Jump to content

Voter Suppression

Pancho

By Pancho
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Bullneck

Bullneck 19000

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, bolverk said:

While what's going on in Georgia is getting all the news, we need to pay more attention to what's going on here at home.

https://www.texastribune.org/2021/04/01/texas-voting-restrictions-legislature/

A couple of amendments affirming the right to vote were struck down by Republicans in the Senate found on pp 21-22.

Floor Amendment No. 4
Amend CSSB 7 (senate committee printing) by adding the following appropriately numbered SECTION to ARTICLE 1 of the bill and renumbering subsequent SECTIONS of ARTICLE 1 accordingly:
SECTIONi____.iiChapter 1, Election Code, is amended by adding Section 1.0055 to read as follows:
Sec.i1.0055.ii RIGHT TO VOTE. Every citizen of this state, who is qualified to vote under the Texas Constitution and the provisions of this code, has a fundamental right to vote in any election for which the voter is eligible.
HINOJOSA MENE´NDEZ
ALVARADO MILES
BLANCO POWELL
ECKHARDT WEST
GUTIERREZ WHITMIRE
JOHNSON ZAFFIRINI
LUCIO
The amendment to CSSB 7 was read and failed of adoption by the following vote: Yeas 13, Nays 18.
Yeas:iiAlvarado, Blanco, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, Hinojosa, Johnson, Lucio, Mene´ndez, Miles, Powell, West, Whitmire, Zaffirini.
Nays:iiBettencourt, Birdwell, Buckingham, Campbell, Creighton, Hall, Hancock, Huffman, Hughes, Kolkhorst, Nelson, Nichols, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner,
Seliger, Springer, Taylor.

Senator Hinojosa offered the following amendment to the bill:
Wednesday, March 31, 2021 SENATE JOURNAL 521
Floor Amendment No. 5
Amend CSSB 7 (senate committee printing) by adding the following appropriately numbered SECTION to ARTICLE 3 of the bill and renumbering subsequent SECTIONS of ARTICLE 3 accordingly:
SECTIONi___.iiSubchapter A, Chapter 65, Election Code, is amended by adding Section 65.0001 to read as follows:
Sec.i65.0001. RIGHT TO HAVE VOTE COUNTED. Every eligible voter who casts a ballot in an election has a fundamental right to have the voter s vote counted. ’
HINOJOSA MENE´NDEZ
ALVARADO MILES
BLANCO POWELL
ECKHARDT WEST
GUTIERREZ WHITMIRE
JOHNSON ZAFFIRINI
LUCIO
The amendment to CSSB 7 was read and failed of adoption by the following vote:  Yeas 13, Nays 18.
Yeas:iiAlvarado, Blanco, Eckhardt, Gutierrez, Hinojosa, Johnson, Lucio, Mene´ndez, Miles, Powell, West, Whitmire, Zaffirini.
Nays:iiBettencourt, Birdwell, Buckingham, Campbell, Creighton, Hall, Hancock, Huffman, Hughes, Kolkhorst, Nelson, Nichols, Paxton, Perry, Schwertner, Seliger, Springer, Taylor.

TLDR version: Texas Republican don't everyone should be able to vote?  Got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

aggie08
aggie08

This is how fucked up all of this is: this is pretty much the only CR thread with no GRHorn or Donkey or Don Johnson or Johnny Sack, etc. playing the both sides card or trolling or telling everyone th

bolverk
bolverk

One thing that strikes me is tha lack of voices here or elsewhere to defend against this worst act against democracy. Sure, you're against the abuse of FISA warrants. Me too! We should totally ha

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Today's Wisconsin vote will go down as one of the most shameful episodes in the post-civil rights era.  And it is 100% on the GOP.  This is their baby -- they INSIST on in-person voting in the middle

Posted Images

Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45500

Posted
Posted

I would honestly like more info on this argument of "they're actually making it EASIER to vote!".  Please, bring the evidence.  The 7am-7pm thing has already been debunked.  Are they just continuing on with that like we didn't already figure out it was bullshit several pages ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys

OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2059

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I would honestly like more info on this argument of "they're actually making it EASIER to vote!".  Please, bring the evidence.  The 7am-7pm thing has already been debunked.  Are they just continuing on with that like we didn't already figure out it was bullshit several pages ago?

it seems to me the strategy is needle in a haystack.  introduce 100 different changes, 10 of them effective at suppression, 90 of them who knows, so the discussion of it is an unfocused cacophony without centralization of reasons for opposing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HornOnTheBayou

HornOnTheBayou 8881

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

it seems to me the strategy is needle in a haystack.  introduce 100 different changes, 10 of them effective at suppression, 90 of them who knows, so the discussion of it is an unfocused cacophony without centralization of reasons for opposing.  

That's exactly what's happening. And it has the added bonus of getting the media to chase the wrong story. The "no serving food or drink in voting lines" is of course evil and ridiculous, but it's the shiny object everyone is focused on because it makes for a good headline. What should be focused on is the ability of the state legislature to overturn rulings by county officials.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, lmao said:

Posted in the wrong thread but can you not be a fan of the voter laws in GA while also believing calling them "Jim Crow on steroids" and "Jim Eagle" is hyperbolic?

