Republicans Rounding Up Democrats in Texas

[Omniabstracta]

It might not be. There is talk of carving out an exception to the filibuster for voting rights.



then you would know HR1 is constitutional.

Unconstitutional. It directly contradicts a Supreme Court ruling that states that individual states can decide to bar felons from voting.

Decisions like Ramirez reaffirm the states’ opportunity to bar felons from the franchise, yes, but they in no way limit the federal government from altering those state regulations, as would be the case with most other voting practices the state might introduce.

[American Pere Housh]

Unconstitutional. It directly contradicts a Supreme Court ruling that states that individual states can decide to bar felons from voting.

Decisions like Ramirez reaffirm the states’ opportunity to bar felons from the franchise, yes, but they in no way limit the federal government from altering those state regulations, as would be the case with most other voting practices the state might introduce.

So you want felons to vote?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Decisions like Ramirez reaffirm the states’ opportunity to bar felons from the franchise, yes, but they in no way limit the federal government from altering those state regulations, as would be the case with most other voting practices the state might introduce.

So you want felons to vote?

Felons should have all their rights restored after they leave prison tbqh

[Kowani]

How?

Federalizing the election laws when that power over election laws solely belongs to the states.

are you fucking kidding me

I guess the VRA and Help America Vote Act was unconstitutional then.

They're not. There is a serious issue about how the parameters will be redefined by Congress and whether the SCOTUS will uphold those parameters. As I've mentioned, I have no way to really gauge the impact this law would have. I'll do some legwork in a bit before Ko overheats and does an effortpost that makes my eyes bleed with its length and sources.

IDs are needed to do a lot of things in this country, including getting a job, purchasing alcohol, owning a firearm, etc.

this may actually be the worst talking point in existence

Article 1 § 4, Clause 1:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.

Well as of right now, HR1 is dead.

that's the fault of manchinite braindead centrism, not nonsensical pointscoring about "constiutionality"

Apparently you haven't read the U.S. Constitution as it is mentioned in Article 1.

And here comes "BUt dah ConStIuTioN" and "But da FoUnDing FAtHErS" etc etc. The Constitution once said slaves will count as 3/5 of a person. Got news for you, shit changes with passing times. If they held themselves strictly to the original frame work then, we wouldn't have a bill of rights, suffrage for women That's why Amendments exists and that's why it's in our power to change it. It's 2021 not the 1700s anymore, just as you wouldn't live in a house or building built on decades old engineering practices and you take pills instead of leaches when you have a headache we can't be a country bounded to a document written by a bunch of men who could barely agree on anything over 200 years ago.

the constitution is a terrible document for many reasons but "the constitution sucks" does not refute charges of legality
much easier to point out that it is in fact entirely consitutional

The reason I brought up North Carolina is to show that voter fraud exists, and that it can be done quite easily, since its perpetrators in North Carolina weren't very bright. This was done to address your claim that we'd never, ever, ever, have voter fraud that mattered. Instead of accepting it, you chose to attempt to conflate it with something else and then claim that it's dumb.

how a case of people getting caught proves that election fraud is "easy" boggles the mind
sure it is very easy to run an illegal ballot harvesting operation it is very hard for that to actually work
the thing about voter fraud is that tactically, it's very fucking dumb

[GuessTheAltAccount]

So you want felons to vote?

Felons should have all their rights restored after they leave prison tbqh

Prison nothing, just the fact that their voting rights are suspended even temporarily incentivizes lawmakers to criminalize whatever behaviours correlate with those less likely to vote for them. That kind of feedback loop of power doesn't tend to end well.

[American Pere Housh]

Federalizing the election laws when that power over election laws solely belongs to the states.

are you fucking kidding me

[Omniabstracta]

Decisions like Ramirez reaffirm the states’ opportunity to bar felons from the franchise, yes, but they in no way limit the federal government from altering those state regulations, as would be the case with most other voting practices the state might introduce.

So you want felons to vote?

Uhh yeah? I don’t want the government to have relatively straightforward mechanisms to permanently strip people’s voting rights from them, shocker.

[Immortan Khan]

Felons who have been released from prison should be allowed to vote so long as they agree to vote for my side.

[Rusozak]

Felons who have been released from prison should be allowed to vote so long as they agree to vote for my side.

And that's the game! Thank you for playing "US political debate" hope to see you next time.

[American Pere Housh]

So you want felons to vote?

Uhh yeah? I don’t want the government to have relatively straightforward mechanisms to permanently strip people’s voting rights from them, shocker.

I don't believe felons convicted of violent crimes should their right to vote back but those felons that are convicted of nonviolent felonies should be given the chance like down in Florida.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Uhh yeah? I don’t want the government to have relatively straightforward mechanisms to permanently strip people’s voting rights from them, shocker.

I don't believe felons convicted of violent crimes should their right to vote back but those felons that are convicted of nonviolent felonies should be given the chance like down in Florida.

Why?

[Uiiop]

I don't believe felons convicted of violent crimes should their right to vote back but those felons that are convicted of nonviolent felonies should be given the chance like down in Florida.

