Supreme Court makes it easier to cull voter registrations

[braces_for_impact]

Vote straight democratic? No. I won't.

Shocking that a republican wouldn't vote straight democratic!

I meant straight Democrat. There are factors to consider beyond party affiliation.

Like what? If I was a die-hard Republican conservative with any backbone and morals, I would consider voting straight Democrat. After all, Trump wouldn't be such a problem if his party that claims to value things like economic restraint, rule of law, personal responsibility, small government, and so on was a check on their buffoon and chief. Or, maybe that was all just talk over the decades. If you want a better party they have to be held accountable for what they've done over the last 30 years. This party has swung increasingly and radically to the right, and allowed itself to be manipulated by their own propaganda machine, and then turned that around to manipulate their own voters. They encouraged reactionary hate instead of cool-headed negotiation. They fostered suspicion of expertise, used a type of class war to attack the "coastal elites", created a distrust of science and replaced it with religion. They actively encouraged dishonest lies about their opposition and constantly attacked their patriotism. They pushed conspiracy theory. Now along comes Trump and uses those same techniques against them, and they are paralyzed, unable and unwilling to act upon those supposedly sacred and non-negotiable principles. If ever there was a time to vote every one of these motherfuckers out, it's now.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

In a 5-4 ruling the court upheld Ohio's process of culling voter roles for people who miss voting in a two year period. They send them a notice and then if they don’t vote over the next four years they remove them. This is how the Rethuglicans get to stay in power. They cull voters in minority districts.

Republicans cull living voters, Democrats count dead voters. Still, these are both on the periphery of the major ways in which the two parties manipulate the voting system to limit our choices.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

In a 5-4 ruling the court upheld Ohio's process of culling voter roles for people who miss voting in a two year period. They send them a notice and then if they don’t vote over the next four years they remove them. This is how the Rethuglicans get to stay in power. They cull voters in minority districts.

Republicans cull living voters, Democrats count dead voters. Still, these are both on the periphery of the major ways in which the two parties manipulate the voting system to limit our choices.

Always love the good ole fashioned false equivalency, this time relying on a false statement.

 

[braces_for_impact]

In a 5-4 ruling the court upheld Ohio's process of culling voter roles for people who miss voting in a two year period. They send them a notice and then if they don’t vote over the next four years they remove them. This is how the Rethuglicans get to stay in power. They cull voters in minority districts.

Republicans cull living voters, Democrats count dead voters. Still, these are both on the periphery of the major ways in which the two parties manipulate the voting system to limit our choices.

Always love the good ole fashioned false equivalency, this time relying on a false statement.

Momma said two wrongs don't make a right. But that doesn't even apply here, because you are right, the accusation is bullshit. You know, with so many illegal voters and dead voters, it's weird how we lose.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Well, Hillary did win the popular vote while losing the EC.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Well, Hillary did win the popular vote while losing the EC.

...and that means dead voters because...?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Because I'm tweaking your nose just for fun. You claim you can't be counting dead voters because you lost, so I point out you didn't lose the popular vote.

Seriously though, what should be done ensure the voter rolls are up to date? Eventually people should be removed from the rolls. I moved from the east coast to the west coast 18 years ago, and three years ago I got a jury notice from my east coast state. Only registered voters get jury notices, and I am registered to vote out here. Apparently I'm also considered a registered voter back east. Sometimes you have to cleanse the voter rolls. What do you suggest to cleans them in a non-biased non-partisan manner?

 

[ZiprHead]

Republicans cull living voters, Democrats count dead voters.

Please, a cite that Democrats count dead voters.

And do you really think the two things you wrote above are equivalent?

 

[Keith&Co.]

What do you suggest to cleans them in a non-biased non-partisan manner?

I think the biggest problem is the 2 year thing. And the single letter. A much greater time band for voter participation would seem less likely to 'accidentally' disenfranchise people.

 

[scombrid]

used a type of class war to attack the "coastal elites",

This one always gets me.

I have a very wealthy friend from Tampa. He is sending back vacation photos; they are photos of him in is designer waders fishing on some trout stream out west followed by a super fancy lunch on the porch of the resort. It is him and his rich buddies on a huge private game ranch. The front runner for the Republican nomination for governor down here is known for his trips to the private game ranches of his wealthy sugar baron donors. These are Republican elite living like lords of 17th century Europe. They don't do anything to protect the commons. They support the president gutting the EPA. They supported slashing our DEP and Water Management Districts and don't bat an eye at the massive algae blooms that are wrecking our lakes and lagoons. Many of them even favor selling off public land. But they are great outdoorsmen going on their canned hunting and fishing adventures on huge private estates.

