Are Republicans trying to deny people their "right" to vote?

[Dargil]

All you Lefties like (names I can't post) who claim this ARE RIGHT!!!

Here's how.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F_YmoDsXgAAh2bh?format=jpg&name=900x900

You were right after all, weren't you?

[NaultD]

So there is a website https://www.vote.org/am-i-registered-to-vote/ that helps you understand if you are registered to vote and ways get registered online.

The people who help you get registered to vote are a different department then the DMV. At the same time for convenience they help each other out so you can register to vote or change information if need like with dmv issues. We shouldn't conflate them as same roles or same expectations.

So you don't need a photo id to vote you got your voting registration from your social security number when you registered. So to create voter photo identification legally it needs to made free at post offices completely separate from any other identification and like 6 years to comply before it prevents reasonable people ability to vote.

Like how our legal system works we are innocent until proven guilty. So for any change you do need majority evidence of something being wrong. Sure theirs 0.1% of fucked up paperwork mostly mostly of jr and sir being mismatch and sir dying before election day but early voted. Things like that but all within standards of deviation that election committees do act on and correct for with small corrections but nothing egregious like don proclaimed to steal an election.

[exitseven]

I am surprised PBS would put something like this out there since they are totally in the tank for the democrats. Liberals keep screaming that Rebublicans are denying people the right to vote. So far they have not been able to produce one single person who is an American citizen that has been denied the right to vote. Republicans on the other hand have shown how the 2020 election was stolen.

[goaded]

It's not PBS, it's some rando on Twitter.

[exitseven]

@goaded oh, that Explains it. I probably should have known better.

[goaded]

Republicans have absolutely not shown how the 2020 election was stolen. Sorry I didn't read that far. The Jack Smith has shown and will prove how Trump attempted to steal it, though. (A judge recently ruled that Trump did incite and take part in an insurrection, by the way.)

[exitseven]

@goaded did you see the movie 2000 Mules? It pretty much showed exactly how it was done. That and the thousand signed affidavits from people who witnessed voter fraud. The few that were investigated were dismissed out of hand.

[goaded]

No, just read the many critical reviews. If there was proof, it would stand up in court.

[exitseven]

@goaded it showed how it was done. It explained global positioning. There was footage of outdoor ballot boxes being stuffed full of ballots. It showed how it is impossible to tell a fake mail in ballot from a real one once it ends up in the ballot box. Outside of the videos that were neither acc epted or rejected it was a do it yourself video on election theft. A lot of people that went in to see it walked out convinced it was stolen. Why do you think only a handful of theaters would show it? I saw it just before it wad scrubbed from the internet. I think the only way to see it now is to send away for the DVD. It was totally suppressed by th3 fake news and the bug tech companies, especially after it was shown to be everything that the producers claimed it was.

[goaded]

You won't take my word for it, how about Trump's AG?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz6smxo-MkE

[exitseven]

@goaded He is a RINO that just wanted to get a job ai MS NBC

[goaded]

Not really. That's just what you'll say about any Republican who says anything against Trump.

[exitseven]

@goaded He was not much of an AG. Instead of going after the truth he decided to sit on his fat ass and take the easy way out. The next time President Trump is going to hire a REAL prosecutor to be AG and he will have the election investigated, Jan 6th investigated and the Bidens will also be investigated. As Chuckie Schumer would say, the democrats will reap the whirlwind.

[Agagagagaga]

@exitseven You can’t expect @goaded to know what the hell he is talking about. He’s in Ukraine, fighting in the trenches. 🙄🤣

[goaded]

@Agagagagaga I know what fascist governments do, and it includes trumped up charges against political oponents, like Trump and at least one of his AG nominees is threatening to do, not unlike the nonsense "impeachment investigation" that has found no evidence that President Biden has done anything wrong.

There's now an official finding of fact from a court that says Trump engaged in an insurrection after the 2020 election. Something everyone else in the world knew on Jan 6 2021.

[exitseven]

@goaded The entire 40,000 hours of video of Jan 6th was released by Mike Johnson. It clearly shows that it was the Capitol police that incited a riot by firing on a peaceful demonstration by Trump supporters that had a permit to have a demonstration. Undercover FBI agents were guilty of it as well.

[goaded]

You must be joking. Funnily enough, it wouldn't require anything like 40,000 hours of video to prove those things, just video of the wrong-doing. Let's see that, then.

Nobody fired on a peaceful demonstration.

[exitseven]

@goaded the real incriminating video was buried. The good stuff was from the body cams of the Capitol Police It may havre been "misplaced'

[goaded]

So the 40,000 hours of video isn't incriminating.

[exitseven]

@goaded the body cam footage was part of the 40,000 hours. I do not know why Kevin McCarthy did nor have it so Tucker Carlson could have used it in his documentary. It showed the protesters nowhere near the Capitol steps and all of a sudden the cops started shooting rubber bullets. Then they started with concussion and smoke grenades. That was when the crowd fought back.

[goaded]

So "the real incriminating video" wasn't "buried"? You can show it to me?

[exitseven]

Thanks for the MHO

[normalice]

Republicans want to choose who is allowed to vote based on who is most likely to vote republican, yes. Are you suggesting you would be opposed to such a system? Because I don't believe you if you say so.

[goaded]

Funny how all the people caught voting for their dead relatives in 2020 were Republican, isn't it? (In one case, didn't he murder his wife, vote on her behalf, and go on TV to say that proved there was voter fraud?)

[Grond21]

This is hilarious. The 2 comments so far have completely missed your sarcasm.

