New GOP efforts to make it harder to vote

iluvatar5150 · Jun 1, 2024

Pommer said:
Several Amendments and Acts of Congress forbid the disenfranchisement of certain groups of people though.

Right. You can't deny somebody the right to vote because they're black. You can deny them the right to vote because they're fat or because you think they're ugly.

Pommer · Jun 1, 2024

iluvatar5150 said:
Right. You can't deny somebody the right to vote because they're black. You can deny them the right to vote because they're fat or because you think they're ugly.

Because the “consent of the governed” rests clearly in the Constitution that is silent as to their participation in that “consent”. Yes, amazing we got nearly 245 years out of such a shoddy piece of workmanship, huh?

FredVB · Jul 3, 2026

With a recognized right to vote those who vote are not to be turned away for anything. That would include how they are dressed, something used against customers in restaurants, stores, airplane entrance, and more, a number of times. They should still be able to vote.

Christ's Bride · Jul 3, 2026

essentialsaltes said:
In a previous thread, we discussed various GOP efforts to make the election less Democratic (and therefore less democratic) in the run-up to the 2020 elections. Given the outcome of the election, it's clear that not enough votes were suppressed to satisfy the Republican Party, so new efforts are underway in various states.

In another symptom of the Republican Party's internal divisions, the Trumpiest members of the party are trying ever bolder ways of reducing the vote, while more moderate GOP members are wondering if this might make them look bad.

State GOP lawmakers propose flurry of voting restrictions to placate Trump supporters, spurring fears of a backlash

GOP state lawmakers across the country have proposed a flurry of voting restrictions that they say are needed to restore confidence in U.S. elections, an effort intended to placate supporters of former president Donald Trump who believe his false claims that the 2020 outcome was rigged.

But the effort is dividing Republicans, some of whom are warning that it will tar the GOP as the party of voter suppression and give Democrats ammunition to mobilize their supporters ahead of the 2022 midterms.

One bill in Georgia would block early voting on Sundays, which critics quickly labeled a flagrant attempt to thwart Souls to the Polls, the Democratic turnout effort that targets Black churchgoers on the final Sunday before an election.

After Fleming unveiled a sweeping proposal Thursday with provisions such as tough new identification requirements when requesting an absentee ballot and a prohibition on “line-warming” by nonpartisan groups — including such activities as distributing water in warm weather or blankets in the cold — Democrats and voting rights advocates pounced.

Is there really a valid reason to make voting some kind of endurance sport? In what way would this ensure the validity of the election? And we know from experience where the long lines in Georgia are going to be.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice, a civil rights think tank, lawmakers in 33 states have crafted more than 165 bills to restrict voting so far this year — more than four times the number in last year’s legislative sessions. The group attributed the surge to “a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud” and accused lawmakers of a “backlash to historic voter turnout” last year.

Historic levels of democratic engagement and participation? Can't have that!

Some Republicans have made clear that they don’t think enacting voting restrictions is smart politics. In Georgia, House Speaker David Ralston and the Senate’s presiding officer, Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, have both announced that they will not support legislation that curtails eligibility to vote by mail, as some lawmakers there and in other states have proposed.

Those actions reflect the growing realization among Republicans that catering to a narrow core of party activists who remain fiercely loyal to Trump is an increasingly perilous path.

only American Citizens should vote --- why would anyone want a person having nothing to lose -- vote?

If a Mexican or muslim votes in a liberal that will give them free money --- it cost them nothing and they get something for nothing.
the NOGO's are hoses spraying our money on non-Americans by the hundreds of billions.

This one of the reason American is headed for destruction and not in decades -- years and maybe months

Paul said if you do not work you do not eat --- we have reversed it -- if you work you do not eat.

essentialsaltes · Jul 3, 2026

Christ's Bride said:
only American Citizens should vote

Naturally.

I must point out that many American Citizens are Muslim.

Pommer · Jul 3, 2026

Christ's Bride said:
only American Citizens should vote --- why would anyone want a person having nothing to lose -- vote?

If a Mexican or muslim votes in a liberal that will give them free money --- it cost them nothing and they get something for nothing.

There are many Muslims who are also American citizens, so I do not know why you’ve lumped them in with Mexicans.

Christ's Bride said:
the NOGO's are hoses spraying our money on non-Americans by the hundreds of billions.

I am unfamiliar with this acronym, what doth it stand for?

Christ's Bride said:
This one of the reason American is headed for destruction and not in decades -- years and maybe months

Paul said if you do not work you do not eat --- we have reversed it -- if you work you do not eat.

I haven’t witnessed such pessimism for a long time.

Hans Blaster · Jul 3, 2026

Pommer said:
There are many Muslims who are also American citizens, so I do not know why you’ve lumped them in with Mexicans.

Many ethnic Mexicans are also US citizens.

mark46 · Jul 3, 2026

Christ's Bride said:
only American Citizens should vote --- why would anyone want a person having nothing to lose -- vote?

I agree with regard to national election rules.

However, I think that a city, state or school district should be allowed to include who they wish.

Nothing to lose? These residents are likely to have jobs and pay taxes.