But it is the liberals that are the enemy of the common man.

 

[braces_for_impact]

Who's that? Ron DeSantis? I live in Clearwater.

 

[fast]

I meant straight Democrat. There are factors to consider beyond party affiliation.

Like what? If I was a die-hard Republican conservative with any backbone and morals, I would consider voting straight Democrat. After all, Trump wouldn't be such a problem if his party that claims to value things like economic restraint, rule of law, personal responsibility, small government, and so on was a check on their buffoon and chief. Or, maybe that was all just talk over the decades. If you want a better party they have to be held accountable for what they've done over the last 30 years. This party has swung increasingly and radically to the right, and allowed itself to be manipulated by their own propaganda machine, and then turned that around to manipulate their own voters. They encouraged reactionary hate instead of cool-headed negotiation. They fostered suspicion of expertise, used a type of class war to attack the "coastal elites", created a distrust of science and replaced it with religion. They actively encouraged dishonest lies about their opposition and constantly attacked their patriotism. They pushed conspiracy theory. Now along comes Trump and uses those same techniques against them, and they are paralyzed, unable and unwilling to act upon those supposedly sacred and non-negotiable principles. If ever there was a time to vote every one of these motherfuckers out, it's now.

You don't love Trump?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't understand why SCOTUS with the cake case did not (or can not?) rule that both Colorado was in the wrong and that he had to bake the cake anyway. Is there a technical term related to this? Do something like sanction (monetarily) the public officials for being anti religious and still make the guy bake the cake. Slap both of these fuckers in the face. Why does somebody have to win? Let both of them lose if that is more fair.

Could this case be seen as ruling that a non religious law or enforcement about requiring cakes be made for gay marriagesalready is constitutional?

In this case they basically said the baker didn't get a fair trial the first time around, go back and fix that. Since this error means they do not have all the relevant facts to review they avoided addressing the actual case.

 

[jonatha]

In this case they basically said the baker didn't get a fair trial the first time around, go back and fix that. Since this error means they do not have all the relevant facts to review they avoided addressing the actual case.

Will there be another proceeding at a lower level?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Here in good ol' Texas, Gov. Abbot has signed a bill that will outlaw straight ticket voting in 2020. Makes it too easy to vote against the $#$!! GOP.

 

[James Madison]

What do you suggest to cleans them in a non-biased non-partisan manner?

I think the biggest problem is the 2 year thing. And the single letter. A much greater time band for voter participation would seem less likely to 'accidentally' disenfranchise people.

You are in luck, because there wasn't any "2 year thing" for removal.

Ohio removes registrants from the rolls only if they “fai[l] to respond” and “con-tinu[e] to be inactive for an additional period of four con-secutive years, including two federal general elections....Combined with the two years of nonvoting before notice is sent, that makes a total of six years of nonvoting before removal”​

 

[Elixir]

Here in good ol' Texas, Gov. Abbot has signed a bill that will outlaw straight ticket voting in 2020. Makes it too easy to vote against the $#$!! GOP.

No challenge to that order? Sounds mighty .sleazy to me. (Of course these days, sleazy is almost always "legal" when done by a 'pug)

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What do you suggest to cleans them in a non-biased non-partisan manner?

I think the biggest problem is the 2 year thing. And the single letter. A much greater time band for voter participation would seem less likely to 'accidentally' disenfranchise people.

You are in luck, because there wasn't any "2 year thing" for removal.

Ohio removes registrants from the rolls only if they “fai[l] to respond” and “con-tinu[e] to be inactive for an additional period of four con-secutive years, including two federal general elections....Combined with the two years of nonvoting before notice is sent, that makes a total of six years of nonvoting before removal”​

Hmm, so it is six years. Is that a sufficient length of time before removing names?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Here in good ol' Texas, Gov. Abbot has signed a bill that will outlaw straight ticket voting in 2020. Makes it too easy to vote against the $#$!! GOP.

No challenge to that order? Sounds mighty .sleazy to me. (Of course these days, sleazy is almost always "legal" when done by a 'pug)

So far as I know, no legal challenge. (But I might be wrong.) What else can you expect from Texas?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Hmm, so it is six years. Is that a sufficient length of time before removing names?

No, not at all. If they're a citizen, they should remain on the voter rolls. How rarely or frequently they exercise their right to vote shouldn't factor into that. If there's only one candidate per generation whom they feel is worth the trouble to get up off their couch for, there should be no impediments to their wandering into a polling booth and casting their ballot once every twenty-five years.

Why don't you just auto-register people based on their tax forms like normal countries do? You Americans just seem to love adding unnecessary complexity to everything for the sake of making it all dumber and more inefficient.