• 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

 
Our view (Winston-Salem Journal): Reject the constitutional amendments
Even if the lower tax rate had merit, we object to the idea of enshrining it into our state constitution, which should express and support the beliefs and shared values of the vast majority of our citizens, not a partisan faction. Political policies come in and go out of fashion. Anyone who doubts that need only consider that the Environmental Protection Agency that conservatives currently deride was created by a Republican president, Richard Nixon. Our constitution is not the place for ideological whims.

Nor should any constitutional amendment be in the hands of our current legislature, which has earned for itself the reputation of recklessness and irresponsibility, as it pushes votes through in the middle of the night on laws that its own members have sometimes not had the opportunity to read, let alone absorb. The hog-farm bill expected to pass through the legislature last week protects a polluting industry at the expense of the property rights of long-established rural North Carolinians. It’s hard to trust that their decisions are truly intended to benefit residents rather than campaign donors.
Click to expand...
 
More on the early voting bill:

The new measure, which will take effect for the upcoming midterm elections, requires every early voting site in the state to stay open 12 hours a day each weekday (in addition to any weekend hours). By mandating such a large number of hours, the new rule will make it prohibitively expensive for some counties to operate early voting locations. Because the law was passed very late in the legislative session, after many counties set their election budgets, many smaller counties will likely be required to close early voting locations so they don’t overspend. “This bill came out of nowhere. County officials weren’t told about it,” said Tomas Lopez, the executive director of the civil rights group Democracy North Carolina. “It’s making it much more expensive to actually conduct an early voting program that reaches as many voters as possible.”
...

Dallas Woodhouse, executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party, contends that Democrats gamed the flexible schedules of polling places by keeping sites in heavily Democratic neighborhoods open for longer hours. Woodhouse says the new law is an effort to prevent those practices and make voting hours fair. “We are going to follow the letter and spirit of the court order,” Woodhouse wrote in an emailed statement, referring to the 4th Circuit’s 2016 ruling that blocked an earlier GOP attempt to cut early voting in the state from 17 days to 10. “The costs to the local counties were not a concern by the leftist groups when they sued us, so they can’t be a concern now.”
Click to expand...

Link
 
I fucking hate Dallas Woodhouse. Somebody should push that motherfucking shitstain into traffic.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
I fucking hate Dallas Woodhouse. Somebody should push that motherfucking shitstain into traffic.
Click to expand...

now that's what i call progressive !


"for relaxing times...."

Dallas.jpg
 
GOP attempting to rig the NC Supreme Court election.

From Jeff Jackson's FB:
Breaking: The surprise session on constitutional amendments *now also includes* a bill to retroactively change election rules in order to help the GOP win a state Supreme Court election.

Two Republicans and one Democrat are running for the state Supreme Court. This would retroactively change the rules in a way that would result in one of the Republicans (the non-incumbent) being listed as Unaffiliated.

This bill became public within the last 90 minutes and has already passed through committee. They are going to steamroll this.

I'll update you as we know more.
Click to expand...
 
Shameless.

The surprise session was called because the descriptions of the proposed constitutional amendments might not present the amendments in the most favorable (dishonest) way.
 
Judge rules in partial favor of NC supreme court candidate who was stripped of the R next to his name.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article216187915.html

Back story: GOP in Raleigh like trying to change rules to keep their power. With the NC Supreme Court, they decided to not only make the race partisan and eliminate publically financed elections, they also eliminated judicial primaries. The idea was that they could limit the number of Republicans on the ballot to one, and the Democrats' votes would be split between several candidates ensuring a Republican justice. Fast forward to the end of the filing period and there are two Republicans and One Democrat to appear on the ballot. The GOP cannot let this stand because the Republican vote would clearly be split therefore all but guaranteeing a Democratic justice. What do they do? They call the General Assembly into special session to retroactively change the rules to prevent the second Republican from being labeled as a Republican on the ballot. In defense of their action, the attorney representing Senate leader Berger and House Speaker Moore said that removing the party label “is not a severe burden.” If the party label is so inconsequential, then why add it to the ballot in the first place, and then when things do not go your way, call the General Assembly into special session to remove it from a candidate?
 
What Anglin is doing is suspicious. But the Republicans made this bed and now they don’t want to sleep in it. Even if he’s doing this to guarantee a Dem gets elected, that was only made possible by the Reps getting rid of primaries in hopes of achieving this very advantage. So fuck them. They got to make the rules and can’t complain when others play by them.
 
WFFaithful said:
Check out the wording appearing on the ballot for the constitutional amendments. Shady stuff.

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article216437935.html
Click to expand...

FFS:

▪ Give legislators a major role in choosing who should fill judicial vacancies, limiting the governor’s power.

What you’ll see on the ballot:

[ ] FOR [ ] AGAINST

Constitutional amendment to implement a nonpartisan merit-based system that relies on professional qualifications instead of political influence when nominating Justices and judges to be selected to fill vacancies that occur between judicial elections.
 
avalon said:
FFS:

▪ Give legislators a major role in choosing who should fill judicial vacancies, limiting the governor’s power.

What you’ll see on the ballot:

[ ] FOR [ ] AGAINST

Constitutional amendment to implement a nonpartisan merit-based system that relies on professional qualifications instead of political influence when nominating Justices and judges to be selected to fill vacancies that occur between judicial elections.
Click to expand...

They really do have no shame. I know diehard Republicans who despise this legislature (especially Phil Berger), including the mayor of a NC city. They're running the state as if it's a banana republic "democracy". If these amendments pass, we might as well just abolish the executive and judicial branches of the state government, as the legislative branch will be well on its way to achieving total control of the state government. Berger can just declare himself governor-for-life at that point.
 
Highland Deac said:
They really do have no shame. I know diehard Republicans who despise this legislature (especially Phil Berger), including the mayor of a NC city. They're running the state as if it's a banana republic "democracy". If these amendments pass, we might as well just abolish the executive and judicial branches of the state government, as the legislative branch will be well on its way to achieving total control of the state government. Berger can just declare himself governor-for-life at that point.
Click to expand...

So are they going to vote for Democrats instead?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top