Why?

Look man stealing an entire company money is just not as bad as involuntary manslaughter.

[Fahran]

this may actually be the worst talking point in existence

And you didn't even reach my actual hot take. Smh.

the thing about voter fraud is that tactically, it's very fucking dumb

Until I bring back political machines. It's me. Ya gurl. Boss 'Ran. Vote early and often, friendos. I'll also buy the pollsters, vote counters, and organizers dinner to discuss... business. That means it's tax deductible and totes ethical.

[Fahran]

Look man stealing an entire company money is just not as bad as involuntary manslaughter.

In net terms, white collar thieves probably cause more harm than burglars who don't progress to assault or murder because they can manage to steal truly obscene amounts of money from people. Think Enron or Madoff.

[Kowani]

this may actually be the worst talking point in existence

And you didn't even reach my actual hot take. Smh.

it was of lesser importance

[Picairn]

Federalizing the election laws when that power over election laws solely belongs to the states.

LMAO.

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

Oh I have read it.

^ The only response you can make when you got destroyed in debate.

[Picairn]

Decisions like Ramirez reaffirm the states’ opportunity to bar felons from the franchise, yes, but they in no way limit the federal government from altering those state regulations, as would be the case with most other voting practices the state might introduce.

In addition, voter restriction laws that were passed with the explicit intent to disenfranchise black voters are blatantly unconstitutional, as decided by the Court in Hunter v. Underwood.

[Fahran]

it was of lesser importance

The based response to the point I brought up is still "You shouldn't need an ID for any of those things. I thought this was America." The sanity of this response is, of course, questionable.

[Fahran]

In addition, voter restriction laws that were passed with the explicit intent to disenfranchise black voters are blatantly unconstitutional, as decided by the Court in Hunter v. Underwood.

I do not like the logic of bringing this up as a response to the above post, despite knowing why it makes sense to do so.

[The Republic of Fore]

Not what I said.

You said that the things Republicans want to pass in a special session are evil. Are things that Democrats want to pass in a special session, good?

Don't waste your time, Democrats always get excuses made for them. Remember when a hundred thousand people occupying the Wisconsin state capitol was "what democracy looks like?" But half a percent of that failing to do it is a coup. Funny how that works.

[Picairn]

I do not like the logic of bringing this up as a response to the above post, despite knowing why it makes sense to do so.

More of an addendum to strengthen Omniabstracta's argument than a response.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

If you are entitled to sign a legal contract and have it be binding on yourself, you should also be entitled to vote.

Since people in prison can be held responsible for their own decisions, they should also be able to vote.

[The Republic of Fore]

If you are entitled to sign a legal contract and have it be binding on yourself, you should also be entitled to vote.

Since people in prison can be held responsible for their own decisions, they should also be able to vote.

Or they could just not commit a felony, that isn't too difficult.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Or they could just not commit a felony, that isn't too difficult.

So they committed a felony. And therefore? How does it then logically follow that they should not be able to vote?

I don’t buy into retributive justice. I think it’s ineffective and barbaric. This silly idea of “waaaa you did bad thing so I’m going to take your toys away” needs to die already.

[Shofercia]

Ah, so saying that we shouldn't

mind Shofercia, Forsher, his sole function is to make noises about his impartiality knowledge of other countries while pushing 'bothsame' YouTube videos instead of naming a single city to back up his argument

isn't an Ad Hominem. Got it Forsher, thanks for the input!

That is correct. They are not assertions that we are incorrect because of our personal qualities.

Don't use fancy words you don't understand when you can just as easily... as you often do... call it a personal attack.

Ad Hominem: directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

Example: My opponent uses fancy words he doesn't understand. That's an attack on the opponent, not the argument.

You said that the things Republicans want to pass in a special session are evil. Are things that Democrats want to pass in a special session, good?

Don't waste your time, Democrats always get excuses made for them. Remember when a hundred thousand people occupying the Wisconsin state capitol was "what democracy looks like?" But half a percent of that failing to do it is a coup. Funny how that works.

If only burned down Asian businesses were given a thousandth of the respect that the White House gets...

how a case of people getting caught proves that election fraud is "easy" boggles the mind
sure it is very easy to run an illegal ballot harvesting operation it is very hard for that to actually work
the thing about voter fraud is that tactically, it's very fucking dumb

They got caught because they were idiots, and pointing out that it's very easy to run an illegal ballot harvesting operation, so easy that even idiots can do it, was the point. If you want it to actually work, you'd need to get smart people involved, but to claim that just because idiots got caught no one will ever try to break the law again and not get caught sounds... counterproductive.

The incentive to successfully commit voter fraud is greater than you think, as even influencing 0.64% of the votes can shift the election from Biden to Trump. And 0.64% is not very hard to influence, especially with mail in ballots. You can get voter rolls, figure out who doesn't really vote, and mail in their ballots. I'm not encouraging this, and I am, in fact, very much against this, and it's one of the reasons why voter rolls should be purged regularly, as this is the exact type of bullshit that needs anti-fraud laws.