• 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!

107,000 purged from Georgia voter rolls for not voting in past elections: report

Perotista said:
Neither party wants Democracy, both want to remain in power forever. If the democrats accepted democracy and election results they wouldn't have begin trying to destroy Trump the day after the election.

Each party wants to destroy the other even if that destruction includes this nation and its democracy. The problem here in Georgia is both parties nominated wackos, Extremist. One from the left and one from the right. It's deja vu all over again of the 2016 election where each party nominate a candidate 60% of American didn't want to become their next president. That 60% was made up of different people, but basically 25% who didn't want and disliked both candidates along with another 35% added to that 25% who didn't want Trump, but Clinton and another 35% who wanted Trump, but wanted Clinton.

Far as I'm concerned, our two major parties have become made up of extremist morons who only goal is to force either the lefts or the rights extremist views upon the people of this country. No wonder both major parties are shrinking fast. Why more and more folks are deserting them. From 2006 independents have risen from 30% to 43% as more and more have left the two major parties.

The problem is the two major parties still retain all the power in our two party system. I don't think either cares if they shrink to just 10%, as long as they maintain all that power.
Click to expand...

Awesome post, Pero. Kudos to you. :applaud
 
Verax said:
TheHill



The GOP does not want Democracy, they will do everything they can to stop the will of the people. They want to target new voters who are disgusted with Republicans and may be voting for the first time.
Click to expand...

My red state does slimy **** like this, too. I've checked my registration status monthly, as well as my wife's. I'd like to see assholes who scheme to suppress the vote thrown in jail. I also think that control of elections should be taken away from the states, at least temporarily. There's way too much **** like this going on.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Follow the rules it's really easy..... Or are these the same people that have not gotten a ID for the last 20 years? :lamo
Every state has laws that guide voting but you already know that.
Click to expand...

A couple questions for you:

1)How do you feel about requiring people with firearms to supply certifications for newly performed Federal and State background checks? The certificates would need to be less than a week old before election day in order to mitigate the chances that illegal aliens forged them so they could vote in the election. The newly performed checks would also have the bonus of catching felons like MS-13 members with warrants for their arrest as well as finding and deporting illegal aliens before they even reached the polling stations.

2)Do you support eliminating the military absentee ballot? Non-US citizens may have voted illegally in the last election using the military absentee ballot. This has effectively canceled out the votes of our brave and honorable servicemen. Instead of the absentee ballot, all servicemen would have one day to vote at a polling station in person while in rotation back to the United States. Agreed?
 
Plus Ultra said:
Critical lefties see such efforts as attempts to "suppress the vote" and see them "aimed at minorities" theorizing minorities (due to lower income) change address more often (which would lead to their inability to vote without updating registration). I think Democrats should start a campaign urging poor minorities to re-register when they move.
Click to expand...
I want to state an apparently little-known fact and follow it up with a few questions. Obviously in addition to you, anyone is free to answer.

The United States, billed as the world's oldest democracy (well democratic-republic) has one of the lowest voter participation rates of any developed nation in the world. So...

1. Why do you and many conservatives feel there's some justification for further complicating a process that a majority of eligible voters obviously already can't motivate themselves to participate in.

2. Why do you believe this false narrative that there is widespread voter fraud in this country when there is absolutely nothing to support the supposition? When did this narrative take hold, and why do you believe it (if you do)?

3. We're on the honor system here. Are you willing to admit that deep down many conservatives simply believe that voting rights should be more restricted, or at the very least consider it a good thing when fewer people--especially fewer certain kinds of people--vote. And before you bristle, I can link you to another political board where I used to post that's overwhelmingly conservative where sentiments like that are the rule, not the exception. I've routinely read proposals to (1) restricti the vote to people with a certain minimum federal income tax liability, (2) restrict the vote to those who haven't received any federal aid in the last "x" number of years, (3) restrict the vote to property owners (business or residential), (4) raise the voting age to 25, and/or (5) require that voters pass a basic civics test.

