Turnout figures clearly indicate lower SES correlates with lower turnout, irrespective of age. It is noticeable whether SES is measured by income/wealth or education.
Suspending the Election
- Thread starter Trunkage
- Start date
Actually no, the only party which doesn't want people to vote seems to be the GOP. The Democrats are trying to get people to vote for them, which is a totally different mindset. They push moderate candidates in a hopeless attempt to get independent and moderate conservative votes and try to make voting as easy as possible. Meanwhile the GOP has an extremely polarizing candidate and has been going through hoops to ensure the demographics which are less likely to vote for their candidate have a hard time doing so. And now they are worried that mail-in ballots may jeapordize their attempt to supress votes... Sounds extremely anti democratic.
The democrats may be pushing "party politics" but on this issue they have nothing to be ashamed of but the Republicans are clearly pushing shameful party politics. And you shouldn't try to convince yourself they are both equally bad on this one because they simply aren't. Making it easier for your electorate to vote is 100 times more respectful than trying to make it harder for your opponent's electorate to vote. If you have any democratic values that is.
What’s so important about Democracy anyway? We’re in some dark times right now, and y’all know what Jeff Bezos’s Washington Post has to say about Democracy and darkness. Better to just ignore this whole voting nonsense.
I encourage you to read about the recent automatic voter registration bills (plural), at both the federal and state levels. More importantly, pay close attention to who is supporting those bills, and who is opposing them.
I can't be entirely sure you're being facetious, since this position seems to have gained some actual traction recently.
I referenced the Washington Post of course I’m serious the Washington Post is a very serious newspaper.
The Democratic Party doesn't want everyone to vote, but not for the reason you think. The political consultant class would rather lose with corporate puppets than have successful primary challenges from the class conscious left. That's why either both party establishments are united in wanting to close polling stations in university towns, poorer areas, black communities, and so forth-- or at the very least the Democrats don't try very hard to disrupt the Republicans from closing those polling stations, accusing everyone named Jose Garcia or Hernandez of voting multiple times and removing them from voter rolls, and so on.
Unless of course you increased the amount of voting facilities in those areas to meet demand.....
Impossible. Democracy has never been done, cannot be done, on such a scale. Clearly you’ve never read your Montesquieu.
Pretty much. On this, the individual to whom you're responding is very much a "don't read the articles, try to figure out a way to attack them so as to avoid reading them or addressing key salient points" person. Frankly if this was 70 years ago he'd be saying "anyone can go to school and learn to read, I don't see the problem!. You can point out disparities in persons per polling station, polling station closure and precinct consolidation, unequal distribution of voting machines per precinct as a function of population served, and literally any other metric that has been measured and proven to display deep and persistent racial disparities in ballot access, and he'd still ignore it trying to say, "well it's just their fault for voting to god-diddly-damn much!".
Setting the record straight on Black voter turnout
Black people not wanting to vote simply isn’t empirically true relative to other racial groups.
www.brookings.edu
Why Minority Voters Have a Lower Voter Turnout: An Analysis of Current Restrictions
With ethnic and racial minority populations in the United States rising, there is a growing population of voices that remain unaccounted for. Though current legislation has been implemented to ensure fair and impartial voting access, there is too much leeway given to state governments in the...
Charts: How minority voters get blocked at the ballot box
It's not just voter ID laws and other restrictions that stymie black and Latino voters.
www.motherjones.com
So a Trump appointee is putting in cost cutting measures because the Postal Service is low on money, and that might slow down service... and Trump acknowledges it will take an influx of funding for the Post Office to handle universal mail in ballots. It sounds like that appointee is the one actually trying to do something. It sounds like all it would take to get in the way is do nothing. Yet they're not doing nothing.
Your conspiracy theory is dumb.
I apologize that I give more time to people who type out an argument than those who paste a google search.
Trump, on live television: I'm not funding the Postal Service because I want to shut down mail-in ballots for the election.
You, in denial: He's just doing some cost-cutting! This is all just a conspiracy!
Trump admits he's blocking postal cash to stop mail-in votes
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump frankly acknowledged Thursday that he's starving the U.S...
apnews.com
Indeed, they're actively sabotaging instead of passively sabotaging, either of which is, like, the opposite of responsible governance meant for representing the people. Shock and horror.
Man, you'd think conservatives would care more about the gutting of one of the only public government services that the Founding Fathers implemented as part of their vision of the government's place serving the people.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,541
- 3,485
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
The postal service being low on funds is the direct result of the 2006 postal accountability act that required the post office to prefund employee retirement benefits. With the normal pay as you go model it would still be a money making institution.
How Congress Manufactured a Postal Crisis — And How to Fix it
An unprecedented congressional mandate threatens the Postal Service's ability to continue to provide good jobs and universal service.
ips-dc.org
The reason why what trump is doing now is dangerous is because its just trying to slow things down and a lot of states have clauses that prevent mailed in ballets that are received after the deadline from being counted. So since it sounds like mailing in ballots will be a big thing this election, all he has to do is slow down mail delivery and pickup in cities since cities tend to vote democratic.
Trump hasn't not funded the Postal Service. Trump isn't unilaterally in charge of funding the postal service. The legislature is working on providing emergency funding, and it's wrapped up in covid relief discussion. Trump's comments taken in context were to say "well, if they want to fund the post office in this relief bill, and they're not negotiating on the relief bill to get it passed, then they aren't going to pass postal funding and won't be able to do mail in voting."Trump, on live television: I'm not funding the Postal Service because I want to shut down mail-in ballots for the election.
You, in denial: He's just doing some cost-cutting! This is all just a conspiracy!
Trump admits he's blocking postal cash to stop mail-in votes
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump frankly acknowledged Thursday that he's starving the U.S...
He's cattle prodding them to actually take action, rather than putting up multi-trillion dollar wishlists and claiming Republicans "don't give a damn" for not getting on board.
Hmmm yes very much OK that the US government is engaging in overt voter suppression.
The USPS has been allowed to run in a needlessly inefficient way for years because nobody wants to spend the massive amounts of money necessary to fix it, hence why they're still using large numbers of highly flammable Grumman LLVs from the 1980s that do 10 miles to the gallon.
The USPS has been allowed to run in a needlessly inefficient way for years because nobody wants to spend the massive amounts of money necessary to fix it, hence why they're still using large numbers of highly flammable Grumman LLVs from the 1980s that do 10 miles to the gallon.