What's new

Voter Suppression and Why The Republicans Love It So Much?

Would you prefer that no one bring a counter perspective on the topic?

I could respond "Very nice of you to spout the Lib talking points" after 90% of the comments on this thread.
I see this claim a lot.

People aren’t attacking conservatives for their conservative talking points. People are attacking posters because they’re spouting off disproven talking points. Conservative talking points aren’t synonymous with lies. There’s a big difference.

We see this all the time with “cancel culture.” Trump wasn’t cancelled because of his conservative talking points. He was de-platformed because he was using social media to violate the terms of service; like fomenting insurrection. Honestly, he should’ve been de-platformed a long time ago with his incessant attacks on people.
 
Last edited:
I see this claim a lot.

People aren’t attacking conservatives for their conservative talking points. People are attacking posters because they’re spouting off disproven talking points. Conservative talking points aren’t synonymous with lies. There’s a big difference.
This simply demonstrates your inability to genuinely consider the other sides points. Just because someone on Twitter or CNN makes a good counter-argument, doesn't mean that any idea has been "disproven". There certainly were not any "lies" in the original person's post (albeit I'm not sure any good points were made). However, a lazy response attacking "GOP talking points" is lazy and a waste. If someone wants to make a point, make it. You're not going to change anyone's mind by attacking their party.
 
Voter suppression doesn’t impact election results??? Ummmm. What? Did you seriously post that with a straight face?

secondly, it’s not the same thing. Non-citizens and dead people aren’t voting while voter suppression actually does happen and it’s impact is significant. Just because conservative message boards are talking about liberals drinking the blood of children and dead people voting, doesn’t mean it’s true nor does it make it any less true that voter suppression impacts elections. And judging by the Qanon stuff, there’s a lot of ridiculous **** posted on conservative message boards these days.

Lastly, even if the impact wasn’t significant, isn’t it unbelievably immoral? Attempting to disenfranchise voters and/or prevent them from voting is an attack on the very soul of democracy.
Absolutely. I do not believe that voter suppression materially impacts election results. People that genuinely want to vote have a million ways to do so. I don't think Republicans can significantly change that fact (even though they probably want to). The comparison of these new laws to Jim Crow are ridiculous. None of the changes seem like they are truly going to turn a lot of voters away.

Passing out water or snacks should only be happening by poll workers. If random people wearing "I Love Trump" pins were passing out water and food at the polls, I guarantee Dems would be looking to enact laws to limit that. Would be nice if the law addressed this by requiring water and snacks to be available to those waiting.

Also, no one seems to point out some things in the new law that EXPAND the ability for people to vote, such as requiring that polling places have two Saturdays open for voting, with options for two Sundays as well. Saturdays were not previously required by law, and now they are. If the SOLE intent of the law was to limit voters, why was this included?

Yes, it is immoral to try and restrict eligible voters from participating in our democracy. If there was malicious intent, as the OP pointed out, it will only serve to fire up the Left's base.......the media will make sure of that.
 
This simply demonstrates your inability to genuinely consider the other sides points. Just because someone on Twitter or CNN makes a good counter-argument, doesn't mean that any idea has been "disproven". There certainly were not any "lies" in the original person's post (albeit I'm not sure any good points were made). However, a lazy response attacking "GOP talking points" is lazy and a waste. If someone wants to make a point, make it. You're not going to change anyone's mind by attacking their party.
Let's break this down honestly because I want to demonstrate good faith arguments and show that conservatives aren't being dismissed out of hand.

The post cited lamented businesses making decisions based on politics. Specifically, MLB moving the all-star game in response to the immoral voter suppression laws recently passed.

This is interesting because for most of my lifetime, Republicans have championed business rights. When liberals brought up the dangers of businesses having too much say in politics, Republicans dismissed them. In 2010, Republicans supported the "Citizens United" ruling known for equating money given by big donors as "free speech." In 2012, The Republican frontrunner called "corporations are people." Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell has a long history of championing businesses and the right to interfere in politics. In fact, even right now he's not exactly telling businesses to stay completely out of politics. Forbes article here.
  • So when did Republicans did Republicans suddenly turn on businesses interfering with politics and why?
  • For most of my life, Republicans in red states have bragged about how they could pick off businesses in blue states with tax cuts and fewer regulations. Will we see Republicans ending these practices?
  • Will we see Republicans continue these anti-business arguments, telling Exxonmobil to stay out of politics and the climate change debate?
  • Or are they just the current Republican talking points?
  • Do you find the GA laws immoral? What should businesses do when a state passes a law that disproportionately impacts a segment of our society?
I await your response.
 