If you run in conservative circles, as I have most of my adult life, I'm sure you've heard the same. Curious if you support or oppose any of these ideas. I'm even more curious if you're at least willing to admit that you realize these voter roll purges, address verifications, and various other hoops are designed to do nothing more than throw up enough roadblocks that people within demos that are less inclined to vote will be more likely to say "screw it" and stay home. It's blindingly ****ing obvious.
 
TDGonDP said:
Mr. Trump stated that 3m Americans voted illegally in the last election, which implied they didn't vote for him. He has been in office for two years and has not started any investigation to this regard.

As a former political party worker in Canada, I came to the realization that maintaining a 100% accurate voters' list is impossible. We should be happy with 95%. But that 5% can cause some discredit to the electoral system. So I think both Mr. Trump and his enemies were trying to bend that 5% to portray unfairness to their side.

As I understand the American system, both D's and R's are appointed to these electoral commissions. If there are deliberate attempts to keep D voters off the list, the D's on those commissions are the ones to blame, not the R's. All these squabbles should be settled months and weeks before the election. It is impractical to settle them on election day. If they remain unsettled after the election, then the D's on those commission need to make their case to the media and court system that the R's were cheating. But from this side of the border, I hear only complaining and not seeing much action to fix the problem---from both sides.
Click to expand...

Our system allows the states most of the control of the voting process. Therein lies the rub - the party in control can get away with a lot. There's a whole lot of info I could give you showing steps each side has taken during my adult life to monkey with the system.

For this cycle, an interesting place to start looking is in GA, where the Sec of State (R) is running for governor. He has the power to purge voters from the rolls, and he's done so, focusing on removing people that might vote for his opponent.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/georgia-black-voter-registration/
Georgia GOP governor candidate sued, accused of preventing minority voter registration - Chicago Tribune
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/wireStory/abrams-kemp-clashing-voter-registrations-58490046

This is a deep topic I don't have time for a deep dive into right now.

Others may have that time.:peace
 
Cardinal said:
Don't care that you were late to the thread. How do you know they’ll have the time and opportunity to vote again? Has everybody shared their personal calendars with you?
Click to expand...
Let me know when everybody shares their personal calendars with you. Until then, you're just blowing smoke.
 
Cardinal said:
Has everybody shared their personal calendars with you?
Click to expand...

Probably not.
Sharing personal calendars---from 35 years ago yet--- seems to be a Supreme Court nominee kinda thing.
 
Verax said:
TheHill

The GOP does not want Democracy, they will do everything they can to stop the will of the people. They want to target new voters who are disgusted with Republicans and may be voting for the first time.
Click to expand...

Who calls for the end of the Electoral College and the Supreme Court after losing democratic elections?
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Who calls for the end of the Electoral College and the Supreme Court after losing democratic elections?
Click to expand...
Technically, for well or ill, the abolition of both would lead to more democracy. A direct-ballot presidential election is more democratic. Without courts to intervene and weigh the constitutionality of laws, whatever the people and their representatives pass would simply stand. The EC and the courts are checks on potential "tyranny of the majority."
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Who calls for the end of the Electoral College and the Supreme Court after losing democratic elections?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what this has to do with the price of tea in China, especially seeing as the abolition of the electoral college would not result in the targeting of Republican demographics for removal from registration rolls.
 
Helix said:
My red state does slimy **** like this, too. I've checked my registration status monthly, as well as my wife's. I'd like to see assholes who scheme to suppress the vote thrown in jail. I also think that control of elections should be taken away from the states, at least temporarily. There's way too much **** like this going on.
Click to expand...

That is an extremely good idea. These states run by cronies that seek to hold on to power cannot be trusted.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
Our system allows the states most of the control of the voting process. Therein lies the rub - the party in control can get away with a lot. There's a whole lot of info I could give you showing steps each side has taken during my adult life to monkey with the system.

