• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

VA Gov Gives 200,000 Felons Voting Rights... 'Move to boost Clinton'...

ocean515 said:
I'm not a slave to ideological bias as it appears some are. Unable to divorce themselves from the limitations of their narrow vision, it's quite common to see outrageous accusations made in an attempt to justify their positions. Throwing out strawmans like race, is just further evidence of this stunted thinking.

Felons decided upon themselves to throw away their constitutional right to vote when they chose to commit crimes that were so substantial, the penalty included that forfeiture.

The theatrics of your claims are rather comical though, so I thank you for that.
Click to expand...

In this case - race is NOT a straw man. It is simply a fact of reality.

But I can see from your perspective why you would want them not to vote in public elections for the rest of their life. Its entirely understandable from your position.
 
haymarket said:
In this case - race is NOT a straw man. It is simply a fact of reality.

But I can see from your perspective why you would want them not to vote in public elections for the rest of their life. Its entirely understandable from your position.
Click to expand...

No, in this case your comments were the precise definition of strawman, and race was included for exactly the purpose you meant it to be. I've simply been commenting on the law, and debt to society. I have not mentioned vote, or race, or anything else.
 
ocean515 said:
No, in this case your comments were the precise definition of strawman, and race was included for exactly the purpose you meant it to be. I've simply been commenting on the law, and debt to society. I have not mentioned vote, or race, or anything else.
Click to expand...

You DO NOT HAVE to mention it. Its there all the same and its obvious.
 
ocean515 said:
The citizens of Virginia, via the process of electing representatives, determined the debt to society owed by people who willingly chose to commit crimes so considerable as to be labeled felony, should include a forfeiture of there right to participate in the process that establishes the laws they reject.

Someone who chooses to violate another Constitutional rights, via the felony they were convicted of, has already decided they don't care about rights, don't care about laws, don't care about other citizens, and are completely and totally willing to accept the consequences of their actions.

It's quite simple really, unless one allows themselves to be twisted by ideas with little foundation in reality. This unilateral action is simply a decision by one individual in power, to decide by themselves, what constitutes a fully paid debt to society, which of course is completely untrue, according to laws on the books when the convicted felon decided to commit such a serious crime.
Click to expand...
Do you know for a fact, that it is not under the governor's purview to do as he did?

[putting motivation aside]

It seems to me if not under his domain, he would be open to (state level) constitutional review and nullification.
 
MickeyW said:
McAuliffe restores voting rights for 206K ex-felons; GOP calls it move to boost Clinton - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virginia Politics

McAuliffe restores voting rights for 206K ex-felons; GOP calls it move to boost Clinton - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virginia Politics


It doesn't get any slimier than this!

Outrageous......I hope Virginians vote this asshole out of office!
Click to expand...

My only question is, Is this normal behavior that is just now being reported on due to the upcoming election, or is this out of the ordinary behavior that just happened to coincide with an upcoming Presidential election?

I don't think Felons should lose the right to vote after they have completed their sentence.

I also cannot deny that action... NOW... is extremely political in nature, intended to help influence (even if only slightly) the election in this state.
 
Redress said:
In which case this will have something of a negligible effect. Still the right thing to do. Once you do your time, you should be able to do the same things most other people can do.
Click to expand...

The right thing to do... the wrong time to do it.

And we all know the reason for the timing of this particular decision at this particular time....


My only question is... will he still continue to sign documents restoring voting power of felons in this state after the election season is over? That will be the deciding factor on what his real reasons for this are.
 
Peter King said:
I think it is insane for people to loose their voting rights because they did a crime. If they were found guilty of voting fraud or corrupting government officials or something like that then yes, maybe loosing your voting rights for a while is OK but not if you were caught shoplifting, pick pocketing, etc. etc.. Then there should be no way for those people to loose their voting rights.
Click to expand...

Uhhhh...

You are aware shoplifting isn't actually a felony right????
 
calamity said:
If they served their sentences and completed parole, they should be allowed to vote again. Sheesh.
Click to expand...

I agree.

But can you also agree that the timing of this makes it appear more about politics than about restoring peoples rights????
 
calamity said:
IMO, unless the felon committed a gun crime, they should be allowed to own a gun again once their jail/parole term is complete.

OTOH, if they commit a sex crime, they should never be released from jail-parole-supervision.
Click to expand...

Why do we care so much about sex crimes? Especially when there are so many cases that are absolute bull****, cases that ruin peoples lives before someone finally admits, after another person has served time that the allegation was bull****.