When was the last time you stood in line several hours to vote? Do that and then tell me it has no effect on your willingness to vote.
I personally would never wait more than an hour. Waiting lines are way too long in some places to vote. Needs to be addressed. However I understand why random people shouldn't be passing out water and snacks. I don't think it would be appropriate for me to be passing out water and snacks telling people to vote for Jo Jorgensen. Wish it was required that polling stations have water and snacks available.
 
Absolutely. I do not believe that voter suppression materially impacts election results. People that genuinely want to vote have a million ways to do so. I don't think Republicans can significantly change that fact (even though they probably want to). The comparison of these new laws to Jim Crow are ridiculous. None of the changes seem like they are truly going to turn a lot of voters away.
That's not what the data says and nor would Republicans be engaged in it if it wasn't impactful. Lastly, if you tried to kill me but failed, does it dismiss the point that you tried to kill me?
Why don't you find attempts to suppress votes to be immoral? Why not make it easier to vote?
Passing out water or snacks should only be happening by poll workers. If random people wearing "I Love Trump" pins were passing out water and food at the polls, I guarantee Dems would be looking to enact laws to limit that. Would be nice if the law addressed this by requiring water and snacks to be available to those waiting.
You think voters might change their votes because supporters of a candidate pass out food and water? Do you have any evidence of this occurring? Like are there states where this is happening? I’m genuinely curious.

Why not address the issue of voting lines? Why not allow mail-in voting and staff polling places to the point that there isn't a need to pass out food and water to accommodate those waiting in long lines?
Also, no one seems to point out some things in the new law that EXPAND the ability for people to vote, such as requiring that polling places have two Saturdays open for voting, with options for two Sundays as well. Saturdays were not previously required by law, and now they are. If the SOLE intent of the law was to limit voters, why was this included?
Which dispropately hurts working POC and helps rural voters. Here's what the NY Times says about that:
These new strict rules on early voting hours are likely to curtail voting access for Georgians who work daytime hours or have less flexible schedules and who may be unable to return an absentee ballot.

The provision requires counties to hold early voting during weekday working hours — 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. — and says it may be held for longer but may not take place before 7 a.m. or after 7 p.m. on those days. The early voting period will begin four weeks before an election. The previous iteration of the law called only for early voting during “normal business hours” and left it up to counties to determine those hours.

The provision also adds a second required Saturday of early voting (the previous law required only one), which will increase access to early voting in most of the state’s rural counties, where election administrators have often been short-staffed and have offered fewer hours of early voting. Most larger counties in the state already offered multiple weekend days of early voting.

The law doesn’t require the availability of early voting on Sundays, which means that counties can choose whether to open for early voting on up to two Sundays before an election.

Counties that choose not to open on Sundays would be limiting ballot access for parishioners at Black churches that have often organized parishioners to vote after Sunday services.

Yes, it is immoral to try and restrict eligible voters from participating in our democracy. If there was malicious intent, as the OP pointed out, it will only serve to fire up the Left's base.......the media will make sure of that.

But now you're asking "the left" to fire up its base to defeat obstacles that shouldn't even exist, right? Why aren't these attempts to make voting harder bothering you? Before you answer, I'd suggest you read this:
I want to make it clear that I'm arguing in good faith here and bringing the receipts.
 
Last edited:
Lost in all of this is context. Republicans attempting to suppress the votes saw roots in Nixon's Southern Strategy. A recently decreased Republican strategist had files on how to gerrymander and use the census as a way to benefit Republicans. This was pretty big news a few years back for those who missed it:

Links here:

Specifically in Georgia: Kemp purged the voting rolls to win his election against Stacy Abrams. He stayed on as Secretary of State (who oversees elections) while campaigning for governor. He resisted calls to resign as SoS in a pretty unethical move.



Under Kemp, 1.6 million people were purged from the rolls. It's important to keep in mind that Abrams lost by fewer than 60,000 votes... So it's not like these GA laws come from a vacuum. There's a lot of necessary context here.

Lastly, what need is there for these additional laws? @AlaskanAssassin I thought conservatives were against unnecessary legislation?
 
Last edited:
Let's break this down honestly because I want to demonstrate good faith arguments and show that conservatives aren't being dismissed out of hand.

The post cited lamented businesses making decisions based on politics. Specifically, MLB moving the all-star game in response to the immoral voter suppression laws recently passed.

