State politicians flee Texas to derail legislation on voting restrictions, abortion access

[Metaphor]

To me, it is like seeing person A hitting person B. You might think the attack is reprehensible, and normally would be right. But then you find out person B was attacking person C with a knife, and person A was trying to defend them.

The republicans are attacking the voters, and while normally leaving the state to prevent a quorum is reprehensible, the democrats are doing it to defend the voters, so I don't have a problem with it. Would I have a problem with republicans leaving a state to prevent a quorum? It would depend on the reason they were doing it, but knowing what the modern party is like, yea I would likely be against them.

Is this how a functioning democracy should work? No, but we have been dysfunctional for some time, with bad-faith negotiations, and outright ignoring policies that over 70% of the people are in favor of because the donors are against it.

That this bill is 'attacking the voters' is an unevidenced opinion. Nobody has explained how it's "attacking the voters".

It is not ‘unevidenced opinion’, it is seeing the pattern of Republican voting bills over the past couple decades. Especially after SCOTUS struck down parts of the voting rights act.

This is a specific bill. If you think the bill is attacking the voters, explain the relevant parts of the bill that do that. I understand you don't need to explain your faith to fellow believers. I'm asking you to explain it to me.

 

[Elixir]

This is a specific bill. If you think the bill is attacking the voters, explain the relevant parts of the bill that do that. I understand you don't need to explain your faith to fellow believers. I'm asking you to explain it to me.

Sheesh. Here's a sample

new identification requirements for people voting by mail
prohibit local election officials from sending a vote-by-mail application to someone who hasn't requested one.
ban drive-through voting and extended hours during early voting
expand what partisan poll watchers can observe during elections
prohibits poll watchers from being removed for violating election law.

Now tell us all about the massive election fraud that made these unarguably restrictive measures an advancement of democracy rather than an attack on the electorate meant to reduce the number of valid votes cast.

 

[laughing dog]

If these legislators are doing the will of their voters by preventing a quorum, and they sre nit breaking any laws, then this is democracy in action.

An interesting take. Of course, that means that every single time a Republican obstructed anything by (ab)using procedural rules, that too might have been 'democracy in action'. I understand from this thread that Mitch McConnell did such things, and has faced the electorate multiple times since 1985 and been returned, so I assume this means Mitch McConnell is a shining beacon of democracy in action.

Well that would depend. If it is done on rare occasion, one might be led to believe is is something the legislator feels most passionate about. On the other hand, if it is done on a regular basis, one might come to the conclusion it is being done simply to obstruct, to keep the other side from looking good in the eyes of the voters.

“One hundred percent of my focus is on stopping this new administration”
-Moscow Mitch

Nice explanation that focuses on context and intent instead of the kneejerk ideological absolutism of "every single time" whataboutism.

Since whataboutism was introduced, I do find it more than telling that I do not recall the OP whining about Republican "anti-democratic" behavior or not doing their jobs.

 

[ZiprHead]

This is a strange thread coming from a "free speech advocate".

 

[Patooka]

On a side note, I really wish the Democrat legislators fled to Cancun. That would be the ultimate "fuck you" to Republicans.

 

[Patooka]

To me, it is like seeing person A hitting person B. You might think the attack is reprehensible, and normally would be right. But then you find out person B was attacking person C with a knife, and person A was trying to defend them.

The republicans are attacking the voters, and while normally leaving the state to prevent a quorum is reprehensible, the democrats are doing it to defend the voters, so I don't have a problem with it. Would I have a problem with republicans leaving a state to prevent a quorum? It would depend on the reason they were doing it, but knowing what the modern party is like, yea I would likely be against them.

Is this how a functioning democracy should work? No, but we have been dysfunctional for some time, with bad-faith negotiations, and outright ignoring policies that over 70% of the people are in favor of because the donors are against it.

That this bill is 'attacking the voters' is an unevidenced opinion. Nobody has explained how it's "attacking the voters".

Like you said, the context is in the OP

 

[Metaphor]

new identification requirements for people voting by mail
prohibit local election officials from sending a vote-by-mail application to someone who hasn't requested one.
ban drive-through voting and extended hours during early voting
expand what partisan poll watchers can observe during elections
prohibits poll watchers from being removed for violating election law.

Now tell us all about the massive election fraud that made these unarguably restrictive measures an advancement of democracy rather than an attack on the electorate meant to reduce the number of valid votes cast.

False dilemma. "Massive election fraud" is not the only reason to introduce or retain "unarguably restrictive measures". I do not accept your framing of the issue.

I also provided a link earlier which appears to not be as selective in its reporting as NPR. Texas voting bills: What to know about the latest legislation | The Texas Tribune This indicates that the bill has a range of restrictions but also has a range of regulations that extend voting hours.

The ID requirements for mail in votes are so mimimalist I am shocked that people can mail in vote right now without providing any of these requirements. The current laxity is the subversion, not a tightening of requirements.

The bill also includes the 'Crystal Mason' provision:


I see the expansion of what partisan poll watchers can observe as an advance of democracy, not a subversion.

The last claim "prohibits poll watchers from being removed for violating election law" is a lie.

The bill also includes the 'Crystal Mason provision', which appears to me something that Democrats should want.

Crystal Mason provision
Meanwhile, HB 3 includes language in response to the controversial illegal voting conviction of Crystal Mason, a Tarrant County woman facing a five-year prison sentence for casting a provisional ballot in the 2016 election. Democrats pushed to add that language to the voting legislation during the regular legislative session.


