• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing NC GOP debacle thread

2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
"This elections bill is a cynical effort to take from certain groups of Americans their most cherished right." What a load of horsehit. If it is their most cherished right, I'm pretty sure they can find a way to get proper identification in the 15 months prior to the next election of importance. We need IDs to buy guns, buy alcohol, drive a car, get in to certain buildings, even see an Rated-R movie or borrow a fucking library book. People are fine with the government soon having access to every medical record compiled about every single one of its citizens, but for some reason shouldn't be allowed to require basic identification when voting? Bullshit. Regardless of whether there is an identifiable fraud problem, the concept that we do not need to require identification to perform a task as crucial as voting is simply absurd and utterly indefensible.
Click to expand...

Congrats on listing a bunch of shit, only one thing of which is a "right". I would agree with this premise if the IDs were free, the agencies that offered the IDs had operating hours that made it feasible for everyone to have access, and in the case of the multitude of areas in which it is a long commute to get them there is transportation provided. You can think it is an indefensible position to not require IDs to vote, I think it is an even more indefensible position to demand people get an ID they clearly do not need and NOT provide easy means to do so. When I lived in Cleveland (not a small city mind you) I originally had to drive over 30 minutes to get to the BMV to get my license. You have to understand that such a journey during the normal operating hours of such gov't institutions is not feasible for everyone, right?
 
Defending the voter ID component forces you to presume that the Republicans cared at all about "the integrity of the voting process," which is clearly, in your words, horseshit. The intent is to suppress voter turnout. If that wasn't obvious, the fact that they, you know, REDUCED early voting and eliminated pre-registration for minors and same-day registration IN THE SAME LEGISLATION should make it pretty clear. They care as much about "voter fraud" as they care about "protecting women's health." Laughable.
 
I haven't read the actual bill/law. But I don't think the W-SJ piece objects to the very notion of IDs, but seems to suggest the way the IDs are going to be implemented will involve unnecessary, silly, and partisan-oriented barriers to the obtaining of a "proper" ID.
 
Voter ID is, surprisingly, the least offensive part of the bill. Take that out, and you'd still have significant minority and poor voter suppression by virtue of the new restrictions on voting hours, same day registration, honoring the line when the poll closes, and early voting, all of which operate to help people vote who have blue-collar jobs that they aren't allowed to leave to go vote on a Tuesday. You can bet the counties that are controlled by Republicans will make sure the precincts in poor, minority areas are understaffed and have few polling places, too.

If the courts allow this to go into effect, you will see a whole bunch of poor black people in long lines on the evening of voting day, shiny new Voter IDs in hand, who are denied the right to vote.
 
Didn't it also take away state funded voter registration?

How does that reduce voter fraud?

I think they also mandated that polls close at their designated time.
 
The IDEA behind Voter ID is something I agree with...everyone should be able to provide ID in order to vote.

But when ID's cost money and the DMV/DOT offices close before most normal working hours, then it becomes the bigger issue of voter suppression.

If you are going to mandate that all voters have an ID, then you need to make it feasible to obtain an ID for any citizen, any time.....not M-F 8-4:30 and charge money for it.



How much does it even cost to get an ID made?...will we see the fee for ID's go up now?
 
Say Hey Deac said:
Defending the voter ID component forces you to presume that the Republicans cared at all about "the integrity of the voting process," which is clearly, in your words, horseshit. The intent is to suppress voter turnout. If that wasn't obvious, the fact that they, you know, REDUCED early voting and eliminated pre-registration for minors and same-day registration IN THE SAME LEGISLATION should make it pretty clear. They care as much about "voter fraud" as they care about "protecting women's health." Laughable.
Click to expand...

I never defended any Republican motivation for anything, nor does my defense of the voter ID component force me to presume anything about any Republicans. My comments are about requiring identification to vote. And again, claiming that IDs should not be required to vote is simply indefensible. Please explain to me why identification should not be required to vote.
 
It's not indefensibile. There is no problem with voter impersonation and making people pay for an ID is a poll tax by definition.
 
DeaconSlim2.0 said:
The IDEA behind Voter ID is something I agree with...everyone should be able to provide ID in order to vote.

But when ID's cost money and the DMV/DOT offices close before most normal working hours, then it becomes the bigger issue of voter suppression.

If you are going to mandate that all voters have an ID, then you need to make it feasible to obtain an ID for any citizen, any time.....not M-F 8-4:30 and charge money for it.



How much does it even cost to get an ID made?...will we see the fee for ID's go up now?
Click to expand...