This is interesting because for most of my lifetime, Republicans have championed business rights. When liberals brought up the dangers of businesses having too much say in politics, Republicans dismissed them. In 2010, Republicans supported the "Citizens United" ruling known for equating money given by big donors as "free speech." In 2012, The Republican frontrunner called "corporations are people." Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell has a long history of championing businesses and the right to interfere in politics. In fact, even right now he's not exactly telling businesses to stay completely out of politics. Forbes article here.
  • So when did Republicans did Republicans suddenly turn on businesses interfering with politics and why?
  • For most of my life, Republicans in red states have bragged about how they could pick off businesses in blue states with tax cuts and fewer regulations. Will we see Republicans ending these practices?
  • Will we see Republicans continue these anti-business arguments, telling Exxonmobil to stay out of politics and the climate change debate?
  • Or are they just the current Republican talking points?
  • Do you find the GA laws immoral? What should businesses do when a state passes a law that disproportionately impacts a segment of our society?
I await your response.
Great points. Much better response than simply attacking a party. Genuinely appreciated.
Republicans love business rights until those rights have a negative impact on their party, or go against their messages. It's pretty sad. This Republican party doesn't really resemble what the party was 10-20 or more years ago. That said, parties change to attract voters or limit voter loss. It wasn't that long ago that Obama was championing stronger boarder controls, limiting illegal immigration, and was nicknamed "deporter-in-chief". Parties change, and the Republicans flip-flop almost daily.
As far as what businesses should do.......that's up to them. We all have free choice to patronize a business or not. The danger lies in alienating people because of your action or inaction. I do not believe businesses have a moral responsibility to be political.
 
Passing out water or snacks should only be happening by poll workers. If random people wearing "I Love Trump" pins were passing out water and food at the polls, I guarantee Dems would be looking to enact laws to limit that. Would be nice if the law addressed this by requiring water and snacks to be available to those waiting.
There are already laws against electioneering people waiting to vote, and there was in Georgia before the new law. I agree there should be no "I Love Biden" stickers on the people handing out such things. That said, the new law prevents a poll worker from handing out water to any individual (although they can leave unattended water stands).

Also, no one seems to point out some things in the new law that EXPAND the ability for people to vote, such as requiring that polling places have two Saturdays open for voting, with options for two Sundays as well. Saturdays were not previously required by law, and now they are. If the SOLE intent of the law was to limit voters, why was this included?
I agree that it is not the sole intent of the law to limit voters. However, all of the expanded access provisions are still curtailed compared to the level of access permitted in the 2020 elections.
 
I agree that it is not the sole intent of the law to limit voters. However, all of the expanded access provisions are still curtailed compared to the level of access permitted in the 2020 elections.
I find it strange that politicians are involved in determining who can vote and how at all. Should there be some type of non-partisan committee in each state that initiates any changes in voting requirements (ID requirements, timing, food & drink, etc.)?
 
Passing out water or snacks should only be happening by poll workers. If random people wearing "I Love Trump" pins were passing out water and food at the polls, I guarantee Dems would be looking to enact laws to limit that. Would be nice if the law addressed this by requiring water and snacks to be available to those waiting.

Lol
How about just don't make people wait in line for hours to vote?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Answer me this, if trump had won Georgia and Georgia’s two incumbent senators had won reelection, think Georgia’s legislature would’ve passed the bill that the MLB and other businesses are now protesting?

Yes they would have passed it. If mail in balloting is the future, a few more safeguards need to be in place. As for the lines, many states had them including Texas and California...that covid thing you know. Do I agree with everything 100% on the bill, no, but its preferable to a country knee high in rot and corruption. Ask the hundreds of thousands of immigrants risking their lives these past few months making the trek what is the reason they are risking their lives - their country has fallen to corruption.
 
Last edited:
'Spouting off opposing talking points' =/= 'skeptical'.
Not sure I get your joke/comment here. Whatever.

We are a discussion board where people talk about stuff, supposedly.

I know I have an uphill battle to establish that here.

In principle, any discussion requires some very basic, foundational, principles. Freedom of speech/expression/belief/association....... stuff like that. I'm sure that list can be discussed and maybe expanded in principle.

In China, there is a sort of government-sanctioned/implemented/enforced code of "good speech".

Seriously, this forum should embrace some kind of discussion as to whether we really want that kind of a forum.
 
Short on time here, maybe more later. I just want to clarify some of the issues I see discussed above.

MLB, and other major corporate concerns, are more influential in our society than local grocery stores/bars/gas stations/cafes/etc etc.