[normalice]

Oh, it wasn't "missed." It just wasn't sarcasm. It's fine to lie and call it sarcasm, if it's funny. But lying with a far right narrative isn't funny, it's creeping christian nationalism, and hiding behind "oh, I was just being sarcastic" is a ragetard move.

[Grond21]

Can you explain that to me? Like, how you are understanding the original question?

[normalice]

The original question was trying to use "sarcasm" to push the far right narrative that it is acceptable to deny the right to vote to people for reasons not explicitly stated in the constitution. Christian nationalists have been trying to get their foot in that door for decades and when they do they will wield permanent uncontestable power.

[Grond21]

So that's how you read it? I see.

I am guessing you are fine with three of those. Only requiring ID is what you are against, correct?

[normalice]

i don't remember what the graphic said, honestly. I only remember that it was an obvious misrepresentation and I'm not up for giving it more clicks.

[Grond21]

If memory serves, it said you have to be alive, be a citizen, vote once, and have an ID

[normalice]

I don't remember the label. But I vaguely recall the implication was that democrats want to give dead people and noncitizens the right to vote possibly more than once. That is, of course, a lie.

As for the voter ID thing, I'm fine with it as long as they are free and availible at the polling place. If you disagree then you are admitting the point is to prevent those with a right to vote from doing so. Right wingers have been figuring out how to turn people away from polling places in blue areas for centuries. That's why there is only one constitional ammendment protecting guns but three protecting the vote!

[Grond21]

It is a common perception on the right, that democrats cheat more than Republicans do.

Free and available at the polling place? Hmm, now that is an argument I haven't heard before. So is the idea that unless the factor (i. e. acquiring IDs) limiting who votes is present at the time of the vote, then it is automatically voter interference?

[normalice]

Yes, but of course it turns out any time e a cheater is found, it's pretty much always a republican. Though, to be fair, that is possibly because of that perception: if you believe the other side gets away with cheating you are more likely to attempt cheating, yourself. On the left the temptation to think the right is just a bunch of hypocrites and shit people is a little hard to suppress but it's important to remember the people on the right are also really gullible. The leaders are happy to win power because their voters cheated, and don't care if their voters get 15 years in prison as a consequence. The problem is the voters don't seem to care, either.

And the idea is any test or tax required for voting is unconstitutional - as it should be. Requiring an ID, even a free one, is a test of preparedness. And an ID one must pay for is also a tax. Its importa t to remember the goal of requiring and ID and adhering to that. And the only constitutionally acceptable goal is to be sure the person voting is who they say they are. But, as much as possible, that burden must be on the state to prove because placing any additional burden on the voter is a test, and there is a constitutional ammendment written specifically to stop such tests. Because once the tests become the point the test writers place themselves above accountability.

[Grond21]

That's how the left sees the right? I didn't know that. Hypocrites, cheaters, gullible, and expendable. It makes me sad to see such a massive divide, and wonder how it can be reunited.

Hmm. That's a very interesting point you raise! It does seem like it could be abused by a state that either puts itself above accountability, as you said.

Okay, so if the state has to make sure people are actually eligible, how best should they do that if having high election integrity is the goal?

[normalice]

I didn't say expendable. The left very much doesn't see the right as expendable. Rather, the left believes the right thinks itself as expendable and is a little saddened by that.

How best to achieve the goal of election integrity? Well, the first step is admitting its not really a problem. The right insists there is massive fraud but there is not. If they are not honest about the problem of course they are not going to be honest about the solutions. But our voting system was working just fine, overall. The only reason eligibility was even called into question was because the right wanted to surprise city voters with a voter ID requirement. Eligibility was pointedly not called into because ineligible voters were caught trying to vote. There wasn't a problem it. So the right came up with a solution to something besides that particular problem. What problem? Why, it was the problem of the right constantly losing elections because of their bad policies. And so rather than change their policies they sought to change their voters so that only those who are gullible or mean spirited enough to vote republican can vote.

[Grond21]

I did mean you thought expendable, I meant the left sees the Republicans acting like that. Sorry for the confusion. And I understand the sadness.

I feel like it is actually a problem. But even if you are right, and it isn't currently an issue, it does seem like a system that is ripe to be taken advantage of, in a lot of ways. So how could we prevent that while not falling into the pitfalls you highlighted?

[normalice]

I can only offer an answer from the other direction. Feel free to speculate on ways to take advantage of the system. If you think of something that hasn't been tried by some republican currently in prison because they got caught trying that exact thing, then the second thing to ask is if your method is realistic. I assure you if voter fraud on the scale needed to sway elections was possible, right wing billionaires would have harnessed it decades ago.

[Grond21]

I'm not interested in taking advantage of the system or cheating. That was not my intent at all. Is that what you understood from what I wrote?

I think I understand your position a little better. It's not an issue because this system inherently works and there is no chance of major voter fraud in this way. Correct?

[normalice]

I didn't suggest you were. But you can speculate on ways to do it. Right wing media has spent decades insisting voter fraud is occuring but being vague about how it is occuring. And the reason for that is because it is not occuring. It's all a ruse to usher in voter disenfranchisement.

And correct-ish. I wouldn't say there is "no" chance because nothing is impossible. But I would say the chance is so small by orders upon orders of magnitude, compared to the chance of voter restrictions turning voters away that we should not worry about that any more or less than we already are.

[Grond21]

Oh I see. Thank you for clarifying.

That is a helpful distinction. I appreciate hearing your perspective on this.

[FunkyMonkee]

Where'd you get THAT bullshit?

[Dargil]

It was a joke.

[FunkyMonkee]

I kinda figured but, just checking.

[gorydetails]

They're awful, fascist nazis

[Snakeyes7]

Those monsters.

[BarryLiverstone]

Some are yes