I think people are too focused on sex crimes like an old Salem Witch trial.
 
Caine said:
My only question is, Is this normal behavior that is just now being reported on due to the upcoming election, or is this out of the ordinary behavior that just happened to coincide with an upcoming Presidential election?

I don't think Felons should lose the right to vote after they have completed their sentence.

I also cannot deny that action... NOW... is extremely political in nature, intended to help influence (even if only slightly) the election in this state.
Click to expand...

This says it all:

Terence Richard "Terry" McAuliffe (/məˈkɔːlᵻf/; born February 9, 1957) is an American businessman and the 72nd Governor of Virginia.[1] He served as Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, from 2001 to 2005, was co-chairman of President Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign, and was chairman of Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign. He was an unsuccessful candidate for the Democratic nomination in the 2009 gubernatorial election. In the 2013 gubernatorial election, he was unopposed in the Democratic primary.


A company man all the way, who would do anything to give his party a leg up!
 
ocean515 said:
That is not the point. The law in Virginia stated that the debt to society owed by people who chose to commit felonies, and get caught and convicted, includes jail, fines, etc., including a forfeiture of voting rights. Restoring voting rights by unilateral fiat, simply forgives part of the debt to society.

That is a fact. Whether it is right to do so, or not, has nothing to do with it.

At least liberal/socialist progressive should call it as it is. This action is a forgiving of part of the debt to society that was understood, and in place, at the time the convicted felon chose to commit their crime.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I who usually sides with conservatives on most issues (except holly roller pushing Christian religion bull****), disagree that this is a "liberal/socialist progressive agenda" as you so seem to imply.

People who commit felonies should be allowed to have their rights back after their full sentence is complete.
 
MickeyW said:
McAuliffe restores voting rights for 206K ex-felons; GOP calls it move to boost Clinton - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virginia Politics

McAuliffe restores voting rights for 206K ex-felons; GOP calls it move to boost Clinton - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virginia Politics


It doesn't get any slimier than this!

Outrageous......I hope Virginians vote this asshole out of office!
Click to expand...

Captain Adverse said:
I don't think they should have ever had their rights to vote revoked in the first place.

Suspended while incarcerated? Sure.

Once released, they should have all their rights restored. They did the time and paid the tab for their crime.

No one should continue to be punished after they've already served their sentences.
Click to expand...

I agree that once the debt to society is paid, that voting rights should be restored, but the timing is rather suspicious.
72nd Governor of Virginia
Incumbent
Assumed office
January 11, 2014
LieutenantRalph Northam
Preceded byBob McDonnell
Chairman of the Democratic National Committee
In office
February 3, 2001 – February 12, 2005
Preceded byEd Rendell (General Chairman)
Joe Andrew (National Chairman)
Succeeded byHoward Dean
Personal details
BornTerence Richard McAuliffe
February 9, 1957 (age 59)
Syracuse, New York, U.S.
Political partyDemocratic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_McAuliffe
Click to expand...

Democrat. Yeah, the timing is rather suspicious.

Loss of voting rights while incarcerated is how it is, and how it's been.

TurtleDude said:
the number of felons who actually bother to vote is rather low
Click to expand...

Probably accurate.
 
Excon said:
Why?
If they paid their debt, it is paid. Not to mention that as a group they have the second to lowest recidivism rate.
Click to expand...

Misleading....

The problem with using recidivism rates to determine the rate of reoffending is readily apparent when considering the following example. If 100% of released molesters reoffended, but the rate of reporting is only 12%, and the conviction rate is half of this, than the recidivism rate would be reported as only 6%!

Prentky et al. (1997) examined recidivism rates on 115 child molesters and concluded that: (1) child molesters remain at risk to reoffend long after their discharge, in some cases 15-20 years after discharge; (2) there is a marked underestimation of recidivism rates.
Recidivism and Child Molesters
Click to expand...
 
Caine said:
Why do we care so much about sex crimes? Especially when there are so many cases that are absolute bull****, cases that ruin peoples lives before someone finally admits, after another person has served time that the allegation was bull****.



I think people are too focused on sex crimes like an old Salem Witch trial.
Click to expand...

From the same source given in post 38.

"The dry research figures only confirm what I have seen over and over in this field: there are a lot of sexual offenses out there and the people who commit them don't get caught very often. When an offender is caught and has a thorough evaluation with a polygraph backup, he will reveal dozens, sometimes hundreds of offenses he was never apprehended for. In an unpublished study by Pamela Van Wyk, 26 offenders in her incarcerated treatment program entered the program admitting an average of 3 victims each. Faced with a polygraph and the necessity of passing it to stay in the treatment program, the next group of 23 men revealed an average of 175 victims each."
Click to expand...
 
