This was Andrew Joseph Duffer's response. LOL @ former President pumpkin t***. "Klansman Kemp signed #SB202 yesterday. It’s one the first major voting bills to pass. Brian said this bill makes it easy to vote and hard to cheat, but it’s actually quite the opposite. The GOP legislators gave themselves the right to take over local elections and throw out results. This will lead to partisan control of elections and more difficult procedures for voters trying to cast their ballots by mail. Since 2012 the GOP in Georgia has closed more than 200 polling places. This bill will also lead to longer lines when voting and make it a crime for third-party groups to hand out food and water to voters standing in line! LINES THAT THEY CREATED. This is what voter suppression looks like, but the KKK (or GOP)calls it “reform.” The desire for those so called “reforms” came after PRESIDENT Biden beat former President pumpkin t*** in the 2020 election and the state sent two Democrats to the Senate. There has been no evidence of fraud or irregularities in the recent elections. The only thing that changed was how many people voted. The GOP doesn’t want you to vote. The only way they can stay in power is to lie, cheat, steal, and silence voters...especially black and brown voters."
About 5 years ago I've suddenly noticed a lot of my conservative buddies spam this narrative that "a Republic isn't a democracy" like out of the blue. Like when did this become a talking point? It shows how the right wing elites trickle down these narratives and implant it slowly in the minds of the blue collar white American. Btw conservatives, a Republic is a subset of a type of democracy. Slowly but surely the term "democracy" is going to be a subset of "cultural Marxism" in conservative circles where it now is marxist to want a democracy.
This stuff might delay the inevitable a bit but Georgia's on a trajectory that can't be reversed. The other thing is that outside the US, the term Republic is discussed in relation to Constitutional Monarchy. Basically, Republicanism abroad is associated with the ability to elect heads of state as opposed to countries that have monarchs as the heads of state. So in places where Queen Elizabeth still serves as head of state, you have constant debates about ditching the Monarchy and becoming a Republic. That is simply a debate about electing (either directly or indirectly) a head of state. But only in America, have we twisted the term Republic to mean some sort of system of government that must be partially anti-democratic.
Turning election result determination over to politicians. That's the GA law and where we are heading. Remember, the Supreme Court is 6-3, and so... HR1 itself might not be enough. Biden yesterday said history will look back at this period of time to study about democracy vs autocracy. He was referring to Putin and Xi specifically. But I think history could also be looking back at this period of time of an American party giving up on democracy and turning toward autocracy. Its followers do not understand this. They think they are still fighting for democracy, when in fact they are tools for autocrats.
I'm warming up to going back to a talking filibuster but at that point you might as well just get rid of it. The GQP will remove it if we make any changes to it next time they're in power. Issue is even if H.R. 1 is passed you still have to deal with the Supreme Court possibly ruling it unconstitutional. So if you get rid of the filibuster you might also have to pack the court and I don't know if Biden will want to go that far...
The substantial Trumpista wing of the GOP want minority rule if that is what it takes for them to win. I first noted in shock "America is a Republic, not a Democracy" on this forum at least 5 years ago as Fchow alluded to.
"A hundred years ago they used to put on a white sheet and use a bloodhound against Negroes. Today they’ve taken off the white sheet and put on police uniforms, they’ve traded in the bloodhounds for police dogs, and they’re still doing the same thing." -Malcolm X
Voter ID is the way to go. Biden should push for making it easier for everyone to acquire IDs. This will help people get jobs, receive benefits, pay taxes, open bank accounts, and travel.
What is the point of voter id when the actual cases of voter fraud that are easily caught are statistically insignificant to the vote count?
If Democrats added voter ID to H.R. 1 would you support it? Now I get it...most people in this modern world have to have an ID and it baffles me how someone can live life without one. I'm about to go and get my 2nd covid shot and guess what...I am required to show my DL.
True. There will be the supreme court hurdle when states sue and make a case about the constitution having it's say on states rights to control their own elections. However the Constitution is pretty clear though about Congress' role too, and that battle in the Supreme Court will take literally years. At the very least, it'll put a short term stop order on many voter suppression laws, and when the Supreme Court does weight in, even under the most GOP generous interpretations, there will be some pretty stark powers that the courts do award Congress in voting rights even if HR1 or parts of HR1 are struck down. I've also been surprised at Gorsuch oddly enough in the way he has signaled in his decisions on these type of cases. I think you'd be surprised, other than Alito and Thomas (who are a joke to the court... I think because they are old and don't give a crap anymore about what happens long term), how the court would mostly vote in this case. There would be real ramifications they might not want to deal with once cases are made and it's clear what the court would be signing off on in terms of rights for states like California, and New York to do bigger things that over rule the federal government. The courts look at cases like this with what they'd lose long term while the GOP day to day strategists could care less if California F-cks off and does their own thing. The day to day strategists are trying to win now with autocratic tactics. The Conservatives on the court are there for life, and think harder about the power they give states they might not want to give power to. I think we'd be surprised that the Conservative Supreme Court might actually see Congress as the safer bet to hold some power given the calculation of giving Congress power who changes hands every couple cylcles regularly vs permanently entrenching independent power to a handful of states that represent a hell of alot of America's financial power.