Consider a town with 10,000 residents over 18, 6,000 of which are non-citizens with green cards. All pay taxes and all have a stake in the services of the town. Should the 4,000 citizens decide for the 10,000 residents?
=======
I am not an advocate, just stating the argument. I don't think that the situation is at all clear.

mark46 · Jul 3, 2026

Pommer said:
I haven’t witnessed such pessimism for a long time.

I would give such nonsense a different characterization.

mark46 · Jul 3, 2026

I support voter ID at the polling station. We have it. I don't think twice about it.

Trump wanting to restrict mail-in ballots is a truly strange idea. Mail-in ballots have helped Republicans for decades. After all, it is Republicans who live in rural areas, sometimes far from the polling location. If there are restrictions, Democrats are at least as likely as Republicans to get out the vote on Election Day and also in taking more advantage of in-person early voting which is available almost everywhere.

NxNW · Jul 3, 2026

Christ's Bride said:
If a Mexican or muslim votes in a liberal that will give them free money --- it cost them nothing and they get something for nothing.

Wow! That may be the most enlightened thing I've ever read here!

keith99 · Jul 3, 2026

Hans Blaster said:
Many ethnic Mexicans are also US citizens.

Heck,

I'm a second generation Angeleno (resident of Los Angeles). As in born here. The majority of those my age who were born here and have a parent who was born here are of Mexican decent.

tz620q · Saturday at 10:29 AM

mark46 said:
I agree with regard to national election rules.

However, I think that a city, state or school district should be allowed to include who they wish.

Nothing to lose? These residents are likely to have jobs and pay taxes.

Consider a town with 10,000 residents over 18, 6,000 of which are non-citizens with green cards. All pay taxes and all have a stake in the services of the town. Should the 4,000 citizens decide for the 10,000 residents?
=======
I am not an advocate, just stating the argument. I don't think that the situation is at all clear.

That is certainly a valid argument where the governed have a say in their government. I think they call this a "sui juris" argument, where a person has attained the ability to manage one's own business. I think this could be extended to voting. It is notable that the first revolutionaries in the U.S. were born as English citizens and rebelled because they felt they weren't adequately represented and that England was passing laws detrimental to their livelihood without representation.

The other side of this argument is that if non-citizens have all the rights of U.S. citizens , there is no benefit to non-citizens trying for citizenship. Perhaps the compromise is at the lowest local level and not going beyond that.

mark46 · Saturday at 11:38 AM

tz620q said:
That is certainly a valid argument where the governed have a say in their government. I think they call this a "sui juris" argument, where a person has attained the ability to manage one's own business. I think this could be extended to voting. It is notable that the first revolutionaries in the U.S. were born as English citizens and rebelled because they felt they weren't adequately represented and that England was passing laws detrimental to their livelihood without representation.

The other side of this argument is that if non-citizens have all the rights of U.S. citizens , there is no benefit to non-citizens trying for citizenship. Perhaps the compromise is at the lowest local level and not going beyond that.

I think that the best compromise is the one negotiated by the founders. The federal government should determine the rules for elections for federal offices and states should determine the rules for elections for state and local offices. For me, I do believe that the federal government also should also determine the rules regarding determining electoral college voters in presidential elections.

I also strongly believe that the federal government also has the responsibility to protect the rights of all in state and local elections with regard to constitutionally protected groups.

Say it aint so · Sunday at 12:02 PM

How many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome: good government? They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people. They never have been from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.

Whose quote is that? That is the quote of Paul Weyrich one of the founders of the Heritage Foundation. I can find quote after quote from those within the GOP point blank saying suppressing of the vote helps them. So that's what they do. This is not about election integrity. This is not about voter ID. This is not about stopping the illegal voting they can't even find. This is again about pure voter suppression. And btw, that first sentence of Mr Weyrich about Christians wanting everyone to vote. That was never a thing.

Vambram · Sunday at 1:19 PM

mark46 said:
I think that the best compromise is the one negotiated by the founders. The federal government should determine the rules for elections for federal offices and states should determine the rules for elections for state and local offices. For me, I do believe that the federal government also should also determine the rules regarding determining electoral college voters in presidential elections.

I also strongly believe that the federal government also has the responsibility to protect the rights of all in state and local elections with regard to constitutionally protected groups.

100% I agree with your post.

Dale · Tuesday at 11:10 AM

I'm sure that my experience is a very small part of the big picture but try this.
I can walk to my voting precinct, it is about three doors down. The last time I went to vote on something I didn't see any other voters, I was the only one there except for the workers. I asked the greeter how many people had voted today. He said that I was the 49th voter.
Then I look at election coverage on TV. It shows black voters trying to vote, with a line coming out of the building and stretching for two blocks. They sure have a lot of patience.

I don't know exactly how this comes about, but they make it easy for me to vote, and surprisingly difficult for some other people to vote.

RocksInMyHead · Tuesday at 12:24 PM

Dale said:
I don't know exactly how this comes about, but they make it easy for me to vote, and surprisingly difficult for some other people to vote.