Mason was on supervised release for a federal conviction at the time and said she didn’t know that made her ineligible to vote. HB 3 would require judges to inform someone if a conviction will prohibit them from voting and require proof beyond a provisional ballot for an attempt to cast an illegal vote to count as a crime.

There are all kinds of reasons to regulate elections. Seemingly, I need more verification of my identity to log in to my deliveroo account (two factor authentication) than I would to vote by mail in Texas. The banning of unsolicited mail ballots prevents waste and fraudulent targeting of voters. For fuck's sake, the bill expands voting hours. The ease of voting is one consideration, but so is fairness between counties and polling places.

But even if some of the provisions "restrict" voting, that does not mean the bill is a subversion of democracy. And even if it were a subversion of democracy, you still have to make the case that Democrats acting in concert to exploit technical rules to disable the legislature is not the bigger subversion of democracy.

 

[Metaphor]

This is a strange thread coming from a "free speech advocate".

Really? You'll have to explain that.

 

[Metaphor]

Well that would depend. If it is done on rare occasion, one might be led to believe is is something the legislator feels most passionate about. On the other hand, if it is done on a regular basis, one might come to the conclusion it is being done simply to obstruct, to keep the other side from looking good in the eyes of the voters.

“One hundred percent of my focus is on stopping this new administration”
-Moscow Mitch

Nice explanation that focuses on context and intent instead of the kneejerk ideological absolutism of "every single time" whataboutism.

Since whataboutism was introduced, I do find it more than telling that I do not recall the OP whining about Republican "anti-democratic" behavior or not doing their jobs.

I did not introduce the whataboutism and I condemned the Republican behaviour too, in this thread, when I was made aware of it.

 

[Gospel]

10/10 Will recommend this post for anyone else willing to consume trash.

 

[Patooka]

10/10 Will recommend this post for anyone else willing to consume trash.

I've been racking my brain to think of an analogy that describes the premise of this thread. Basically, this is like specifically targeting jaywalkers in a region that is dominated by ISIS. Sure, the jaywalkers are being irresponsible but it takes some real cognitive dissonance to ignore the prevailing issues of the situation.

 

[Gospel]

Patooka, it's what happens when you poke your nose in another country's business without knowing about crap like the Oregon GOP doing the ole Tom & Jerry twinkle toe walk out in 2019 (and tons of other Historical American moments). It's an American phenomenon that ain't going anywhere cause... Freedom duh.

 

[Metaphor]

10/10 Will recommend this post for anyone else willing to consume trash.

I've been racking my brain to think of an analogy that describes the premise of this thread. Basically, this is like specifically targeting jaywalkers in a region that is dominated by ISIS. Sure, the jaywalkers are being irresponsible but it takes some real cognitive dissonance to ignore the prevailing issues of the situation.

@ZiprHead, is the forum called 'talkfreethought', or is the forum called 'left wingers who cannot bear challenge or mild dissent even on a board where 90%+ of posters agree with and think exactly like them, and content-police every thread they don't like and hurl personal invective through the manufacture of unbelievably impolitic hyperbole'?

 

[Gospel]

10/10 Will recommend this post for anyone else willing to consume trash.

I've been racking my brain to think of an analogy that describes the premise of this thread. Basically, this is like specifically targeting jaywalkers in a region that is dominated by ISIS. Sure, the jaywalkers are being irresponsible but it takes some real cognitive dissonance to ignore the prevailing issues of the situation.

@ZiprHead, is the forum called 'talkfreethought', or is the forum called 'left wingers who cannot bear challenge or mild dissent even on a board where 90%+ of posters agree with and think exactly like them, and content-police every thread they don't like and hurl personal invective through the manufacture of unbelievably impolitic hyperbole'?

thought is the key word buddy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This strikes me as a subversion of democracy and a dereliction of these Democrats duties as legislators and representatives.

How did you feel about the republicans doing the same thing?

I was not aware that any party had ever done this before. It's a grubby, lowdown, anti-democracy tactic and anyone who engages in it ought to be ashamed. At a minimum, the pay of every politician who is not attending their work should be docked for each day they do this. How utterly vile.

Of course you didn't realize it--that's what happens when you get your "news" from right wing sources: you get a very distorted picture of the world.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Things you can still do in Texas

 

[Metaphor]

I was not aware that any party had ever done this before. It's a grubby, lowdown, anti-democracy tactic and anyone who engages in it ought to be ashamed. At a minimum, the pay of every politician who is not attending their work should be docked for each day they do this. How utterly vile.

Of course you didn't realize it--that's what happens when you get your "news" from right wing sources: you get a very distorted picture of the world.

Oy gevalt. I get my news from a variety of sources all over the political spectrum.

 

[Metaphor]

@ZiprHead, is the forum called 'talkfreethought', or is the forum called 'left wingers who cannot bear challenge or mild dissent even on a board where 90%+ of posters agree with and think exactly like them, and content-police every thread they don't like and hurl personal invective through the manufacture of unbelievably impolitic hyperbole'?

thought is the key word buddy.

Are you implying my original post was 'thoughtless'?

You called my thread '10/10 trash'. Why? I think it's become a trash fire too, but probably not for the same reasons.

I can't get a single person to admit that 'making it harder to vote' is not the same thing as 'subverting democracy'. It's like they cannot conceive of any world where making it harder to vote (for eligible voters) could be a side effect of other worthwhile goals, or that making it harder to vote (for non-eligible people) is a democracy-uplifting end in itself.

 

[Metaphor]

snipped

Do your nontributions have to be so obnoxiously large?

 

[fromderinside]

snipped

Do your nontributions have to be so obnoxiously large?

I don't think so. Especially when one so overtly tries to suppress instances of inconsistence in Texas legal practices.