Also don't forget that Congress is essentially a collection of elected state Representatives. So as the GOP states try to make the case that this is a States rights issue vs. a tyrannical federal government.... that on it's face will be false. Thats why the constitution is pretty clear about giving Congress so much power, and why they are article 1 for a reason. This is why the GOP had to use tax law as their mechanism for trying to strike down Obamacare in the courts. They knew they had no reasonable case to make about State's rights to overturn a Congressionally passed law. Even with a completely partisan supreme court, it'll be hard as hell to overturn HR1.
"Republic" <> 'Democracy" The original US at 1789 wasn't very democratic and the Founders themselves were very leery of direct democracy, because they feared it would led to a populist demagogue taking power. A Republic can exist without democracy and in "The Republic" Plato makes an argument against democracy. The US is a republican democracy and the arc of US history has been towards more democracy. Several Amendments of the Constitution have specifically made that so. From a historical and philosophical standpoint yes it can be argued that the US is a republic and not a democracy but that hasn't been true in decades.
Does any country practice direct democracy? Direct democracy is citizens directly voting on legislation. Around the world that only happens at the small town level and in some cases with propositions. No one claims this country is a "direct democracy". It's always has been a representative democracy. The founders literally fought a war because of the slogan "no taxation without representation". They didn't want a simple majority to make wide scale major changes hence why it takes a lot for a constitutional amendment.
What possible ways are there to make it easier for everyone to get IDs that don't discriminate against economically challenged, rural, and elderly citizens. And how do you treat lost cards? And how would that address many of the voter suppression bills republicans are introducing in their blatant power gab?
There are not true direct democracies of countries that I know of but there are varying levels of democracy. Might understanding is that the US is actually more democratic than many countries because in our system we can vote directly on our representatives whereas in parliamentary systems they vote on the party and the party chooses the leadership. Anyway I agree it's incorrect that our country doesn't have a democracy. The rest was just mean being pedantic.
If I remember correctly the USSC didn't actually overturn the Voting Rights Act but just struck down some parts of it under the argument that the issues had resolved themselves. If that is the case then the USSC hasn't ruled out the idea that Congress can have some control over how states conduct elections under the the 14th Amendment.
That's exactly right. I think it was Justice Roberts himself that voice the majority opinion which was pretty clear that it was Congress that needed to act in order to address those areas, and wasn't the courts role to interpret those areas not covered. So yeah, the very same Supreme Court Chief Justice's decision would be a big part of Congresses argument why HR1 is constitutional.
Statement by President Biden on the Attack on the Right to Vote in Georgia | The White House Statement by President Biden on the Attack on the Right to Vote in Georgia MARCH 26, 2021 • SPEECHES AND REMARKS More Americans voted in the 2020 elections than any election in our nation’s history. In Georgia we saw this most historic demonstration of the power of the vote twice – in November and then again in the runoff election for the U.S. Senate seats in January. Recount after recount and court case after court case upheld the integrity and outcome of a clearly free, fair, and secure democratic process. Yet instead of celebrating the rights of all Georgians to vote or winning campaigns on the merits of their ideas, Republicans in the state instead rushed through an un-American law to deny people the right to vote. This law, like so many others being pursued by Republicans in statehouses across the country is a blatant attack on the Constitution and good conscience. Among the outrageous parts of this new state law, it ends voting hours early so working people can’t cast their vote after their shift is over. It adds rigid restrictions on casting absentee ballots that will effectively deny the right to vote to countless voters. And it makes it a crime to provide water to voters while they wait in line – lines Republican officials themselves have created by reducing the number of polling sites across the state, disproportionately in Black neighborhoods. This is Jim Crow in the 21st Century. It must end. We have a moral and Constitutional obligation to act. I once again urge Congress to pass the For the People Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to make it easier for all eligible Americans access the ballot box and prevent attacks on the sacred right to vote. And I will take my case to the American people – including Republicans who joined the broadest coalition of voters ever in this past election to put country before party. If you have the best ideas, you have nothing to hide. Let the people vote.
Scratch that, no ID required on the 2nd one @Astrodome and you still haven't answered my question as far as if you would support a bill like that...