If you're an American citizen of the age of majority, you should be able to vote, no matter who you are.

I also like Sweden's policy of automatically registering all people who are 18+ to vote. Then there's less chance for voter obstruction.
 
Caine said:
I agree.

But can you also agree that the timing of this makes it appear more about politics than about restoring peoples rights????
Click to expand...

Sure. And, not to mention who the governor is--royal scumbag Terry Mc.
 
Northern Light said:
If you're an American citizen of the age of majority, you should be able to vote, no matter who you are.

I also like Sweden's policy of automatically registering all people who are 18+ to vote. Then there's less chance for voter obstruction.
Click to expand...

I'd go a step further and let resident aliens here legally vote. If you live here and pay US taxes, you should be allowed to vote. OTOH, I would suggest taking away the vote from those who do not pay taxes...but, that would probably be no one since we all pay tax of some sort or another.
 
Excon said:
Insane? No way?
Wut?
These folks have already demonstrated defective thinking by willingly breaking the law. That should be reason enough to revoke the privileged until after they have been discharged from their sentence.
Click to expand...

Yup, as soon as they leave jail and start rehabilitation outside of the prison walls, there is no need to keep them from voting. And defective thinking? That is an oversimplification for why crimes happen. And even that should not rob them from their voting rights. There is no correlation between voting and having committed a crime.
 
Caine said:
The right thing to do... the wrong time to do it.

And we all know the reason for the timing of this particular decision at this particular time....


My only question is... will he still continue to sign documents restoring voting power of felons in this state after the election season is over? That will be the deciding factor on what his real reasons for this are.
Click to expand...

I would agree it is the wrong time to do it. You should not change election laws in national election years.
 
MickeyW said:
McAuliffe restores voting rights for 206K ex-felons; GOP calls it move to boost Clinton - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virginia Politics

McAuliffe restores voting rights for 206K ex-felons; GOP calls it move to boost Clinton - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Virginia Politics


It doesn't get any slimier than this!

Outrageous......I hope Virginians vote this asshole out of office!
Click to expand...

Half the people who live there work in the DC Complex wasting our money and bribing each other.

Why wouldn't the the convicted felons vote for Hilary. They should support one of their own.
 
Redress said:
I would agree it is the wrong time to do it. You should not change election laws in national election years.
Click to expand...

When people are prevented from exercising their Constitutional rights, there is no better time to change that sad situation than today.
 
haymarket said:
You DO NOT HAVE to mention it. Its there all the same and its obvious.
Click to expand...

Only to one who obsesses with race. Perhaps you should do something about that. These days, being a rather obvious racist does not bode well for someone.

so, if you could, please keep your racism to yourself, and don't attempt to spread it to others who don't suffer from the same defect in character.
 
Chomsky said:
Do you know for a fact, that it is not under the governor's purview to do as he did?

[putting motivation aside]

It seems to me if not under his domain, he would be open to (state level) constitutional review and nullification.
Click to expand...

At this point, I have not read anything to suggest the Governor does not have to the power of his office to make the unilateral decision that he made. I guess time will tell if there are any remedies, or challenges to his commutation of sentence for 200,000 felons.
 
Caine said:
Sorry, but I who usually sides with conservatives on most issues (except holly roller pushing Christian religion bull****), disagree that this is a "liberal/socialist progressive agenda" as you so seem to imply.

People who commit felonies should be allowed to have their rights back after their full sentence is complete.
Click to expand...

There full sentence includes forfeiture of their voting rights. You are in support of commuting their sentence. That is a fact. It may not be a wrong position, but what is completely wrong is to suggest they have completed their sentence, when in total fact, they have not.

The laws were on the books when they chose to commit crimes deemed so serious as to be labeled felonies. I mention liberal/socialist progressives because they are in the vast majority who support this commutation of sentence.
 
calamity said:
From the same source given in post 38.
Click to expand...

So a small study of 26 offenders, who we don't even know whether or not they were EXTREME cases or classified as "predators", is enough to say that ALL sex offenders should be troubled by legal issues for life?

Do you realize that pissing in public can make one a "sex offender" ????

This sex offender **** has gotten out of control... and the ignorant public who seems to think someone on the sex offender registry = "predator".

At one point a few years back, while a police officer I searched the sex offender registry and not ONE SINGLE person registered in all of NC met the requirements for "Predator" status.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom