House Passes the Most Significant Democracy Reform Bill in a Generation

[Bodakane]

Are you saying that a person living on the other side of the world with a mere passing interest isn't qualified to make grand sweeping statements about your countries legal system?

Dafuq? No I’m saying a person regardless of where they live shouldn’t make grand sweeping statements about matters they are ignorant about.

The perfect example is you talking about the Mueller investigation. You think this is like Law & Order, and since it’s been 30 minutes we should be on to the court portion of the show.

But of course you think this like a TV show, you support a TV personality for POTUS.

[Mighty Tim]

Dafuq? No I’m saying a person regardless of where they live shouldn’t make grand sweeping statements about matters they are ignorant about.

The perfect example is you talking about the Mueller investigation. You think this is like Law & Order, and since it’s been 30 minutes we should be on to the court portion of the show.

But of course you think this like a TV show, you support a TV personality for POTUS.

I would honestly like a more traditional canadate I preferred trump over Hillary or Bernie but most other canadates would of had my vote...maybe not Jeb bush.

[Paraka]

the fact that it wont get traction is just a provable example of why the GOP is corrupt and needs to be replaced.

Honestly, I do see that as an angle to vilify the opposition. It's a common political tactic to play. Hell man, I can literally see this exact fucking form passed by a Republican House to get shit on my a Democratic Senate, simply because it's not their team running it along.

This isn't about "whataboutisms" when saying this, either. It's that this solidifies it more as a PR stunt than anything. And honestly... I can see it working if the Democrats weren't so damn fragmented right now.

[Eldar45]

Again, in these GOP controlled state they are closing down DMVs and SoS offices in poorer areas. There used to be 5 within a 20 min driving radius from my house. There is one now. But for others further south they have to drive almost an hour to get to one.

I live in a GOP controlled state, with Voter ID. We have a system that you can get a photo voter ID for free on election day at the county court house.

[Fugus]

I live in a GOP controlled state, with Voter ID. We have a system that you can get a photo voter ID for free on election day at the county court house.

Consider yourself lucky, not every state tries to be that democratic.

Remember what happened just last year during the elections where you had Republicans trying to prevent Indians who lived on the reservations from voting and tried moving voting stations from populated areas to unpopulated ones away from bus stops.

Or you have my state of North Carolina which tried doing studies of which IDs minorities were most likely to lack to try and require them to surgically cut voter turnout.


If they made sure getting IDs were free and easy for all, voter ID laws wouldn't be hated so much. But also, the Republicans wouldn't push for them as much either because they couldn't abuse them to cut turnout.

[NihilSustinet]

So I show up with filled out ballots without the voter present. Yep that is democracy.

I won't even begin to imagine your life.

you realize there are several ways to vote without being present, right? youre an idiot.

- - - Updated - - -

Honestly, I do see that as an angle to vilify the opposition. It's a common political tactic to play. Hell man, I can literally see this exact fucking form passed by a Republican House to get shit on my a Democratic Senate, simply because it's not their team running it along.

This isn't about "whataboutisms" when saying this, either. It's that this solidifies it more as a PR stunt than anything. And honestly... I can see it working if the Democrats weren't so damn fragmented right now.

well it did manage to pass in the house, so there must have been some amount of solidarity.

[Paraka]

well it did manage to pass in the house, so there must have been some amount of solidarity.

Lived enough years to see that defense more than once. A majority House can push out anything knowing it's not going through Senate for the reason of spinning it as an affront on democracy. Hell, Reps did this to push the "Obama ain't bipartisan" narrative.

Don't get me wrong, skimming through it feels good and I would vote for it as well. But I am at a loss with parts of it before I would. Like how exactly would it improve voter registration. But gerrymandering... That shit needs to stop, we get McConnells and AOCs that way.

[NihilSustinet]

Lived enough years to see that defense more than once. A majority House can push out anything knowing it's not going through Senate for the reason of spinning it as an affront on democracy. Hell, Reps did this to push the "Obama ain't bipartisan" narrative.

Don't get me wrong, skimming through it feels good and I would vote for it as well. But I am at a loss with parts of it before I would. Like how exactly would it improve voter registration. But gerrymandering... That shit needs to stop, we get McConnells and AOCs that way.

maybe so, but btw, AOC district doesnt look gerrymandered to me, its two neighborhoods in NYC. Astoria and a few other neighborhoods in brooklyn, and part of the bronx.

[Hobb]

The bill looks great, but doomed in the Senate.

Best to bring it up again in 2021 when Trump and the GOP majority in the Senate is gone.

[Cthulhu 2020]

2) Then they wait. Again, 2 weeks early = 2 weeks less informed. What if you have another Hilary where something Huge is discovered in the last 2 weeks? Oops, guess you voted too soon for the wrong person.

You mean when Comey released emails from Weiner's computer, everyone went back to hating Hillary because emails were "found" and then after the election it was found there was nothing in the emails but the damage had already been done? Yeah, we surely don't want another candidate being falsely damaged.

Early voting should be a thing. Period.

[tyrlaan]

Honestly, I do see that as an angle to vilify the opposition. It's a common political tactic to play. Hell man, I can literally see this exact fucking form passed by a Republican House to get shit on my a Democratic Senate, simply because it's not their team running it along.

This isn't about "whataboutisms" when saying this, either. It's that this solidifies it more as a PR stunt than anything. And honestly... I can see it working if the Democrats weren't so damn fragmented right now.

I don't get the PR stunt argument. Everything in the bill is fundamentally a good move that all Americans should easily be able to agree on unless you really like corruption. So who cares if it's a PR stunt? The GOP can "call the bluff" and vote for it and then 'oh noes' we'd have some awesome stuff get passed.