Yes. 
 

Who cares. You think the right wing hate machine cares? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

 

I read it. Not surprisingly, it’s designed to limit black voters and take power away from local officials in black counties like Fulton county and hand it to the White supremacists that are in charge of the state.
 

 Any other questions troll? 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 12850

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

I read it. Not surprisingly, it’s designed to limit black voters and take power away from local officials in black counties like Fulton county and hand it to the White supremacists that are in charge of the state.
 

 Any other questions troll? 

I have a question. What the fuck does it take to get banned on here? Apparently continually doing nothing but trolling doesn’t do it anymore. There’s no honest discussion, no rebuttal to anyone who engages. Just click bait Twitter headlines anD nothing else. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45565

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I have a question. What the fuck does it take to get banned on here? Apparently continually doing nothing but trolling doesn’t do it anymore. There’s no honest discussion, no rebuttal to anyone who engages. Just click bait Twitter headlines anD nothing else. 

Well, we could neg bomb him to Bolivia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38127

Posted
Posted

To protect voter integrity = we are implementing new (barriers/restrictions/regulations)

Since there is no evidence whatsoever of illegal voting, and trust me, they’ve fucking looked, you can erase the left side of the equation. Once you realize there is no illegal voting and no threat to voter integrity, you are left with this 

To protect voter integrity = we are implementing new (barriers/restrictions/regulations)

What effects will these new restrictions have? Hmmm? It truly is a mystery 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

I read it. Not surprisingly, it’s designed to limit black voters and take power away from local officials in black counties like Fulton county and hand it to the White supremacists that are in charge of the state.
 

 Any other questions troll? 

Ah yes. The white supremacists. You’re not a serious person Jimmy. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

I read it. Not surprisingly, it’s designed to limit black voters and take power away from local officials in black counties like Fulton county and hand it to the White supremacists that are in charge of the state.
 

 Any other questions troll? 

How is it designed to limit black voters? There’s more early voting access. Offers no excuse absentee ballots. Makes drop boxes permanent fixtures in voting. 
 

I can see why people see state level trying to take power over local as problematic, but Jim Crow on steroids and let’s boycott everything is fucking dumb though. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hobbes2702 said:

I have a question. What the fuck does it take to get banned on here? Apparently continually doing nothing but trolling doesn’t do it anymore. There’s no honest discussion, no rebuttal to anyone who engages. Just click bait Twitter headlines anD nothing else. 

I did rebut. I don’t rebut every single poster. If I post something, 10 people reply. I’m not going to respond to each one.

Sharing a WSJ editorial that people here disagree with may be uncomfortable for y’all, but it’s far from trolling. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9674

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I would honestly like more info on this argument of "they're actually making it EASIER to vote!".  Please, bring the evidence.  The 7am-7pm thing has already been debunked.  Are they just continuing on with that like we didn't already figure out it was bullshit several pages ago?

The key is  expand voting access and make the primary consideration be “counties” not people, while restricting voting where bottlenecks occur because of density and high numbers.  More numerous rural/sparsely populated counties get expanded access while a few more populous/urban counties get restricted access per capita.  That way you can claim that “we are making it easier to vote!”  and technically be correct,  although anyone with a brain knows this is obviously false if voting access for all voters is the primary concern.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Willfully Horn

Willfully Horn 7922

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, lmao said:

Posted in the wrong thread but can you not be a fan of the voter laws in GA while also believing calling them "Jim Crow on steroids" and "Jim Eagle" is hyperbolic?


For such beliefs to be defensible, IMO, it is first necessary to address:

 

3 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

it’s designed to limit black voters and take power away from local officials in black counties like Fulton county and hand it to the White supremacists that are in charge of the state.
 

 

This new line of voter suppression includes hamstringing counties where POC are the majority. I think it is reasonable, and is not hyperbolic, to view this development as Jim Crow II.

17 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

How is it designed to limit black voters? There’s more early voting access. Offers no excuse absentee ballots. Makes drop boxes permanent fixtures in voting. 
 

I can see why people see state level trying to take power over local as problematic, but Jim Crow on steroids and let’s boycott everything is fucking dumb though. 

Subjecting election results to the control of gerrymandered representatives and state Senators. How do you think this last election would have played out if these new controls had been in place?

State government nullification of the will of the voters? That’s steroidal oppression. 

Edited by Willfully Horn
Tense
  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Willfully Horn

Willfully Horn 7922

Posted
Posted

Voting machines can generate a paper transcript of one’s vote. I used such technology in Hays County, and could see for myself that my vote was correctly recorded. That paper ‘trail’ went into a lockbox backup.

This is how voting machine technology gains public confidence.

This is where we can find bipartisan agreement.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
aggie08

aggie08 21436

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

How is it designed to limit black voters? There’s more early voting access.

Imagine being dump enough to believe that the GOP is rushing through voting laws nationwide using #FRAUD!!! as the impetus to make voting easier in urban areas.

  • Hook 'Em 10
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13049

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

it seems to me the strategy is needle in a haystack.  introduce 100 different changes, 10 of them effective at suppression, 90 of them who knows, so the discussion of it is an unfocused cacophony without centralization of reasons for opposing.  

Exactly; plus, if they can overturn as was stated above, then further disenfranchisement becomes a feature not a bug. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
staboner

staboner 4959

Posted
Posted
On 4/4/2021 at 7:42 AM, jimmyjazz said:

Alright, I'll start.  Neg bombing every chance I get.

Fuck you, GRHorn.  You do not argue in good faith.  You're nothing but a troll and you need to leave.  If immamac won't do it, we'll try.

you are getting warmer

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
On 4/3/2021 at 4:45 PM, GRHorn said:

How is it designed to limit black voters? There’s more early voting access. Offers no excuse absentee ballots. Makes drop boxes permanent fixtures in voting. 
 

I can see why people see state level trying to take power over local as problematic, but Jim Crow on steroids and let’s boycott everything is fucking dumb though. 

Why should I bother with answering your dumb troll questions? The law is obviously specifically designed to hinder minority votes and is founded on the big lie that trump actually won the election. Anyone who’s thinks otherwise is a moron a liar or both. There is simply no point in engaging with someone like you pretend to be. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRHorn

GRHorn 105

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Why should I bother with answering your dumb troll questions? The law is obviously specifically designed to hinder minority votes and is founded on the big lie that trump actually won the election. Anyone who’s thinks otherwise is a moron a liar or both. There is simply no point in engaging with someone like you pretend to be. 

I’m not going to convince many (any?) people here that it’s being overblown. The point is reasonable minds can disagree with the CR groupthink on this issue without being “white supremacists”. Here’s a thread from a national correspondent for Slate. 

And yes, moving the MLB all star game to the local citizen’s detriment was silly political grandstanding. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6908

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I’m not going to convince many (any?) people here that it’s being overblown. The point is reasonable minds can disagree with the CR groupthink on this issue without being “white supremacists”. Here’s a thread from a national correspondent for Slate. 

And yes, moving the MLB all star game to the local citizen’s detriment was silly political grandstanding. 

What do you see as the predicate for Georgia Republicans used to make sweeping changes to election laws they codified?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biff Tannen

Biff Tannen 45500

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Why should I bother with answering your dumb troll questions? The law is obviously specifically designed to hinder minority votes and is founded on the big lie that trump actually won the election. Anyone who’s thinks otherwise is a moron a liar or both. There is simply no point in engaging with someone like you pretend to be. 

You can’t reason with them. They’re halfwits. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89457

Posted
Posted
On 4/3/2021 at 12:03 PM, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:
Is it just me, or doesn't it seem like this is going to backfire on Republicans?  The harder they try to make it to vote the harder people are going to try to vote. 

There is a good possibility that if they fuck around, they could actually make it harder on the olds who vote R, whereas the younger folks who vote D can adapt quickly and overcome/get the word out through social media/etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16864

Posted
Posted
On 4/4/2021 at 4:25 PM, NWBuck said:

For the "yOu didN'T EveN rEAD iT" crowd, here's a bit of a deeper examination and response:

 

So Stacey Abrams and about 100 others just needs to challenge every Republican vote to nullify it then.  So the effect will be that the entire state of Georgia will have zero votes.   Land of the free.

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

I love all these claims by lying Republican assholes that they are expanding voting in Georgia. Sure it does. For voters located in white areas of the state. It severely restricts voting in black areas. But since there are less areas where blacks constitute the majority, then we’re expanding voting overall! 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DonkeyCigars

DonkeyCigars 144

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

No.

Any other questions? 

Yes. 

Why not, given the circumstances and his statements around those circumstances? 

Essentially, make Rob M. confirm that he doesn't personally care about voter supression and is only operating out of pandering sentiment towards the issues of the day and don't allow him to weasel out of it personally, while making operational/professional decisions and stances that contradict and point to hypocrisy, personally.

It feels like in 2021, there is no corporate veil. We pierce these days, so that is what is informing my question.

Edited to add; his respect points would go through the roof and I'd think the world of him if he said "No, I'm not going to do anything personally and it's none of your business, quite frankly. I'm charged to lead this organization and do right by it and that's what I'm doing."

Edited by DonkeyCigars
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DonkeyCigars

DonkeyCigars 144

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

I mean, the answer is yes.  But not in the way the people who read the National Review think.

I was going to say; liberals were yelling this to high heaven when all the rubes and poor uneducated people blew everyone's minds and actually elected Trump.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PenelopeWitherspoon

PenelopeWitherspoon 19094

Posted
Posted
On 4/3/2021 at 5:48 PM, GRHorn said:

I did rebut. I don’t rebut every single poster. If I post something, 10 people reply. I’m not going to respond to each one.

Sharing a WSJ editorial that people here disagree with may be uncomfortable for y’all, but it’s far from trolling. 

It is a fucking editorial, i.e. an opinion piece.  It isn't news, it isn't fact.  Shut the fuck up.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...