Foreign Policy is a zero-sum game as well.
Also to sum up the republican party in a sentence.
The GOP's rampant legal attempts to Usurp Power After Biden Win.
- Thread starter ObsidianJones
- Start date
Also to sum up the republican party in a sentence.
So, Iowa
Arizona
Georgia
Montana
Florida
Texas
Missouri
This from a party that had a group of people pretend to be state electors, Yet this political party targets people who look like me because somehow our existence is more of a problem.
Once is a mistake, twice is suspect, three times is a pattern of behavior, but I'm still not supposed to consider the Republican Party hostile to people who are of my race despite their concerted efforts to take away my voice... Because they don't like the accusations of what is literally the Law of the Lands that they control.
Does that make sense to anyone?
Sure is nice that these losers in my state have now made it so you have to get an affidavit with your birthday and drivers license number notarized to send in mail-in ballots.
Arizona Senate votes to require ID with mailed ballot
The measure approved Monday would impose a new step in the process for mail voting, which now accounts for 80 percent of the ballots cast in Arizona.
www.azcentral.com
It makes sense in that the adherence towards truth and/or honesty is hardly a concern for republican politics. What matters are results. It has only rewarded them further power and wealth throughout history, so why stop now? I mean, your other post I just seen involved M. Taylor Greene: a well known batshit conspiracy pusher and lately a fawning qanon spreader, she won Georgia by a landslide on that bullshit (while her opponent sacrificed everything only to lose to the typical slurry of toxic lies) There is little hope in looking for truth in their rhetoric, though I do admire your optimism. Unfortunately, the few truthes there are are only weaponised to bolster the majority of untruthes and awful policies. It is important to keep calling it all out though, so definitely keep on keeping on raising the awareness!
As the lawyer representing Republican interests in a voting rights case during Supreme Court hearings recently admitted on camera, it's because they view voting as a zero sum game, and if they let more people vote, they will lose it. Fuck peoples' rights as long as they get to maintain power, I guess.
Really? So if one person newly gains the right to vote, another person loses theirs?
I find the irony in the right to vote being more dangerous than the right to bear arms a little funny, I guess.
No. The people voting aren't the competitors in an election, the people being voted for are the competitors, and one candidate gaining a vote is the exact mathematical equivalent of the other losing a vote.
actually, I think tstorm823 is correct on this narrow point. The competitors in a US election are quite distinct from the voters; the voters aren't really choosing the candidates in any real sense. Coalitions are coordinated by mass media, which also means the options are chosen by mass media (or a complex involving the mass media). And if the options are chosen by some mechanism other than voter will, it's most accurate to say that the options presented are the competitors (or the particular factions among the ruling class that the competitors represent) rather than the voters.
Last edited:
Way to skip over the second half of that sentence. You know, the part about Republicans denying citizens their constitutional rights to maintain power.
Sigh... the Republicans are saying the quiet part out loud again.
www.forbes.com
“Democrats value as many people as possible voting, and they’re willing to risk fraud. Republicans are more concerned about fraud, so we don’t mind putting security measures in that won’t let everybody vote—but everybody shouldn’t be voting." (emphasis mine)
‘Everybody Shouldn’t Be Voting:’ Arizona Lawmaker Defends GOP Effort To Restrict Voters
President Joe Biden carried Arizona by about 0.3%.
www.forbes.com
“Democrats value as many people as possible voting, and they’re willing to risk fraud. Republicans are more concerned about fraud, so we don’t mind putting security measures in that won’t let everybody vote—but everybody shouldn’t be voting." (emphasis mine)
Children, people who already voted, people who weren't going to vote but then Democrats showed up in a bus and drove them to the wrong precinct...Sigh... the Republicans are saying the quiet part out loud again.
‘Everybody Shouldn’t Be Voting:’ Arizona Lawmaker Defends GOP Effort To Restrict Voters
President Joe Biden carried Arizona by about 0.3%.
“Democrats value as many people as possible voting, and they’re willing to risk fraud. Republicans are more concerned about fraud, so we don’t mind putting security measures in that won’t let everybody vote—but everybody shouldn’t be voting." (emphasis mine)
Are Republicans so completely incompetent that they're attempting to stop those groups from voting and instead preventing citizens from submitting legal ballots due to their implementation?
Or are Republicans (and you) simply lying about who is being targeted?
Either way, everyday Americans lose their constitutional rights so Republicans can maintain power...
I am a Republican, you don't have to group me separately.
"So Republicans can maintain power" is effectively the same phrase as "so the Republican constituency can be represented."
And it is just your perception that it's a lie. Transparency and accountability are important in elections, the last two presidential elections should be evidence enough of that, and Democrats fight against that because they believe they gain electoral advantage in an opaque and unregulated system.
Here's a thought: Read the article. Because this guy went on to say:
"Not everybody wants to vote, and if someone is uninterested in voting, that probably means that they're totally uninformed on the issues. Quantity is important, but we have to look at the quality of votes, as well."
It's as plain as day: This person wants to keep people from voting if he feels their votes would be "low quality". How would you like it if your vote were restricted because someone felt you were "totally uninformed on the issues"?
In a certain sense, my vote is restricted. I have to decide to vote, or I don't get to. In Democratic dream world, they'd be allowed to drive out to their target demographics, open a ballot, hand them the pen, tell them who to vote for, and then submit the ballot for them, so that even people who didn't decide for themselves to vote would have their votes in for the Democrats. It's not difficult to vote. Every state has absentee voting if you can't make it to the ballots. The large majority of people not voting are those who don't care to. If having to want to vote is the restriction, that's pretty much the natural state of voting.