Back in the 60s I was seeing people discuss the rights of businesses to refuse service to blacks or coloreds. These establishments were influential in politics locally.

I have analyzed this issue and concluded that businesses that serve the public must not use their platform to distort anyone's rights. Open to the Public and businesses largely open to the public must give up their rights to use their public space to discriminate against anyone on any criteria of discrimination, even political views.

If this is not the law, it must be made the law.

It's the price businesses must pay to be in the public offering anything of value.

Probably it is more the fact that nothing has changed in the worlds of politics and commerce, but considering the British merchants/corporations;' influence in provoking the American colonists to rebellion, I really think todays international corporations are still in the same game. Owning governments/governments owning them and crapping on the competition/would-be competition.

Having those kinds of interests displace ordinary people's interests and rights.

Call it what you will. Communism is in reality a very very corrupt kind of governance where the party elites "own" everything. Fascism in various forms has always involved corporate interests having the power to treat people like trash.

The current confluence of Chinese interests/International corporate interests and political establishments, well-oiled with all kinds of payola, is as bad as anything the world has ever seen.
 
Last edited:
Yes they would have passed it. If mail in balloting is the future, a few more safeguards need to be in place. As for the lines, many states had them including Texas and California...that covid thing you know. Do I agree with everything 100% on the bill, no, but its preferable to a country knee high in rot and corruption. Ask the hundreds of thousands of immigrants risking their lives these past few months making the trek what is the reason they are risking their lives - their country has fallen to corruption.
Why do additional safeguards need to be put in place?

Bill Barr said that there wasn’t any evidence of widespread voter fraud. Do you have evidence that he was wrong?

And states like Utah have been using vote by Mail for years without any problem. Do you have evidence that there is widespread voter fraud in Utah?
Even though she shares a political party with Trump, Gardner said she’s “very frustrated with our president” and worries his comments could erode the public’s confidence in the election process when states like Utah have for years conducted vote-by-mail elections with success.

“Anytime you undermine people’s confidence in election results without fact-based data, you’re actually undermining the integrity of our elections,” Gardner said.

As other states grapple with swiftly implementing universal vote-by-mail elections amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Utah is already ahead of the game. Showing a long and proven track record that voting by mail is not fraught with fraud — and showing long-established working relationships with local postmasters — Utah’s state and local election officials are confident there will be no issues or mailing delays for the 2020 general election.

So why are additional safeguards needed? What evidence to you have of “high rot and corruption?” I don’t follow you. Is this not fact free Republican talking points @AlaskanAssassin? I don’t quite follow what @Jazz4ever is saying but it definitely seems like Republican talking points that you’d see on any bot on social media.

Lastly, I don’t understand why covid would’ve increased election lines. If anything, wouldn’t it have shortened them? I guess I don’t follow. Why not make vote by Mail universal so people can avoid lines?

I await your fact based reply.
 
I find it strange that politicians are involved in determining who can vote and how at all. Should there be some type of non-partisan committee in each state that initiates any changes in voting requirements (ID requirements, timing, food & drink, etc.)?
Good thoughts here.

Why do we allow state legislatures to draw up congressional maps? Won’t they just gerrymander them to help their own party? Some states have an independent commission drawing up the maps. HR1 would make every state delegate the drawing of congressional maps to independent commissions.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/five-ways-hr-1-would-transform-redistricting
 
Lol
How about just don't make people wait in line for hours to vote?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
What a concept!

Why not incentivize polling places to process voters faster? Why not provide more Dropboxes for the more populated areas? Why not allow for universal mail-in voting?

Why not make Election Day a holiday? Or make it over a weekend? It’s much easier to vote on a Sunday than on a Tuesday night after work.

Why not provide a universal ID for people instead of relying on a Driver’s license?

There are so many things we can do to improve our democracy. Of course, Republicans don’t want to make it easier to vote because. Well... Donald said it best:

 
Last edited:
What a concept!

Why not incentivize polling places to process voters faster? Why not provide more Dropboxes for the more populated areas? Why not allow for universal mail-in voting?

Why not make Election Day a holiday? Or make it over a weekend? It’s much easier to vote on a Sunday than on a Tuesday night after work.

Why not provide a universal ID for people instead of relying on a Driver’s license?

There are so many things we can do to improve our democracy. Of course, Republicans don’t want to make it easier to vote because. Well... Donald said it best:

I like the idea of making it a holiday. Should have happened long ago tbh.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Top