It's unsurprising to me that you consider constitutional rights so expendable. I just hope you remember this next time you make a constitutionalist argument! Minor technicality of state law > the US Constitution!
Biden helps avert railway strike.
- Thread starter CastletonSnob
- Start date
What rights don't black people have? If you support BLM and what they'd ideally want to do, then you're only causing those black communities to be worse off (they literally are worse off now than before BLM). I'm for policies that improve policing and much of what BLM has changed has not improved policing. Just because your overall ideals are good, doesn't make good.
According to American law, how were those votes legitimate?
On paper or in practice? Because if you're going strictly by what's on paper, everything appears fine. When you look into the reality of the situation, Jim Crow never really went away.
Last edited:
Eligible voters, casting the single vote to which they are legally entitled, in a legal election, and at the right time and place.
If these requirements are met, then its incumbent on anyone who wants to have them thrown out to provide a reasonable basis.
Incredible how willing people are to disenfranchise voters while simultaneously pretending to believe in democracy.
On paper. If you're say these people don't have rights, then that means they don't have rights on paper. What you want is policy changes like say crack cocaine getting the same sentences as normal cocaine.
How are those votes legitimate under the Constitution and illegitimate under state law? Voting is a state's right thing so how is the constitution gonna trump a state law unless it's literally a law saying you can't vote (that would be about it)? You're talking about the disenfranshisement of a few thousand votes IIRC and ignoring the disenfranchisment of literally the whole country of voters just because the team you don't like did something you don't like acting like the democrats don't disenfranchise voters. The democrats rigged it so Bernie wasn't running for president.
lol nope. That's something you arbitrarily decided. After all, we all have a right to healthcare, but in the US we don't on paper, so we don't have it in practice either. Just because you have a right on paper means nothing if it cannot be enforced.
Again, lol nope. I actually want all the drugs to be decriminalized so that people can get help without fear of losing their freedom. I don't see what this has to do with police violence, housing and job discrimination, etc.
So we're just ignoring all those federal voting laws now?
If it's in the Constitution, it automatically supersedes the states' authority. You may have noticed for example that states do not have a right to establish a state church. I weep for the level of civics education in this country.
Which is just you telling us to not look at what the Republicans are doing.
This sentence is a garbled mess.
The votes in question aren't illegitimate under state law, as per the Secretary of State. And Federal law outlaws discounting votes on the basis of immaterial or minor technicalities.
I just wonder why you, personally, see a minor technicality as more important than someone's right to vote. Why? Why is it more important to you to discount votes that have minor, immaterial errors, than to ensure everyone eligible has their vote counted?
Sorry, what have I "ignored" exactly? I've condemned the DNC repeatedly for their shady shit concerning Sanders in the primaries.
It doesn't really change the fact that in the Presidential Election, the Republicans launched large-scale efforts to disenfranchise people, and the Democrats didn't.
aside from various lawsuits to get the green party removed from ballots
We don't literally have the right to healthcare, that's why you have to fight for it. That's what rights are, I didn't decide the meaning of a word. How are race rights not being enforced?
I was giving that as an example, not something you would want for sure, but you want policy changes, not actual rights given.
What federal voting laws are states ignoring?
Nope, 100% fine with looking at literally everything, I don't have a team or tribe I'm attached to. You guys only seem to point out republicans doing shit when democrats do the same shit. When are ya'll gonna learn neither of them are on your side?
Where's the article that says that lawfully what the republicans did was throw out legitimate votes?
When did I say I was for technicalities? Do you not read my posts?
So having a presidential candidate that the people don't want vs one that they do want isn't a larger scale disenfranchise effort than a few thousand votes?
Any of them really.
Another arbitrary and meaningless distinction.
By discounting any votes on the details described, they are saying that their state protocols supersede all federal laws of the same relevant topic. They do not.
You keep saying that, but you only ever criticize the Republicans with the caveat, "But I think the Democrats are worse somehow." You always let one party off the hook
We know this, we just don't feel the need to flex it for internet points.
A train derailed in Ohio, causing one of the biggest environmental disasters we've seen in America.
Some of the demands from the workers was better safety things for the trains.
Would this disaster been prevented if these safety features been implemented per their demands? I suppose we'll never know for sure. But thankfully we protected the profits of train companies instead...
Some of the demands from the workers was better safety things for the trains.
Would this disaster been prevented if these safety features been implemented per their demands? I suppose we'll never know for sure. But thankfully we protected the profits of train companies instead...
I'm led to believe that a journalist was arrested for trying to cover the crash, to increase us never knowing.
Also, that Biden is going to further loosen safety regulations.
As an aside, though, were train company profits protected? Cause a giant crash would suddenly change the numbers.
Pete Buttigieg’s Transportation Department Is Skirting Safety Standards
The recent train derailment in Ohio shows the need for more stringent safety rules for train brakes, especially for trains carrying hazardous materials. Transportation regulators are instead bending to the interests of rail industry lobbyists.
jacobin.com
Thank god railway workers weren't allowed to voice their complaints about the dangers of the current rail industry. It would have really sucked to at the very least have cover for letting the country become a toxic hellscape.
I'm still super disappointed the OP has yet to talk in their thread again since Biden broke the strike.
Are we still happy that Biden helped avert the strike?
Were the lives worth it to protect the profits of the railroads?
They should transport all the dangerous chemicals in Teslas, because they are so safe and never explode.
I don't quite get what your problem is. Rich people don't tend to live next to railway lines, so why should derailments of trains with toxic chemicals matter?