End the suffrage !!!

#3
#3
lawgator1 said:
I borrowed the title from the old Man Show routine, for those who've seen it. Anyway, point of the thread is that Florida Governor and GOP legislature are disenfranchising people, as we speak.



Rick Scott signs elections bill: Florida Governor Rick Scott gives OK to sweeping elections overhaul - OrlandoSentinel.com
Click to expand...

The new law dramatically overhauls state voting laws by changing longstanding procedures that allow a person to change his or her registration or name at the polling place, puts in new requirements for third-party voter-registration groups and shortens the number of days available for early voting.
Click to expand...
At the very least, you have to see this as a reasonable change.. to avoid voters from walking in to 3 or 4 precincts in one day and voting several times. :unsure:
 
#4
#4
It's pretty sketchy, that's for sure. But then again, Rick Scott is a sketchy mo-fo.
 
#5
#5
Rasputin_Vol said:
At the very least, you have to see this as a reasonable change.. to avoid voters from walking in to 3 or 4 precincts in one day and voting several times. :unsure:
Click to expand...


Can't do it. They'd have to change their name and their address 3 or 4 times to do so.
 
#6
#6
Rasputin_Vol said:
At the very least, you have to see this as a reasonable change.. to avoid voters from walking in to 3 or 4 precincts in one day and voting several times. :unsure:
Click to expand...

The cutting out early voting is what gets me. There is absolutely no reason to do that other than to disenfranchise voters who don't have the luxury of time.
 
#7
#7
VOLatile said:
The cutting out early voting is what gets me. There is absolutely no reason to do that other than to disenfranchise voters who don't have the luxury of time.
Click to expand...


Each element of it is designed to dumb down Democratic turnout. Its pretty transparent.
 
#9
#9
hndog609 said:
For the sake of argument if nothing else exactly what about cutting early voting specifically attacks Dems?
Click to expand...

dems would be unable to vote 3 or 4 times and unions would be unable to rig voting machines.

dems are not big fans of accountability, so when someone actually tries to hold American accountable when it comes to voting, dems get really mad and cry racism.

i would like to know how dems are being disenfranchised by this law.
 
#10
#10
joevol320 said:
dems would be unable to vote 3 or 4 times and unions would be unable to rig voting machines.

dems are not big fans of accountability, so when someone actually tries to hold American accountable when it comes to voting, dems get really mad and cry racism.

i would like to know how dems are being disenfranchised by this law.
Click to expand...

I have to commend you joe, it takes a special person to function in society while exhibiting these massive levels of paranoia
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#11
#11
joevol320 said:
dems would be unable to vote 3 or 4 times and unions would be unable to rig voting machines.

dems are not big fans of accountability, so when someone actually tries to hold American accountable when it comes to voting, dems get really mad and cry racism.

i would like to know how dems are being disenfranchised by this law.
Click to expand...


You have to present your identification at the poll. If you got married over the course of the last couple of years, they let you correct it in the rolls. Its not like you get to show up at 3-4 different places and vote as the same person over and over.

It tends to be women much more so than men who use that mechanism, ergo the concern expressed by women voters groups.

Your post demonstrates a complete lack of ability to understand the basic facts.
 
#12
#12
VOLatile said:
The cutting out early voting is what gets me. There is absolutely no reason to do that other than to disenfranchise voters who don't have the luxury of time.
Click to expand...



lawgator1 said:
Can't do it. They'd have to change their name and their address 3 or 4 times to do so.
Click to expand...

Why don't Democrat voters have the same amount of time to vote as GOP'ers?
 
#13
#13
lawgator1 said:
You have to present your identification at the poll. If you got married over the course of the last couple of years, they let you correct it in the rolls. Its not like you get to show up at 3-4 different places and vote as the same person over and over.

It tends to be women much more so than men who use that mechanism, ergo the concern expressed by women voters groups.

Your post demonstrates a complete lack of ability to understand the basic facts.
Click to expand...


That is a problem of the women just not taking the initiative until the very last minute to do the proper documentation. What is their excuse for not updating their driver's license? I thought the majority of states had motor voter, anyways?

Please explain why women are being hardest hit by this.
 
#14
#14
Rasputin_Vol said:
That is a problem of the women just not taking the initiative until the very last minute to do the proper documentation. What is their excuse for not updating their driver's license? I thought the majority of states had motor voter, anyways?

