Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 75 of 75

Thread: SCOTUS may affirm 'white rule'

  1. #71
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    62,360

    Re: SCOTUS may affirm 'white rule'

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay59 View Post
    It's not cover because they are not saying it.

    Republicans should be concerned about people voting Democrat or third party. You say this like it's a bad thing. Why?
    They can be concerned until their precious little fragile hearts give out. What they can't do is set national policy with the specific intent to reduce the number of people voting Democrat, in particular by targeting racial groups.

    I would like to believe "let's not set voting policies based on trying to reduce turnout in the other team's demographic" is not a controversial statement, but the GOP's actions clearly show concerted effort to do exactly that. Like abortion bans, there's hurdles to explicitly targeting race in voting laws, so they try every effort around the edges to effectively do that without explicitly doing it. (there USED to be much bigger hurdles with the VRA in place, and it's not a coincidence that literally the same day SCOTUS tossed that out a bunch of red states passed a flurry of new voter restrictions)
    Last edited by Deuce; 06-25-19 at 01:35 PM.
    “personal attorney” to Individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't know who [Individual-1] is and neither do you.

  2. #72
    Temp Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,600

    Re: SCOTUS may affirm 'white rule'

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay59 View Post
    It's not cover because they are not saying it.

    Republicans should be concerned about people voting Democrat or third party. You say this like it's a bad thing. Why?
    Yeah, i'm going to go with it's bad to disenfranchise people because of party affiliations.

  3. #73
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    62,360

    Re: SCOTUS may affirm 'white rule'

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Yeah, i'm going to go with it's bad to disenfranchise people because of party affiliations.
    It's scary that right wingers are becoming bold enough with their fascism that they're starting to get a lot more comfortable with just openly declaring **** like "hurting liberals is good" or "so what if a police officer wants to murder all gay people" or "it's ok if literal babies sit in their own filth in a cage, they shouldn't have been brought here by their parents."
    “personal attorney” to Individual-1, who at that point had become the President of the United States
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't know who [Individual-1] is and neither do you.

  4. #74
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    784

    Re: SCOTUS may affirm 'white rule'

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    Yeah, i'm going to go with it's bad to disenfranchise people because of party affiliations.
    Why not say that in the first place. Then we would know where you stood.

  5. #75
    Educator
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    784

    Re: SCOTUS may affirm 'white rule'

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    They can be concerned until their precious little fragile hearts give out. What they can't do is set national policy with the specific intent to reduce the number of people voting Democrat, in particular by targeting racial groups.

    I would like to believe "let's not set voting policies based on trying to reduce turnout in the other team's demographic" is not a controversial statement, but the GOP's actions clearly show concerted effort to do exactly that. Like abortion bans, there's hurdles to explicitly targeting race in voting laws, so they try every effort around the edges to effectively do that without explicitly doing it. (there USED to be much bigger hurdles with the VRA in place, and it's not a coincidence that literally the same day SCOTUS tossed that out a bunch of red states passed a flurry of new voter restrictions)
    You claim that is what they want but no one has shown any evidence except an article from a liberal think tank. On the other hand, keeping non eligible people from voting is a valid concern. They have a small edge on you there.

    From my seat, all anyone wants to do is gather information. If you assume that the Republicans are right and that Democrats really are cheating, the consternation makes sense. Otherwise, what is the problem with gathering information?

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •