpaio will take over a big chunk of Ward voters once he receives an endorsement from Trump. You are are correct that Arpaio has no statewide appeal. But he has appeal among GOP primary voters and it looks like most favor a wingnut over the establishment conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 15 hours ago, No Excuses said: Congressional maps to be redrawn in NC by January 29th. This is fairly big from a legal standpoint because it is the first time a congressional map has been found unconstitutional in federal court. SCOTUS has two cases on gerrymandering on the docket this year, and now there is precedent for them to cite to, although nonbinding. The panel found 3 separate ways that this gerrymandering violated the constitution, and the Republican nominee concurred with all but one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 21 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: This is fairly big from a legal standpoint because it is the first time a congressional map has been found unconstitutional in federal court. SCOTUS has two cases on gerrymandering on the docket this year, and now there is precedent for them to cite to, although nonbinding. The panel found 3 separate ways that this gerrymandering violated the constitution, and the Republican nominee concurred with all but one of them. Interesting. Question: is this case similar in any way to the one going in Pennsylvania? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 10, 2018 Author Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 minute ago, No Excuses said: Interesting. Question: is this case similar in any way to the one going in Pennsylvania? I think there are a lot of similarities, but one key difference is that the case in NC had, basically, the people that drew the maps admitting that they drew them for the sole purpose of electing Republicans and defeating Democrats and not any other purpose that could be defended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.