I didn't realize that no cost or inconvenience at all is required to be associated with voting in any way. I've had to drive several miles to my polling location for years. When do I get my reimbursement check from the government for the gas I had to pay for?
 
Deacon923 said:
Voter ID is, surprisingly, the least offensive part of the bill. Take that out, and you'd still have significant minority and poor voter suppression by virtue of the new restrictions on voting hours, same day registration, honoring the line when the poll closes, and early voting, all of which operate to help people vote who have blue-collar jobs that they aren't allowed to leave to go vote on a Tuesday. You can bet the counties that are controlled by Republicans will make sure the precincts in poor, minority areas are understaffed and have few polling places, too.

If the courts allow this to go into effect, you will see a whole bunch of poor black people in long lines on the evening of voting day, shiny new Voter IDs in hand, who are denied the right to vote.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see a copy of an employee handbook that says an employee can be fired for leaving work to go vote. I've read hundreds of them, and I've never seen anything close to that. In fact, most say the exact opposite - you are allowed time to go vote so long as you use best efforts to miss as little work as possible. Which is just like any other job - blue collar, white collar, or no collar.
 
It's says you're allowed time to vote but in reality you lose points with the boss most places.
 
Realizing that this is a thread slamming the legislature, they should also be given credit when they do something right. McCrory signed a bill on Friday requiring a do-over of Mecklenburg County's assinine 2011 property tax revaluation where appraisers simply pulled valuation numbers out of the air, with no regard for market conditions. But I guess Anthonry Foxx got enough short-term cash for his non-existant steertcars to have Obama pull him up to D.C., so that's all that really matters.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/07/30/4201844/error-plagued-reval-on-way-to.html
 
Editorial: Education cuts are hurting our state (W-SJ)

E.J. Dionne on Holder's vow to fight back on voting rights

Quote:
----------
To get a sense of how bad these laws are, consider the bill Republicans rushed through both houses of North Carolina's legislature that should be called the Omnibus Voter Sup-pression Act of 2013. It reads like a parody written for Stephen Colbert's show with its cornucopia of provisions that would make it as hard as possible for African-Americans, Latinos and young people to vote.

As The Charlotte Observer reported, it shortens the early-voting period, eliminates the op-portunity to register and vote on the same day during that time, and ends pre-registration for teenagers 16 to 17. The bill also prevents counties from extending voting hours when lines are long -- which they will be with the cutback on early voting days. It not only re-quires photo identification, but also narrows the list of what's acceptable, eliminating col-lege IDs, for example.

Oh, yes, and remember the old civic tradition of using all avenues to encourage people to register to vote, a favorite cause of that famously revolutionary group, the League of Women Voters? This bill would ban paid voter-registration drives.

Throughout the world, our country proclaims its commitment to equal rights and broad democratic participation. We seem to be abandoning those ideals at home. You have to wonder what this will do to our witness on behalf of democracy.
----------
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I'd love to see a copy of an employee handbook that says an employee can be fired for leaving work to go vote. I've read hundreds of them, and I've never seen anything close to that. In fact, most say the exact opposite - you are allowed time to go vote so long as you use best efforts to miss as little work as possible. Which is just like any other job - blue collar, white collar, or no collar.
Click to expand...

So the Republican legislature is messing with private sector productivity by getting rid of weekend early voting and early voting all together that would allow people to vote and miss less work? You'd think there would be more support for early voting if that's the case.
 
I really don't know what they are trying to do. But I also don't think the end result is the major catastrophe that people are claiming. Often times simpler is better. We've had issues with employees voting early because they miss time that we are not expecting them to miss. We know they are going to be late or leave early on official voting day, and that's fine, but we don't know they won't be here on time or overrun their lunch break on a random day two weeks prior.
 
You are being willfully naive or categorically dishonest in saying "I really don't know what they are trying to do."

Anyone with a brain understands this is to suppress the vote.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I really don't know what they are trying to do. But I also don't think the end result is the major catastrophe that people are claiming. Often times simpler is better. We've had issues with employees voting early because they miss time that we are not expecting them to miss. We know they are going to be late or leave early on official voting day, and that's fine, but we don't know they won't be here on time or overrun their lunch break on a random day two weeks prior.
Click to expand...

2&2, what would keep you from mandating that your employees stick to their usual schedule and don't miss time on election day?
 
There is over 15% real unemployment in North Carolina. For every $8/hour person who has a job, there are 3 more that want that job. And yet 2&2 tells us that these people can just walk out of their factory, janitorial, loading dock, or McDonald's job on a Tuesday to go vote with no consequences, because the employee handbook doesn't forbid it.

Keep fighting the good fight 2&2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top