I also highly doubt the Dems are as fragmented as the media likes us to believe. They just clamor for every little gossip-level tidbit they can to talk about political turmoil the same way entertainment rags obsess over what people wear to award shows.

[Paraka]

I don't get the PR stunt argument. Everything in the bill is fundamentally a good move that all Americans should easily be able to agree on unless you really like corruption. So who cares if it's a PR stunt? The GOP can "call the bluff" and vote for it and then 'oh noes' we'd have some awesome stuff get passed.

I also highly doubt the Dems are as fragmented as the media likes us to believe. They just clamor for every little gossip-level tidbit they can to talk about political turmoil the same way entertainment rags obsess over what people wear to award shows.

There has been many that could have been beneficial for all, and as I said earlier from my skin of it it looks pretty good. But I have seen that a couple times cause the right/left tribalism that comes into play. A decade ago Dems were for potential ways to secure our borders, now that the Republicans are towing that line they railed against it. Hell a few pockets of people tried spinning Trump's speach about desiring to remove being gay illegal on a federal level. It's always something fishy when it's the other side doing it as of late, and to be honest, I'd rather be critical til it passes than to embrace something cause it felt good.

As far as fracture in the Democrats, I understand what you're saying. I am not saying they're decimated or anything, just that at this level of distancing it'll be hard for anyone to unite the entirety of the left side enough to serve Trump on a path to a singular term. It's very reflective of seeing the vast array of Democrats planning to run in 2020 with whatever they're championing being so vastly different from one another.

[tyrlaan]

There has been many that could have been beneficial for all, and as I said earlier from my skin of it it looks pretty good. But I have seen that a couple times cause the right/left tribalism that comes into play. A decade ago Dems were for potential ways to secure our borders, now that the Republicans are towing that line they railed against it. Hell a few pockets of people tried spinning Trump's speach about desiring to remove being gay illegal on a federal level. It's always something fishy when it's the other side doing it as of late, and to be honest, I'd rather be critical til it passes than to embrace something cause it felt good.

Except the Dems are still for border security, just not the dumbass wall. So your example is not valid.

Meanwhile you can read the entirety of HR1. And if there's something fishy about it, you will either see it there or it would come out during Congressional discussion of the bill. Thus far the only criticism has been that it's a "power grab by the Democrats" to make Election Day a national holiday, which is of course fundamentally absurd unless you prefer suppressing votes over enabling them.

It's one thing to be skeptical and look at things critically. It's another to buy into rhetoric that makes you think strengthening the foundation of our government might be a "stunt".

As far as fracture in the Democrats, I understand what you're saying. I am not saying they're decimated or anything, just that at this level of distancing it'll be hard for anyone to unite the entirety of the left side enough to serve Trump on a path to a singular term. It's very reflective of seeing the vast array of Democrats planning to run in 2020 with whatever they're championing being so vastly different from one another.

Are they so vastly different though? Warren, Sanders, Gillibrand, Harris, Buttigieg, and Gabbard all have Medicare-for-all on their platform. Maybe some I'm missing. All of them are speaking to addressing the wealth gap and struggling middle class, often with similar ideas to address it.

I don't see vastly different at all, and its part of why I am curious to see how Bernie intends to make himself distinct this time around.

[lockedout]

She doesn't need to push anything since the house is going to subpoena his tax returns next week and there's not much Trump can do to stop that.

I didn't say she heeds to I said she IS.

[Smitzelplix]

I live in a GOP controlled state, with Voter ID. We have a system that you can get a photo voter ID for free on election day at the county court house.

Which state is that?

[Kaleredar]

LOL. Right mail in ballot is way different than someone showing up with a stack of ballots to be counted. The only reason you advocate for "blind" ballots is that it benefits Democratic candidates. Kind of like how these voter's rights groups are nothing more than a front for fraudulent voting.

I have no political affiliation. However, liberal extremism seems to be the popular way to go nowadays it seems. You know.... Just sayin.....

PS.
No way Bernie wins. I bet my soul. Identify a real candidate, like Barack Obama, so people can actually vote in this next election.

Voter fraud is practically non-existent. Proposed voter ID laws, therefore, exist to solve a problem that itself does not exist, and "just so happen" to disenfranchise minorities and young people at a vastly greater margin. You know; people who vote for liberal candidates.

And you wonder why conservatives promote those laws?

[Fugus]

No way Bernie wins. I bet my soul. Identify a real candidate, like Barack Obama, so people can actually vote in this next election.

Careful there, you might end up having to give the devil his due on that one. He is popular and by all accounts, if he wasn't cheated in the primaries could have won the 2016 elections as he was projected to win by larger margins than Clinton was across the board and his polices are actually popular.

Also remember, Obama came in under the guise of "Hope and Change" what do you think people were hoping would change under him?

[tyrlaan]

LOL. Right mail in ballot is way different than someone showing up with a stack of ballots to be counted. The only reason you advocate for "blind" ballots is that it benefits Democratic candidates. Kind of like how these voter's rights groups are nothing more than a front for fraudulent voting.

I have no political affiliation. However, liberal extremism seems to be the popular way to go nowadays it seems. You know.... Just sayin.....

PS.
No way Bernie wins. I bet my soul. Identify a real candidate, like Barack Obama, so people can actually vote in this next election.

Hmm...

- Props up the GOP bogeyman of voter fraud
- Claims to be an "independent"
- Associates voter rights with "liberal extremism"
- Squeezes in a dig at Bernie for... reasons?
- 12th post ever

Struggling to believe you're here to have a discussion in good faith.

[Eldar45]

Which state is that?

Mississippi.

[Smitzelplix]

Mississippi.

That actually sounds like a good system going by the information found on this link. I like how it says you can use your receipt for identification purposes if the election is within 45 days.

http://msvoterid.ms.gov/Pages/VoterIDHowtoGetID.htm