Please explain why women are being hardest hit by this.
Click to expand...

it takes all of a couple hours at the dmv with the right paperwork (all of which they list clearly). Can be done 6 days a week
 
#15
#15
I support reintroducing the literacy test. It was stricken because of uneven application and the Supreme Court said that it was constitutionally permissible otherwise.

Before you can vote, it should ask the country that borders the United States to the North and the country that borders the United States to the South with 4 multiple choice answers.

If you do not know the answer, you should not be allowed to vote. A neutral test given by a computer could also be given to people who desire to be candidates. I do not think Madame "go gata" would have ever been eligible.
 
#16
#16
MikeHamiltonFan said:
I support reintroducing the literacy test. It was stricken because of uneven application and the Supreme Court said that it was constitutionally permissible otherwise.

Before you can vote, it should ask the country that borders the United States to the North and the country that borders the United States to the South with 4 multiple choice answers.

If you do not know the answer, you should not be allowed to vote. A neutral test given by a computer could also be given to people who desire to be candidates. I do not think Madame "go gata" would have ever been eligible.
Click to expand...


Don't forget a poll tax. Also, the polling places should be kept strictly in country clubs.
 
#17
#17
I am willing to replace the poll tax.

Almost every problem in the body politic in the United States would be removed if a requirement to vote included being a net contributor to the United States. If you collected more benefits than you paid in tax, you could not vote.
 
#18
#18
By the way, according to the London Economics evolutionary biologist and most of the liberals in academia, liberals are smarter than conservatives.

If you used my second proposal to eliminate the parasites, the Democrats would be blown out over and over by those who oppose massive redistribution of wealth from workers to non workers.

If you simply went with the literacy tests, according to most smug liberals I know, the Republican party would be gutted.

By the way, I would pay good money to administer a WJ or a Stanford to Sarah Palin and Katie Couric. I do not think Palin is a genius, but I guarantee you that I could make Katie Couric cry within 2 minutes of a live television interview if she without notes had to discuss Supreme Court precedent.

Many of the politicians and many of the pundits are just reading from the cue cards given them by their uglier and smarter staffers.
 
#19
#19
MikeHamiltonFan said:
I am willing to replace the poll tax.

Almost every problem in the body politic in the United States would be removed if a requirement to vote included being a net contributor to the United States. If you collected more benefits than you paid in tax, you could not vote.
Click to expand...

Senior citizens definitely don't deserve to vote.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#20
#20
gorockytop101 said:
Senior citizens definitely don't deserve to vote.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Don't forget the disabled. Parasites, all of them. In fact, we should begin a policy of eradication of the aged and feeble bodied once they stop being contributors and become blood sucking leeches regardless of previous contributions.

I would like to buy MHF for what he's worth and sell him for what he thinks he's worth. With the profit I would personally pay off the national debt and still be able to live a thousand lifetimes that The Donald would envy. This MHF is a pure and simple elitist with a grossly overinflated sense of moral superiority and a celestially overblown self-worth.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#21
#21
I can guarantee you that within 10 years the AARP will have set us up for intergenerational warfare. Lots of folks are going to be given palliative care only and the Baby Boomers will wonder why the children they raised without respect for life (abortion) and in a post Christian era have decided to judge them on the basis of utility and decide against spending all their resources to fund a bankrupt system (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid).
 
#22
#22
gorockytop101 said:
Senior citizens definitely don't deserve to vote.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Social Security was NEVER intended to pay people out more than they put in.

If it functioned as it was set up, senior citizens could certainly continue to vote.

People on welfare could not.

As for the disabled, people who are legally incompetent can currently vote. Same is true for seniors with dementia. That is wrong.

There are plenty of disabled people who do not take government money. I have one in my family.
 
#23
#23
MikeHamiltonFan said:
Social Security was NEVER intended to pay people out more than they put in.

If it functioned as it was set up, senior citizens could certainly continue to vote.

People on welfare could not.

As for the disabled, people who are legally incompetent can currently vote. Same is true for seniors with dementia. That is wrong.

There are plenty of disabled people who do not take government money. I have one in my family.
Click to expand...

I am one. I go to work everyday. But by your logic, my disease is probably punishment for some sin that I have committed. You strike me as that type.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top