I agree if this is just GA. This is a national effort. I think both Jim Crow AND anti-democracy in that perspective are correct. There is an urgent push from Republican legislators to legalize cheating and suppressing certain groups of voters, riding on Trump's BIG LIE. He was successful at undermining the integrity of the voting process and brainwashing massive number of people into believing there was widespread election fraud. In a way, the Republican legislators are giving justification and support to the Jan 6th coup attempt - they all believed in the big lie and now these Republicans are making laws based on that belief. This shouldn't be a surprise. The majority of GOP House members voted to reject the election results on Jan 7th. Personally, I would like to see to focus on voting as a fundamental right. We all want easy access and quick way to cast votes. 2020 was the most scrutinized election in history and there was essentially no fraud. The Republican politicians realize they can't win fairly and is now messing with all of our constitutional rights - HR1, For The People act, is to ensure our voting right are safeguarded and that we all have easy access to voting, securely.
Yes it has gotten out of hand and if we get bogged down to a conversation of what is worse we have truly lost and facts mean nothing on both sides. Nobody will believe anything because everything comes with as much hyperbole as possible and both sides gets discredited. Since when is anything ok because thats what Republicans do?
Does not matter if this is just GA if you actually look at the bill and what it is doing its nowhere near as restrictive as a Jim Crow law and its has more access to voting than the liberal bastion of New York. Yes it is restrictive but its not as egregious as a lot of other blue states and when that gets shown the Jim Crow rhetoric looks absurd and is just being used to ratchet things up. I agree on everything concerning Republicans and voting issues but let's talk about what is actually happening and stop with the Jim Crow stuff. I myself was not up on the things that are in the bill and I think a lot of other people are uneducated on it as well.
To summarize the usual GOP/"libertarians" "My candidates will never win because a majority do not support our positions," Therefore we need to make it hard for the majority that opposes our policies to vote. If as all evidence shows fraud is about 1 in million that is all we need to justify our suppression. If there is one case of fraud in roughly 150 million the number of total votes that justifies our tactic.
How? Certainly some Democrats have repeated inaccurate claims. Do you feel they are justified in their outrage at the attempt of voter suppression?
You certainly can speak on this because you are the master of outrage as theater. It's what you do every day in here.
Perhaps. What level of outrage do you feel would be proportionate toward the attempt of using legislation to suppress voting? What steps do you feel should be taken to address it?
not an issue I follow closely. But I think the phrase "suppress voting" is well-selected to spin a complicated issue in a simple way. There is, at least in principle, no difference between, say, "common sense voter registration laws" and "common sense gun registration laws." That political actors can claim or feign "outrage" over the perceived injustice is a sociological reality; the moral or political question of what is the best policy? is a quite different issue. Mail-in voting, just to take one example, occurs largely out of sight. Whereas in-person voting occurs in the presence of election workers. That some would like to take measures to guarantee mail-in voting is not abused seems like an intelligible position to hold (regardless of whether you agree with that position or not). To feign outrage over "voter suppression" as regards this particular issue seems out of place to me, when what we need is calm and deliberate discourse about how to make mail-in voting fair and accurate.
Your mail in voting claim makes no sense. In person voting doesn't check for ids therefore the presence of election workers makes no difference as the way fraud is detected is if someone tries to attempt to vote when a vote in the same name has already been cast using a voter roll binder that has a list of all voters and their addresses. This same thing is applicable with mail in voting. Repeat attempts under the same name is how Individual voter fraud is detected.
Do you think it's weird at all that prior to 2020, the people that are now trying to "secure mail-in voting" actually loved and encouraged mail-in voting and raved about it, and instead focused all of their "voter fraud" efforts on in-person voting? Do you think it's a coincidence that they just happened to flip their stance when the other party's voters started using it a lot more? You believe these people are genuinely trying protect the vote?
Mail-in voting has been shown to have been secure and not a problem with validity. It also has historically been used by voters that favor one party over the other. Mail-in voting is regulated. The regulations are different from state to state. Reducing mail-in voting however, doesn't make it more secure. Thank you for engaging in discussion.
I'm glad you have that confidence. Others don't share it. And the issues extend well beyond the question of "security": https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...ving-problems-with-mail-in-voting/ar-BB17Y47G and the problems with NY's 22nd Congressional District's election in 2020 have been well-documented: https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/pol...ds-in-last-undecided-2020-house-race/2860029/
Perhaps you should spend less time googling and reposting endless Reason.com articles and instead learn about the issues you have opinions on?
