Oregon Republicans facing arrest

[Kowani]

and that would likely violate the Voting Rights Act as its unlikely in some states people of certain ethnic groups would get elected.

The Voting Rights Act is racist and should be thrown out tbh

I’m curious, how is it racist?

[Washington Resistance Army]

The Voting Rights Act is racist and should be thrown out tbh

I’m curious, how is it racist?

It grants legal protections for certain ethnic groups and demands that congressional lines to be drawn explicitly for them to be able to elect their own.

[San Lumen]

I’m curious, how is it racist?

It grants legal protections for certain ethnic groups and demands that congressional lines to be drawn explicitly for them to be able to elect their own.

and why is that bad? Honestly we should restart a election reform thread

[Kowani]

I’m curious, how is it racist?

It grants legal protections for certain ethnic groups and demands that congressional lines to be drawn explicitly for them to be able to elect their own.

I’m gonna need the exact statute for both of those claims, ‘cause my quick-check didn’t find either of ‘em.

[Ginger Ale Zevia]

Why should the minority have no protections against the majority destroying their livelihood and way of life.

Ooh, ooh, I know: FrEe AnD fAiR eLeCtIoNs!

By which logic, women in Missouri and Georgia should respect the outcome of the election and just accept the fact that they're going to jail if they get an abortion.

Which logic?

[The Two Jerseys]

Ooh, ooh, I know: FrEe AnD fAiR eLeCtIoNs!

By which logic, women in Missouri and Georgia should respect the outcome of the election and just accept the fact that they're going to jail if they get an abortion.

Which logic?

The "the majority are allowed to force their will upon the minority, and the minority will shut up and take it" logic.

[San Lumen]

Which logic?

The "the majority are allowed to force their will upon the minority, and the minority will shut up and take it" logic.

We have elections for a reason and they have consequences

[Kowani]

The "the majority are allowed to force their will upon the minority, and the minority will shut up and take it" logic.

We have elections for a reason and they have consequences

So, what’s your opinion on Slavery?

[San Lumen]

We have elections for a reason and they have consequences

So, what’s your opinion on Slavery?

It’s morally wrong obviously and we fought a war over it and as result passed a constitutional amendment to ban it

[Kowani]

So, what’s your opinion on Slavery?

It’s morally wrong obviously

Morality is subjective, try again.

]and we fought a war over it and as result passed a constitutional amendment to ban it

“Free and fair elections”

[Mettaton-EX]

Ooh, ooh, I know: FrEe AnD fAiR eLeCtIoNs!

By which logic, women in Missouri and Georgia should respect the outcome of the election and just accept the fact that they're going to jail if they get an abortion.

Which logic?

"oh yeah? well if you support duly elected governments using their power to protect human rights, then you also have to support duly elected governments using their power to dismantle human rights! logic!"

[The of Japan]

]and we fought a war over it and as result passed a constitutional amendment to ban it

“Free and fair elections”

The Abraham Lincoln administration was voted in both in 1860 and 1864.

[Duhon]

I’m curious, how is it racist?

It grants legal protections for certain ethnic groups and demands that congressional lines to be drawn explicitly for them to be able to elect their own.

So your schtick is that if a law or series of laws makes a playing field a fair level one, that's "racist" and should be thrown out?

[The of Japan]

I love how this became about election reform. I think we should restart a election reform thread as this is way off topic

You asked how we should fix the gerrymandering problem. Not having electoral districts is an easy way to fix it

A Mixed Member Proportional would also work

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

I’m curious, how is it racist?

It grants legal protections for certain ethnic groups and demands that congressional lines to be drawn explicitly for them to be able to elect their own.

TIL legal protections for disenfranchised groups of people to ensure their right to vote is racist. This opinion is just reactionary schlock.

[The Emerald Legion]

The silence is deafening...

irrelevant to the thread.

Hardly. You're assertion is that the Oregon Republicans are not performing their duty by using the procedural rules of their office in order to get their constituents what they want, and should instead have simply voted no and allowed the measure to pass.

Either methods beyond simple voting are ok, in which case what the Oregon Republicans do is acceptable, which is directly contrary to your present argument, or it is not, and the veritable ocean of Frivolous lawsuits and judicial activism that have hamstrung the executives branches acting out the plans of the Duly Elected president are also unacceptable.

Either legal tricks are acceptable or not. Choose one.

[San Lumen]

irrelevant to the thread.

Hardly. You're assertion is that the Oregon Republicans are not performing their duty by using the procedural rules of their office in order to get their constituents what they want, and should instead have simply voted no and allowed the measure to pass.

