The DemoRATS are so desperate. They know they cannot win in free and FAIR election, so they need to do everything they can to federalize the elections. If they were to pass that government take over of elections this Republic is officially dead and ALL BETS ARE OFF. If we cannot rely on a free and fair election then NOTHING ELSE MATTERS and this country WILL FALL... I suspect that the RATS know this and are hoping for this. Lets hope that Manchin and Sinema hold strong...
https://www.dailywire.com/news/schumer-v...ck-efforts
(01-03-2022, 05:18 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]The DemoRATS are so desperate. They know they cannot win in free and FAIR election, so they need to do everything they can to federalize the elections. If they were to pass that government take over of elections this Republic is officially dead and ALL BETS ARE OFF. If we cannot rely on a free and fair election then NOTHING ELSE MATTERS and this country WILL FALL... I suspect that the RATS know this and are hoping for this. Lets hope that Manchin and Sinema hold strong...
https://www.dailywire.com/news/schumer-v...ck-efforts
The logic of the bolded statement is correct but fortunately the John Lewis Voter Rights Act does nothing of the sort.
(01-03-2022, 10:12 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You're so gullible.
The VRA was in effect from 1965 to 2013. Almost 50 years.
Did this cause a permanent takeover of the political system by Democrats? No.
The JL-VRA is different in some ways, of course, but do any of those differences make elections "dead" and "all bets are off"?
Which provisions do this?
Mike. We've done this already.
I read the bill. You didn't. When I told you the details, you said, that can't be true. I encouraged you to read the bill. You never got back.
Now, the name has changed since then. I haven't read the new version. However, I would be SHOCKED to find out they did anything but rebrand it. If it's the same or even similar to the old bill, it's the worst form of disenfranchisement possible in a Republic.
(01-05-2022, 07:18 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I read the bill. You didn't. When I told you the details, you said, that can't be true. I encouraged you to read the bill. You never got back.
Now, the name has changed since then. I haven't read the new version. However, I would be SHOCKED to find out they did anything but rebrand it. If it's the same or even similar to the old bill, it's the worst form of disenfranchisement possible in a Republic.
It is frightful, if they pass this piece of crap, the Republic is dead. That's it, game over.
(01-05-2022, 07:18 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]I read the bill. You didn't. When I told you the details, you said, that can't be true. I encouraged you to read the bill. You never got back.
Now, the name has changed since then. I haven't read the new version. However, I would be SHOCKED to find out they did anything but rebrand it. If it's the same or even similar to the old bill, it's the worst form of disenfranchisement possible in a Republic.
The John Lewis Voting Rights Act is totally different from the For the People Act. They've been proposing the former since 2015. The latter only since 2019.
Ok. I'll get some free time and read this atrocity. Other than the name, which will be used to brand the opposed as racists, what parts have changed? You didn't read the first bill, so it's hard to imagine you've read this one.
(01-05-2022, 03:52 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Ok. I'll get some free time and read this atrocity. Other than the name, which will be used to brand the opposed as racists, what parts have changed? You didn't read the first bill, so it's hard to imagine you've read this one.
The for the people act basically creates a new section of US code with new minimum standards that local election officials have to meet. It requires independent commissions for redistricting. It also touches on campaign finance quite a bit. It requires making voter registration easier.
The JL-VRA is an amendment slash rebuild of the existing voting rights act. It does not impose minimum standards. Like the original VRA, it roughly says local elections have to run the same way they've always run, unless you can prove that changes you propose are not discriminatory on the basis of race or ethnicity.
(01-05-2022, 04:29 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2022, 03:52 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Ok. I'll get some free time and read this atrocity. Other than the name, which will be used to brand the opposed as racists, what parts have changed? You didn't read the first bill, so it's hard to imagine you've read this one.
The for the people act basically creates a new section of US code with new minimum standards that local election officials have to meet. It requires independent commissions for redistricting. It also touches on campaign finance quite a bit. It requires making voter registration easier.
The JL-VRA is an amendment slash rebuild of the existing voting rights act. It does not impose minimum standards. Like the original VRA, it roughly says local elections have to run the same way they've always run, unless you can prove that changes you propose are not discriminatory on the basis of race or ethnicity.
BS, it is a federal take over of elections, making it easier for the RATS to cheat, again...
It seems I heard the dems want to enact emergency COVID voting rules which do not expire when the pandemic ends. I haven’t verified it but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least.
(01-05-2022, 04:31 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2022, 04:29 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The for the people act basically creates a new section of US code with new minimum standards that local election officials have to meet. It requires independent commissions for redistricting. It also touches on campaign finance quite a bit. It requires making voter registration easier.
