Active Now

Malizz
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Do you consider VOTER SUPPRESSION a dirty trick or just part of the body politic? ONLY RED STATE GOVERNORS engage in it! Coinkydink?

Do you consider VOTER SUPPRESSION a dirty trick or just part of the body politic? ONLY RED STATE GOVERNORS engage in it! Coinkydink?

Posted - October 16, 2018

Responses


  • 32527
    Yes it is a dirty trick. I do not consider voter ID voter suppression. 

    Dems do suppress the vote they simply use a more deceptive tactic. They scedule local elections a different times from Federal elections knowing there will be lower turnout. 

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-democrats-suppress-the-vote/
      October 16, 2018 6:36 PM MDT
    1

  • 19942
    My first impression is that you may have posted a more current article than one from 2015.  Second, if election for all offices - federal, state, city, local - we would never get out of the voting booth.  Third, not all states and municipalities vote for all of the offices listed in the article.  New York City doesn't vote for a Fire Commissioner and I have no idea how the school boards are chosen, but I don't recall seeing them on a general ballot.  
      October 17, 2018 8:37 PM MDT
    2

  • 32527
    I can tell you the NYC school board is elected and the fact that you have never seen them on the ballot proves my point. 
      October 17, 2018 9:02 PM MDT
    2

  • 19942
    "All elected, except in some large cities, e.g., Yonkers, appointed by mayor, New York City, mayoral control instead of school board."

    https://www.nsba.org/sites/default/files/reports/electionschart.pdf
      October 18, 2018 5:20 AM MDT
    1

  • 32527
    Indeed there are 2 districts who do not elect school boards. (My apologies)
    All the more reason to move local elections to coincide with larger state and fed elections. Why have a Mayor be elected with just 25% of voters? And then give him/her that much more power? 

    Does not matter if all local elections are for the same offices over the different one....the point is it would result in higher turnout and less costs of conducting the elections. This post was edited by my2cents at October 18, 2018 6:05 AM MDT
      October 18, 2018 6:01 AM MDT
    0

  • 19942
    Let's say you move all local elections to federal dates.  You would have to tailor every ballot to the individual municipality.  You think that would save money?  I think it would be the best way to royally screw things up.  What would happen if it turned out that someone made a mistake and put the wrong names on the ballot for a particular area?  Far too confusing.  My personal belief as to why there is such apathy among voters is that we are not really given decent candidates.  They can promise the moon and the stars before the election, but when push comes to shove, the only thing they're interested in is lining their own pockets.  We no longer feel we truly have a say in how our elected officials will run things.
      October 18, 2018 11:18 AM MDT
    1

  • 32527
    As far as decent candidates....that is what primaries are for. But yes most are just in to line their pockets. Especially the higher up you go. There is indeed a reason almost all of Congress is rich. 

    They have to make proper ballots for each area anyway...so I don't see any confusion above the normal. Or have separate ballots for each fed, state, local.  This post was edited by my2cents at October 18, 2018 12:21 PM MDT
      October 18, 2018 12:00 PM MDT
    0

  • 19942

    Perhaps the Board of Elections in your area is more capable than it is in mine.

      October 18, 2018 12:36 PM MDT
    1

  • 32527
    Perhaps they should all rise to the occasion. I have voted before with only on thing on the ballot (primary for Pres)...I just remember thinking what a waste of resources. 
      October 18, 2018 12:42 PM MDT
    2

  • 19942
    On that we can agree although that rarely, if ever, happens in NYC.
      October 18, 2018 6:34 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    :):):)
      October 18, 2018 3:33 AM MDT
    0

  • 13251
    What proof of your assertion do you have, Rosie? None as per usual, I suspect.
      October 17, 2018 9:34 PM MDT
    2

  • 52903

      Proof is a fleeting and bothersome concept when one wants to rant, Stu. 

      October 17, 2018 11:17 PM MDT
    3

  • 113301
    Everything I say is made up to annoy you and others of your ilk. I live for telling lies. It's what I do. What I have always done. What I shall always do. The fact that you show up to challenge me and my veracity is all I need to know. SIGH. Every word I've ever written on any question or answer or response is a baldfaced lie. Including this. I am consistent.
      October 18, 2018 2:44 AM MDT
    1

  • 52903

      Wait, isn't that a personal attack?  Call the moderators!
      October 18, 2018 8:04 AM MDT
    0

  • 13251
    :):):)
      October 18, 2018 10:28 AM MDT
    1

  • 13251
    Actually, Rosie, you don't annoy me at all. On the contrary, I find your unfounded, unhinged, unhampered-by-facts rants rather amusing. And while I can't speak for my ilk, whatever you've arbitrarily decided that is, I do drink milk but I don't wear silk (except perhaps for the occasional necktie). Happy Thursday to thee!
      October 18, 2018 1:50 PM MDT
    1

  • 16197
    Voter apathy is a bigger problem - and it seems that Dem voters are more likely to succumb to it. The Sanders camp in particular voted as a bloc at the last election - by NOT voting.
      October 17, 2018 11:33 PM MDT
    3

  • 113301
    You are aware of all the lawsuits going on vis a vis voter suppression, right? Limiting hours, closing voting loctations, changing the rules to adversely affect voters who vote Dem? That doesn't help. Some Jacka** currently has frozen 53,000 votes. Another state now says if you don't list an address just a PO box you cannot vote. Native Americans live in areas where there are no addresses. They have always lived on reservations without street addresses. It's disgusting Sbf. Sigh. I don't dispute the lazya** folks who give stupid dumb excuses to not vote. They are there. But there are also people wanting to vote who are being prevented from voting because they tend to vote Dem. I think it has always been going on but accellerating in desperation because the trumpicans know if the Dems win back the majority in the House investigations will begin immediately as will the impeachment process. Time will tell. Thank you for your reply and Happy Thursday! :)
      October 18, 2018 2:49 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    Personally, I don't believe "natives" on reservations should vote in American elections.
    But that's just my belief that ... "You are either a sovereign nation, or not.  You can't have it both ways."
      October 18, 2018 12:06 PM MDT
    4

  • 7280
    Just background information for everybody and anybody:

    The passage of the Indian Citizenship Act in 1924 granted citizenship to all Natives born in America.


    Under the 1924 Act, indigenous people did not have to apply for citizenship, nor did they have to give up their tribal citizenship to become a U.S. citizen. Most tribes had communal property, and to have a right to the land, individual Indian people needed to belong to the tribe. Thus, dual citizenship was allowed.

    Tribal sovereignty is dependent on, and subordinate to, only the federal government, not states, under Washington v. Confederated Tribes of Colville Indian Reservation (1980). Tribes are sovereign over tribal members and tribal land, under United States v. Mazurie (1975).

    The federal U.S. government has always been the government that makes treaties with Indian tribes – not individual states. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution states that "Congress shall have the power to regulate Commerce with foreign nations and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes".
      October 18, 2018 3:33 PM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    What? Native Americans are the first Americans aren't they Walt? White man come and invade THEIR land. As if that weren't enough you would rob them of having the right to vote? I am gobstomped and seriously confused. White man invader...bad guy. Native American victim of bad guy. Native American forced to live on reservations because bad guy had guns and guns talk big time. I guess I completely totally unreservedly and absolutely resolutely disagree with thee. It happens. Different strokes for different folks. Thank you for your reply and Happy Friday! :)
      October 19, 2018 3:14 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023

    If the tribes want to be sovereign nations ... they do not get to vote in our elections.
    If they want to vote in our elections ... they do not get to be sovereign nations.

    We don't allow citizens of other nations to vote in our elections.
    Seems pretty simple to me.

    btw - the majority of tribes were constantly at war with each other.  (mainly because all the plains territory was newly open for conquest, after the recent fall of native civilizations.)
    That's why the names they had for each other were insults, and they viewed each other as "less than people".
    Europeans just fought a different type of war, and the tribes couldn't adapt fast enough.
      October 19, 2018 7:16 AM MDT
    0

  • 32527
    Actually, enough Bernie voters turned into Trump voters to effectively decide the election for President Trump.
    12% of Bernie voters voted for Trump in the general.  (I know of at least 2 such voters here on AM)
    8% for Jill Stein 

    More important, in the three critical states that tipped the election, Sanders-to-Trump voters ultimately gave Trump the margin he needed to win:

    • In Wisconsin, roughly 51K Sanders voters backed Trump in a state he won by just 22K votes.
    • In Michigan, roughly 47K Sanders voters backed Trump in a state he won by just 10K votes.
    • In Pennsylvania, roughly 116K Sanders voters backed Trump in a state he won by just 44K votes.

    Without these states Hillary would be President. 
      October 18, 2018 11:53 AM MDT
    2