Either methods beyond simple voting are ok, in which case what the Oregon Republicans do is acceptable, which is directly contrary to your present argument, or it is not, and the veritable ocean of Frivolous lawsuits and judicial activism that have hamstrung the executives branches acting out the plans of the Duly Elected president are also unacceptable.

Either legal tricks are acceptable or not. Choose one.

Again since they are outvoted why not do this on almost every bill? Legal tricks are not acceptable. Do the job you were elected to do or resign

[The Emerald Legion]

Hardly. You're assertion is that the Oregon Republicans are not performing their duty by using the procedural rules of their office in order to get their constituents what they want, and should instead have simply voted no and allowed the measure to pass.

Either methods beyond simple voting are ok, in which case what the Oregon Republicans do is acceptable, which is directly contrary to your present argument, or it is not, and the veritable ocean of Frivolous lawsuits and judicial activism that have hamstrung the executives branches acting out the plans of the Duly Elected president are also unacceptable.

Either legal tricks are acceptable or not. Choose one.

Again since they are outvoted why not do this on almost every bill? Legal tricks are not acceptable. Do the job you were elected to do or resign

Why not do this on almost every bill? Because people would get tired of it. It's called Politics. Part of Politics is not ALWAYS going nuclear on everything lest you be seen poorly.

[San Lumen]

Again since they are outvoted why not do this on almost every bill? Legal tricks are not acceptable. Do the job you were elected to do or resign

Why not do this on almost every bill? Because people would get tired of it. It's called Politics. Part of Politics is not ALWAYS going nuclear on everything lest you be seen poorly.

Politics is also doing a job and not acting like spoiled children throwing a temper tantrum because they didn’t get their way

[Ors Might]

Why not do this on almost every bill? Because people would get tired of it. It's called Politics. Part of Politics is not ALWAYS going nuclear on everything lest you be seen poorly.

Politics is also doing a job and not acting like spoiled children throwing a temper tantrum because they didn’t get their way

They are doing their job though. They were elected to represent the interests of a specific group of people. You are asserting without evidence that the only way that they can do that is by allowing the Democrats to pass a bill that would harm their constituents.

[San Lumen]

Politics is also doing a job and not acting like spoiled children throwing a temper tantrum because they didn’t get their way

They are doing their job though. They were elected to represent the interests of a specific group of people. You are asserting without evidence that the only way that they can do that is by allowing the Democrats to pass a bill that would harm their constituents.

Then run against the bill next election and run better candidates that can reduce the margins in the the most populous area of the state

[Ors Might]

They are doing their job though. They were elected to represent the interests of a specific group of people. You are asserting without evidence that the only way that they can do that is by allowing the Democrats to pass a bill that would harm their constituents.

Then run against the bill next election and run better candidates that can reduce the margins in the the most populous area of the state

Why would they do that when they can do this instead? Why go for the explicitly least possible route when it isn’t necessary?

[San Lumen]

Then run against the bill next election and run better candidates that can reduce the margins in the the most populous area of the state

Why would they do that when they can do this instead? Why go for the explicitly least possible route when it isn’t necessary?

Then why not prevent the majority from passing almost anything or confirming any nominations from the governor

[Ors Might]

Why would they do that when they can do this instead? Why go for the explicitly least possible route when it isn’t necessary?

Then why not prevent the majority from passing almost anything or confirming any nominations from the governor

Because it isn’t necessary to do that most of the time? Whats with your hatred for nuance?

[Thermodolia]

You asked how we should fix the gerrymandering problem. Not having electoral districts is an easy way to fix it

and that would likely violate the Voting Rights Act as its unlikely in some states people of certain ethnic groups would get elected.

That’s an extremely racist statement. You do realize that in a PR system the parties come up with party lists which have the entire list of the people who would be the legislators if they win.

And if you seriously believe that the democrats wouldn’t have minorities on their electoral lists then we have some serious problems

Many people dont know this but Oregon has a long history of racism. It was founded as a white state and specifically prohibited non whites from moving to the state with a law beginning in 1844. In 1857 it was enshrined into the constitution. The Black exclusion laws were repealed via referendum in 1926 with 62 percent voting in favor.

Dude up until 1865 slavery was fucking legal. It’s really no surprise that they banned non-whites in 1857. The fact that they repealed it in 1926 further destroys your argument

even today Oregon remains a a very white state compared to rest of the west coast and most immigration to the state is largely white. Portland in fact contains over two thirds of states African American population.

And? Do you really think that the democrats wouldn’t have minorities on their electoral lists? Also is New Mexico full of racists because there aren’t any blacks in New Mexico?