The JL-VRA is an amendment slash rebuild of the existing voting rights act. It does not impose minimum standards. Like the original VRA, it roughly says local elections have to run the same way they've always run, unless you can prove that changes you propose are not discriminatory on the basis of race or ethnicity.
BS, it is a federal take over of elections, making it easier for the RATS to cheat, again...
Have you read either bill?
(01-05-2022, 05:00 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2022, 04:31 PM)Ronster Wrote: [ -> ]BS, it is a federal take over of elections, making it easier for the RATS to cheat, again...
Have you read either bill?
I've read enough to know that the federal government is taking away the ability for states to conduct elections as THEY see fit. Also making everyone give our tax payor dollars to campaigns that we do not support and making it very easy to cheat with absentee ballots.
Any system involving mail-in ballots has to go. Too open to fraud/corruption. Also, if this is the same bill as the previous one (i read the first one entirely), we do not need to be lowering the voting age to 16. If anything, it should probably be raised to 21.
(01-05-2022, 05:14 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]Any system involving mail-in ballots has to go. Too open to fraud/corruption. Also, if this is the same bill as the previous one (i read the first one entirely), we do not need to be lowering the voting age to 16. If anything, it should probably be raised to 21.
The for the people act said kids could pre-register at 16 but they could not actually vote unless they were 18 on election day.
The John Lewis Voting Rights act has no provision for 16 year olds.
Florida has had no excuse absentee voting (vote by mail) since 2002, maybe earlier, and Republicans have controlled the governor's office and both houses of the legislature that entire time. There has been no cheating of any significance.
(01-05-2022, 05:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2022, 05:14 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]Any system involving mail-in ballots has to go. Too open to fraud/corruption. Also, if this is the same bill as the previous one (i read the first one entirely), we do not need to be lowering the voting age to 16. If anything, it should probably be raised to 21.
The for the people act said kids could pre-register at 16 but they could not actually vote unless they were 18 on election day.
The John Lewis Voting Rights act has no provision for 16 year olds.
Florida has had no excuse absentee voting (vote by mail) since 2002, maybe earlier, and Republicans have controlled the governor's office and both houses of the legislature that entire time. There has been no cheating of any significance.
Point taken on pre-registring 16 year olds, but why? Just another step towards voting at 16, IMHO.
I didnt complain about absentee voting, just mail in voting. Absentee voting is and has been well controlled and verifiable for the most part. Mail in? not so much.
(01-05-2022, 05:44 PM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ] (01-05-2022, 05:28 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The for the people act said kids could pre-register at 16 but they could not actually vote unless they were 18 on election day.
The John Lewis Voting Rights act has no provision for 16 year olds.
Florida has had no excuse absentee voting (vote by mail) since 2002, maybe earlier, and Republicans have controlled the governor's office and both houses of the legislature that entire time. There has been no cheating of any significance.
Point taken on pre-registring 16 year olds, but why? Just another step towards voting at 16, IMHO.
I didnt complain about absentee voting, just mail in voting. Absentee voting is and has been well controlled and verifiable for the most part. Mail in? not so much.
What is the difference between absentee voting and mail and voting? To me they are the same thing.
Because dems cheat - IE ballot harvesting.
"Heather Mullins from Real Americas Voice later reported on the John Fredericks radio show that there is video that captures 240 ballot traffickers in Georgia. Each of the traffickers averaged 23-24 drops where they would empty backpacks into the ballot boxes. True The Vote was able to take cell phone ping data on a mass wide-scale and piece together that several people—suspected ballot harvesters—were making multiple trips to multiple drop boxes, raising potential legal questions in a number of these states — 242 in Georgia and around 200 in Arizona.
John Fredericks — “Here’s the bottom line. You can’t ballot harvest in Georgia. What turned this around is that a whistleblower in Georgia came forward. On the tapes they identified 240 of the same people going around the state stuffing ballot drop boxes between 2 and 5 AM… where they were emptying backpacks out and they were dropping 50, 100 ballots into a dropbox. This is totally illegal… Here’s the bottom line, right? The one whistleblower that came forward because allegedly his mom said, hey what you’re doing is wrong and you need to be honest about it. Own up to it. He said that he was paid $10 per ballot… And he made $45,000 between November 3rd and the runoff. Two elections he made $45,000!… Now do the math.”
“There were 240 people of the same ones over and over in the same car involved in it. You start doing the math here. 45,000 time 240 people. You’ve got $11 million dollars distributed illegally. Then you take 4500 ballots by 240 people. You’re talking about a million ballots.”"