For this cycle, an interesting place to start looking is in GA, where the Sec of State (R) is running for governor. He has the power to purge voters from the rolls, and he's done so, focusing on removing people that might vote for his opponent.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/georgia-black-voter-registration/
Georgia GOP governor candidate sued, accused of preventing minority voter registration - Chicago Tribune
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/wireStory/abrams-kemp-clashing-voter-registrations-58490046

This is a deep topic I don't have time for a deep dive into right now.

Others may have that time.:peace
Click to expand...

If the system is screwed up as you suggest, then it is time to change the system.

My understanding of American history is that disadvantaged groups have had to fight like hell to get the right to vote. Why should USA assume things have changed? The mechanisms are all in place to stage this fight and win.
 
Cardinal said:
1)How do you feel about requiring people with firearms to supply certifications for newly performed Federal and State background checks? The certificates would need to be less than a week old before election day in order to mitigate the chances that illegal aliens forged them so they could vote in the election. The newly performed checks would also have the bonus of catching felons like MS-13 members with warrants for their arrest as well as finding and deporting illegal aliens before they even reached the polling stations.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think this would be a good idea as non-citizens are also allowed to lawfully purchase firearms and having successfully passed whatever newly performed background checks shouldn't qualify them to vote.
2)Do you support eliminating the military absentee ballot? Non-US citizens may have voted illegally in the last election using the military absentee ballot. This has effectively canceled out the votes of our brave and honorable servicemen. Instead of the absentee ballot, all servicemen would have one day to vote at a polling station in person while in rotation back to the United States. Agreed?
Click to expand...
I suspect the instances when a non-citizen has voted using a military absentee ballot are few, this probably has happened as I'd expect non-citizens serving in the US military (a precondition to obtaining a military absentee ballot) could easily mistakenly believe military service confers citizenship (this is the general rule internationally). I also expect most non-citizens serving in the US armed forces eventually do qualify and their lack of citizenship is merely the absence of compliance with some formalistic procedure (didn't get sworn in at a citizenship ceremony).
 
Plus Ultra said:
No, I don't think this would be a good idea as non-citizens are also allowed to lawfully purchase firearms and having successfully passed whatever newly performed background checks shouldn't qualify them to vote.
Click to expand...

So you support the right of illegal aliens and MS-13 members with warrants out for their arrest to vote in our elections. Noted.

Plus Ultra said:
I suspect the instances when a non-citizen has voted using a military absentee ballot are few, this probably has happened as I'd expect non-citizens serving in the US military (a precondition to obtaining a military absentee ballot) could easily mistakenly believe military service confers citizenship (this is the general rule internationally). I also expect most non-citizens serving in the US armed forces eventually do qualify and their lack of citizenship is merely the absence of compliance with some formalistic procedure (didn't get sworn in at a citizenship ceremony).
Click to expand...

So you support non-Americans taking advantage of military absentee voting to vote in our elections. Noted.
 
Cardinal said:
What does your belief that people are trying to get non-citizens to vote have to do with removing removing people's right to vote?
Click to expand...
Voting isn't a right. It's a privilege given to you from the state you live in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
Cardinal said:
What does your belief that people are trying to get non-citizens to vote have to do with removing removing people's right to vote?
Click to expand...


They are not removing their right to vote. They can still vote, they have to re-register. (Apparently the people didn't care anyway, since they haven't voted in years). If they can't be bothered to keep their registration active, we are supposed to feel bad?
 
Verax said:
TheHill



The GOP does not want Democracy, they will do everything they can to stop the will of the people. They want to target new voters who are disgusted with Republicans and may be voting for the first time.
Click to expand...
So these are so disgusted with republicans they are gonna show up to the polls for t b email first time in years but their not disgusted enough with them to make sure they are still registered before going to the polls. That's some sound logic you got going on there.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Voting isn't a right. It's a privilege given to you from the state you live in.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Voting is a right. If citizens were required to pass a test demonstrating a basic grasp on how U.S. institutions function in order to vote, you'd be one non-voting joker.
 
holbritter said:
They are not removing their right to vote. They can still vote, they have to re-register. (Apparently the people didn't care anyway, since they haven't voted in years). If they can't be bothered to keep their registration active, we are supposed to feel bad?
Click to expand...

Do you believe that everybody should be required to re-register to vote, or just demographics known to vote Democrat?
 
LincolnRossiter said:
Thanks for the link. I’m not up on my case law. However, there appears to be a distinction between that case and this one.

From the link.


Did Georgia undertake a similar address verification initiative as a part of its law?
Click to expand...
Yes, it appears there is also an address confirmation process in Georgia. It appears there was already a case challenging the kaw in Georgia, but plaintiffs withdrew after the Scotus ruling b/c the two laws were so similar:

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article213001299.html
 
Cardinal said:
How do you know they'll have the opportunity and the time? Have they shared their personal calendars with you?
Click to expand...

I don't know, and I don't really care about their personal calendars. If they want to vote, they need to register. It's simple. If It's not important, then they won't bother. It sounds like for many who haven't voted for some time now, it's not a high priority. I'm not going to tell them what to do, but you can, if you like. Sounds like they already know what to do to register, don't you think?
 
Taylor said:
Yes, it appears there is also an address confirmation process in Georgia. It appears there was already a case challenging the kaw in Georgia, but plaintiffs withdrew after the Scotus ruling b/c the two laws were so similar:

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article213001299.html
Click to expand...
Thanks. I guess that explains Cardinal's point of why they aren't suing. I'd probably still sue and hope to draw some distinctions between the facts in the two cases.
 
Cardinal said:
So you support the right of illegal aliens and MS-13 members with warrants out for their arrest to vote in our elections. Noted.

So you support non-Americans taking advantage of military absentee voting to vote in our elections. Noted.
Click to expand...
Also note first, that there's a greater harm in granting all non-citizens who lawfully possess a firearm the right to vote, than in identifying illegal aliens and MS-13 gang members who attempt to lawfully purchase firearms; and second, that the number of non-citizens mistakenly using military absentee ballots must be insignificant, nothing to support, but I certainly see a greater harm in denying all members of the armed forces the right to vote when deployed overseas to prevent maybe a few non-citizens among them doing so. Its just a matter of balancing the equities.
Military absentee ballot requests were at dismal levels; Virginia had received only 1,746 -only 8 percent of the total from 2008; Ohio had received 1,806 requests, and it's total was 13,317 in 2008; Florida had 37,953 requests, after a total of 86,926 four years ago. https://pilotonline.com/news/military/article_2d17fc66-ad4e-512e-8f9d-9cbe31cb7580.html
Click to expand...
On the non-citizens in the armed forces:
Citing data from Homeland Security's Citizenship and Immigration Services, the military news outlet reported applications for citizenship among troops went down by about 40 percent in January, February, and March — dropping to 661 from 1,069 in the previous three-month period.

Approvals declined by about 44 percent, to 412 in the first three months of 2018 from 745 in the previous period, the agency added.

Military.com said unnamed sources attributed the declines mainly to the end in 2016 of recruitment under the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest program (in which legal immigrants were recruited primarily for their language or medical skills) and to a 2017 change in Defense Department policy on non-citizen troops.

According to Military.com, new non-citizen enlistees in the military now require more extensive background checks and honorable service of at least 180 days before an application for naturalization can be filed.
In addition, those completing the 180 days must get approval from an officer rather than from their personnel office, to advance to the next step in naturalization, the military news outlet reported.

The changes in policy and the effective end of the MAVNI program began triggering big drops from October through December 2017, Military.com reported.

CIS data showed applicants dropped from 3,132 in July-September 2017 to 1,069 from October-December 2017, Military.com reported. The number of troops approved to become naturalized citizens dropped from 2,123 in July-September 2017, to 755 in the October-December 2017 period. https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/citizenship-military-troops-defense/2018/07/17/id/872276/
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom