Thursday, June 3, 2021

GOP Voter Suppression Update

 2 Kinds of GOP Bills

GOP wants to make Election Administration Political

Voting Statement of Concern

As a life long GOPer it saddens me that the GOP seems to want to make it harder for people to vote, rather than adjusting their platform to attract more voters...  Hopefully American citizens keep working to vote, no matter what stupidity is thrown at them.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

I thought I would comment on the rules objection.

In elections, there are always rules, and there always people who will disagree with the rules that have been established. But in every competition, the important thing about rules isn't that everyone agrees with them but that they apply equally to everyone. I may think there should be four outs in inning rather than three, but as long as three outs are required of both teams, I don't have a complaint.

In the 2020 election, there were a number of rules. Some rules weren't like by some of us. But all rules applied to everyone equally, with results that were beneficial to members of both parties.

The rules this time made it easier to vote. If that meant that more Democrats voted, it also meant more Republicans voted. I have heard of no Republican claim that his vote shouldn't be counted because it too easy for him to cast.

Under the rules, many Democrats won. But so did many Republicans. Republicans did better across the board than many expected. We have heard the Republican presidential candidate complain, but what we haven't heard is any complaints from Republicans who were elected under these rules. No Republican who won has argued that his election was invalid because the rules were invalid. Not one has refused to take office because of the rules, not one has asked for a do over election or even a recount. Their silence is load. But consider the other side If the rules were unfair or invalid, shouldn't there be Democratic objections? Weren't they hurt by rules which made it easier for Republicans to vote? But they too are silent.

Why is it, exactly, that voters and candidates, losers and winners, Democrats and Republicans have overwhelming accepted the results of the 2020 without objection? It's because implicitly, but also definitively, they knew that the conduct of the election was fair. That is why the results have been upheld by election officials of both parties reluctantly, but also with confidence and certainty.

--Hiram

John said...

Maybe it could be said...

"Only true "LOSERS" blame the rules when they lose..."

Anonymous said...

There were hundreds of federal election in 2020. There were both winners and losers. Why is only one person who ran in them still complaining about the rules? Why isn't Collin Peterson up north somewhere griping that loosened voting rules enabled Fischbach to get elected?

--Hiram

Laurie said...

How Successful Have Republican Voting Restrictions Been?

Anonymous said...

I do think the huge voter turnout in 2020 when so many voter restrictions were lifted indicate that restriction efforts have been historically successful. And what we learned in 2020, is that both sides benefit from the lifting of voter restrictions benefit both parties and candidates of both parties, just in different ways. I can tell you this surprised me.

Under the rules they complain of, Republicans gained seats in the House of Representatives. They held seats they weren't expected to hold in the senate. In Minnesota, for the first time in decades under the rules Trump complains so bitterly of, Republicans were able to win the congressional seat in the seventh district. Does anyone want to sift through Fischbach's statements for complaints about the election rules that made it easier for her supporters to vote?

--Hiram

John said...

I think there is a lot of politics here from both sides.

People will make time and take the effort to vote if they think it is important.

Unfortunately many people in America, especially those who do not pay much in taxes, often do not feel that it matters.

The good news in 2020 was that Trump was so offensive and off putting that people cared about removing him. So they made the effort to vote.

With this in mind, how do we encourage more citizens to stay informed and to vote regularly?

John said...

And yes closing polling places in poor neighborhoods, limiting early voting, limiting mail in voting, having extreme voter ID, etc are all ways in which the GOP tries to suppress the vote of the poor and highly mobile in our society.

And yet the poor and highly mobile can vote, if they care enough to do so.

Remember that Trump won in 2016 because of a LOT of Obama's voters just did not show up...

Anonymous said...

I think there is a lot of politics here from both sides.

It is chicken egg issue to some degree. I am a Democrats because I favor policies that directly benefit a wide sector of the population. I support public schools and Soci the al Security for reasons like that. Republicans believe such policies are wasteful and inefficient, that policies which favor fewer people who can pass the benefits along more efficiently are best. Given those general views as a starting point, it is perfectly consistent for me to advocate policies that open up the franchise to more people. It really isn't because it makes it easier to cheat. It was Trump after all who was caught in an attempt to cheat, something few Republicans talk about much.

Politically as I have belabored here and elsewhere, I was surprised that lifting the restrictions, unsuppressing the vote can help Republicans, sometimes to a painful degree. That something I don't like but have decided to lump. Vote away, misguided voters of the seventh district, you have my blessing.

-=-Hiram

John said...

I will beg to differ regarding your broad brush statements regarding DEMs and GOPers.... :-)


Anonymous said...

I suppose there are Democrats who favor trickle down economics and there are Republicans who favor trickle up economics, they just aren't the ones you read about in the papers.

--Hiram

John said...

From my perspective, DEMs think politicians know how to spend a citizen's money better than a citizen does.

Definitely something I disagree with since they tend to ear mark it for their supporters. (ie public employees, irresponsible citizens, etc)

Anonymous said...

DEMs think politicians know how to spend a citizen's money better than a citizen does

That's a characteristic view Republican view of Democratic thinking. Republicans think the way they spend their money, individually, benefits the public. It's a disputable issue.

--Hiram

Anonymous said...

DEMs think politicians know how to spend a citizen's money better than a citizen doesY

You know I always did wonder about that. It's a cliche but it seems so obviously wrong. The government is much better at building interstate highways than I am. If I wanted to create an army, I really wouldn't know where to start. Do they sell tanks at Walmart? Can you get them on Amazon? I think Social Security is great, but if you expect me to pay for it myself, you will be disappointed.

--Hiram



John said...

Back in the 1960's the government used the majority of tax dollars for productive things like in Research and Development, Infrastructure, National Defense, etc.

Now unfortunately most of government spending is just taking money from Peter and giving it to Paul... It has pretty much no "investment value" to improve the competitiveness and long term welfare of the USA.

And often it encourages people to make bad decisions which harm the USA. And since it largely borrowed money it is even worse.

Anonymous said...

Back in the 1960's the government used the majority of tax dollars for productive things like in Research and Development, Infrastructure, National Defense, etc.

That was their policy call then, but we don't live in the 1960s today.

Social Security, a program that quite literally takes money from individual and pays it to another existed in the 1960s. I don't know how to value it really, it's not something that can be bought or sold on a stock exchange or on ebay.

Social Security is a fact of life, and life facts often play a role in decisions. I would argue that the security of SS encourages people to make risky and disastrous investments. But it also encourages to people to make good if risky investments. You can choose to invest in Apple. Or in AMC. SS is a factor in both but I don't see how it encourages one or the other.

--Hiram

Anonymous said...

I highly recommend Ken Burns' documentary on the Vietnam War. It's available to stream on PBS. Watching it certainly relieved me of any notion that lawmakers in the 1960s were somehow geniuses who set policy precedents that should be followed a half century later.

--Hiram

John said...

No... The politicians and citizens definitely were not geniuses.

They set us up for this disaster by over promising on SS, Medicare, Welfare, Pensions, Public Employee Contracts, Special Education regulations, etc... Not to mention the Vietnam war.

See Figure 2 if you want to see how those bad promises are eating our options (ie discretionary spending...

See figure 3 outlays forecast for how it only gets worse going forward

Anonymous said...

People vote for gridlock and then complain that nothing gets done. Problems just won't be solved as long as we elect people who are committed to not solving them.

--Hiram

John said...

What problems do you want solved?

Other than over spending and under taxing...
And spending too much on interest, pensions, welfare, etc.
I am pretty happy with the USA.

Anonymous said...

We sometimes forget that hundreds of millions of Americans didn't die in the pandemic.

--Hiram

John said...

See more good things about America...

What problems do you want solved?