Seabass wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:42 pm
Forty Two wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:18 pm
Seabass wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 8:38 pm
Population grows over time, enthusiasm varies with different candidates and elections... there are a lot of variables at play, and you can't boil it down to one simple answer. But voter suppression is clearly a factor, IMO. If you've actually read all the info I and others have posted on this subject and still remain unconvinced, then I don't know what else to tell you...
People
are coming out in record numbers by the way. I think voter turnout so far has been more than double what it was at the same point in 2014.
If you've actually read the material you post and conclude anything other than 90% of it is not voter suppression, then I don't know what to tell you. You see voter suppression everywhere, in everything, and you have just about the lowest opinion of minorities that one could have.
Bitch, shut the fuck up. I don't see "voter suppression everywhere, in everything".
Based on your links, you do. You think voter suppression includes voters proving citizenship.
Seabass wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:42 pm
What I DO see is that due the nature of winner take all plurality voting, an unscrupulous government official need only manipulate a small number of votes to change the outcome of an election. There was an election a while back that came down to a tie, so they drew the fucking winner out of a bowl. (to be clear, I'm not citing that as an instance of suppression. I'm just making the point that elections can be really fucking close.)
Yes, elections can be close. Democrats have gerrymandered districts for decades. So what? Is that "suppression?"
Seabass wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:42 pm
Forty Two wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 9:18 pm
As for voter turnout, the interest in the election is high, so we would expect higher turnout. That being said, we don't know how much of the early voting are people who would vote anyway on election day, but have become comfortable with early voting and opted to get their vote in. I.e., we don't know if the early voters are additional voters or the same voters. The last three elections here in Florida, in my precincts, voting on election day involved fewer lines and waiting than early voting. Twice I went by the polling place for early voting, but seeing the line out the door, I opted to swing by another day. Last election, I waited until election day and just walked in at 8am and voted with no waiting. This year, I voted early because I passed the polling place on my way to the office, and it looked pretty empty. There were a couple people voting, but many of the little desks/booths were wide open. I walked in, identified myself, got a ballot, voted off my pre-filled in sample ballot that they mail everyone, got my sticker, joked around with the poll workers on the way out, and went on my way. I saw them suppressing some other voters, though, by daring to ask them their name.
Fuck your useless anecdotes. Guess what: I have literally NEVER personally had to wait in line to vote. That doesn't mean that others don't.
I've had to wait in line many times. Oh, fucking well. Boo fucking hoo. Lines occur when lots of people show up. A system can't reasonably be expected to guarantee that nobody waits in line. But, of course, now lines are "suppression" because minorities are apparently less likely to wait in lines.
You keep puking links on here. I spend the time to go through them, and you never address the horse shit that you've called "voter suppression." I'm not going to go through your gish gallop.
For example, I went through - in great detail - how Dodge City Kansas was not, in the least, suppressing anybody's vote, and I showed how they were, in fact, facilitating people's votes. You call it voter suppression. But, the most you do is toss a link on the thread and declare it proof of suppression. How about addressing specific cases, like Dodge City? Do you admit, like any reasonable person would, that Dodge City moving the voting location from a construction laden place convention center to another similarly sized "expo" -- 4 miles away - while having plentiful early voting over multiple days and multiple polling location, and while allowing anyone to vote by absentee ballot and to get that ballot on-line or in person, etc. is not suppressing the latino vote? Of course you just skip right over that - because your attention to detail on this amounts to "the unbiased source "vox" says there is voter suppression, so it's established."
Do you admit that any of the horse hockey in the Vox article above is not "voter suppression?" Or is it all voter suppression?
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