There are a few things that figure into it:

1. Time of day. Especially in working-class districts, most people aren't able to vote in-person until after ~5PM. Most employers do not give paid time off for voting, so people can't afford to do it during normal business hours. This can lead to a heavy rush and long lines in the evening. Conversely, if you can go in the morning or when most people are at work, lines may be short to non-existent.

2. Availability of early and/or mail voting. The easier and more convenient it is to vote early or by mail, the shorter lines will be on election day.

3. Lack of polling places. This report is a bit dated, but it shows over 1000 polling places closed between 2012 and 2018, frequently in districts with a high percentage of black residents. Some counties in Georgia, which is where a lot of the images of very long lines came from, closed over 80% of their polling places. Several counties were reduced to just one polling place.

BPPLEE · Tuesday at 2:13 PM

essentialsaltes said:
In a previous thread, we discussed various GOP efforts to make the election less Democratic (and therefore less democratic) in the run-up to the 2020 elections. Given the outcome of the election, it's clear that not enough votes were suppressed to satisfy the Republican Party, so new efforts are underway in various states.

In another symptom of the Republican Party's internal divisions, the Trumpiest members of the party are trying ever bolder ways of reducing the vote, while more moderate GOP members are wondering if this might make them look bad.

State GOP lawmakers propose flurry of voting restrictions to placate Trump supporters, spurring fears of a backlash

GOP state lawmakers across the country have proposed a flurry of voting restrictions that they say are needed to restore confidence in U.S. elections, an effort intended to placate supporters of former president Donald Trump who believe his false claims that the 2020 outcome was rigged.

But the effort is dividing Republicans, some of whom are warning that it will tar the GOP as the party of voter suppression and give Democrats ammunition to mobilize their supporters ahead of the 2022 midterms.

One bill in Georgia would block early voting on Sundays, which critics quickly labeled a flagrant attempt to thwart Souls to the Polls, the Democratic turnout effort that targets Black churchgoers on the final Sunday before an election.

After Fleming unveiled a sweeping proposal Thursday with provisions such as tough new identification requirements when requesting an absentee ballot and a prohibition on “line-warming” by nonpartisan groups — including such activities as distributing water in warm weather or blankets in the cold — Democrats and voting rights advocates pounced.

Is there really a valid reason to make voting some kind of endurance sport? In what way would this ensure the validity of the election? And we know from experience where the long lines in Georgia are going to be.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice, a civil rights think tank, lawmakers in 33 states have crafted more than 165 bills to restrict voting so far this year — more than four times the number in last year’s legislative sessions. The group attributed the surge to “a rash of baseless and racist allegations of voter fraud” and accused lawmakers of a “backlash to historic voter turnout” last year.

Historic levels of democratic engagement and participation? Can't have that!

Some Republicans have made clear that they don’t think enacting voting restrictions is smart politics. In Georgia, House Speaker David Ralston and the Senate’s presiding officer, Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan, have both announced that they will not support legislation that curtails eligibility to vote by mail, as some lawmakers there and in other states have proposed.

Those actions reflect the growing realization among Republicans that catering to a narrow core of party activists who remain fiercely loyal to Trump is an increasingly perilous path.

Maybe the goal is to make it harder to cheat
Benny Johnson

@bennyjohnson
·
40m

New Jersey Governor Makes Jaw-Dropping Statement on ‘Voting Error’ New Jersey Democratic governor Mikie Sherrill said a software error in the state's Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) system improperly registered about 6,600 non-U.S. citizens to vote between June 2023 and June 2024. Sherrill said the error occurred under the previous administration and that, after learning about it, she ordered an investigation. She directed officials to remove those improperly registered from the voter rolls, and began replacing the vendor responsible for the system. A preliminary review found that nearly 400 of those illegally registered cast ballots. Sherrill said the incident underscores the need for accountability and election integrity. It’s simple, America. Pass the SAVE America Act!

Valletta · Tuesday at 2:47 PM

RocksInMyHead said:
There are a few things that figure into it:

1. Time of day. Especially in working-class districts, most people aren't able to vote in-person until after ~5PM. Most employers do not give paid time off for voting, so people can't afford to do it during normal business hours. This can lead to a heavy rush and long lines in the evening. Conversely, if you can go in the morning or when most people are at work, lines may be short to non-existent.

2. Availability of early and/or mail voting. The easier and more convenient it is to vote early or by mail, the shorter lines will be on election day.

3. Lack of polling places. This report is a bit dated, but it shows over 1000 polling places closed between 2012 and 2018, frequently in districts with a high percentage of black residents. Some counties in Georgia, which is where a lot of the images of very long lines came from, closed over 80% of their polling places. Several counties were reduced to just one polling place.

In many blue states it has become popular to disenfranchise voters by holding primaries earlier and earlier. In this way the Democratic Party leadership can made decisions on candidates to avoid the democratic process as much as possible.

The Democracy Gap: Reforming California’s Primaries

www.commoncause.org

New GOP efforts to make it harder to vote

Well-Known Member

Future History Slab Carver

Regular Member

Active Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Future History Slab Carver

Your turn, Atlanta!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

sola dosis facit venenum

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Born-again Christian; Constitutional conservative

Senior Veteran

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads