Florida Republicans come clean and admit to suppressing Dem votes

That's what giddy does in D&D. I'm not sure why, but it appears to be an obsession with him. As has been pointed out, he's serious about what he posts, unlike *asso and liltexxx. In other forums, he's fine, but "down here" the train goes off the rails. In my opinion, of course. I actually like the guy, but not in D&D (and I would say the same thing about basso and texxx). I've found that a conversation with him is impossible for me. It's simply too frustrating.

 

Sunday voters were simply re-directed to the more conventional early voting patterns of Saturdays and weekdays for most of a month before Election Day.

 

The voters who traditionally vote the Sunday before the election, black voters, had that option removed in an effort to reduce the number of African Americans who cast a vote in Florida. It was a despicable tactic passed by desperate people whose only hope of winning is suppressing as many minority votes as possible.

You are nearly as despicable for defending such actions.

 

I know what the law was. None of what you said changes the fact that Republicans were trying to keep blacks from voting.

Sadly, none of what you said changes the fact that you're rationalizing that, and trying to make it okay.

 

So, is "Sunday voters" the new "you people"?

Hello there, giddy.

 

Was it me, or all you critics, that overlooked that this was a LAW passed by the Florida legislature? All laws have motives and not all are always high-minded but this law prevented NO ONE from voting unless THEY just refused to vote on any day but Sunday.... for religious reasons!

In reality, this law probably had negligible effect on the election and, in fact, Obama won! Has the media identified one voter who was unable to vote due to it?

This is a law that was voted on. I find a lot more objectionable things in American politics than this.

 

They were trying to keep Democrats from voting. It is not beyond the pale that a smattering of Republican votes might have been cast on Sundays.

 

Jim Crow laws were passed by state legislatures, too. Doesn't make it okay.

...or were UNABLE to unless they received assistance from their church community (i.e. - the elderly) or couldn't vote during the week because they were WORKING and couldn't afford to wait in line for nine hours. Stop intentionally ignoring this point.

I will agree that the law had negligible effect...this time. But that doesn't make it okay to deliberately disenfranchise voters, especially voters of a particular ethnicity (as the GOP has admitted).

I'm sure you do, since it didn't effect YOU.

Personally, I believe in giving EVERYONE as much opportunity to vote as possible.
You obviously don't. Which is why your party lost. Welcome to the 47%.

 

giddy, you are arguing over the effectiveness again. Like I said if an attempted rapist tries to rape someone but fails doesn't mean it's okay.

 

They were trying to keep blacks from voting because they vote Democrat. That's what they've admitted to doing. Why are you trying to change what they've admitted except for that by changing it, you might feel better for not being upset by it.

 

You keep this up; I'm not really arguing over effectiveness (as in performance)... other than to point out that the law prevented NO ONE from voting. That is an important distinction which you seem to be willing to overlook, preferring act as if the law took their vote away...

 

Are you really going to equate this with Jim Crow laws? There are bad laws passed but the OP and others as I recall are shouting "TREASON."

Not ignoring it. In my state, and I would assume that most states have similar conveniences, we had weekday and Saturday opportunities to vot for about a month before Election Day. You guys seem to want to characterize this as vote on Sunday and stand in line for 9 hours. I don't think those were the only two choices.

No one was dis-enfranchised.

Keep the main thing the main thing.

 

Yes... and "Labor makes you free."

 

Again it isn't an important distinction at all.

If the attempted rapist was fought off by the would-be victim, then no rape actually took place. NO ONE was raped. That doesn't mean it wasn't a big deal, and things shouldn't be done to prevent the rapist from striking again.

You are arguing that it didn't really prevent people from voting so it isn't a big deal.

Three things.
1. The fact that the intent was to keep black voters from voting is despicable and something should be done to prevent it. It is a brand of shame on those that proposed it, and tried to put it into place. It is a brand of shame for those that defend it.

2. It probably did keep people from voting.

3. One of the reasons it didn't keep more people from voting is that groups caught on to what was being attempted and put exhaustive effort into combating it.

 

You are wasting your time with giddyup, he will rationalize anything away and act dense when cornered. The most horrifying part is that he is a teacher.

 

Wish some of you would try these insults in person. When you stoop to insults, you've lost the argument. That's what we teach first-graders!!!

 

How am I surprised that Giddyup is taking this line of argument. As far As getting worked up about insults tell me Giddy where was your concern when those poster were throwing around "libtard"?

 

Don't care for insults thrown in any direction; I try to do very little, IF NONE, of it myself but I usually reserve my comments for the stuff aimed directly and personally at me.

Libtard. Wingnut. They are all gross overgeneralizations even if not personal.

I take this line of argument because I get neither hysterical or paranoid when things aren't exactly cut my way. A law was passed in FL and there are those who who consider (I guess) those who pass the law as treasonous.

It is universally known that Democrats like large voter turnout becuase lots of otherwise uninvolved folks will typically vote the Democratic party line. Republicans favor smaller voter turnout because it prevents the earlier scenario from being realized.

Political operatives confer that the only way to "legally" perhaps reduce voter turnout among likely Democratic voters in one fell swoop is to do away with Sunday voting.

Is there any other way to significant impact voter turnout? Not really.

The goal was to lower voter turnout not discriminate against black voters. Any voter, black or white, could go vote another time and everybody knows that.

It's like the old adage: do you want the drill or the hole in the wall? You want the hole but the drill is the tool to get the job done.

 

giddy twisting himself into knots again trying to explain away the obvious. Lol

They're not trying to stop black voters from voting even if that day is well known as a day black churchgoers go to vote, they're just trying to stop all voters from voting and this is a good thing because in a democracy it's great to suppress voting for political purposes. Nice job man, looking forward to the next stupid ass rationalization.