It seemed like she was making a rather standard Marxist argument with her Equality vs Equity video, but I’m sure there are other words to describe her ideology.
Why don’t Dems call out the Blue Shift which as become the ‘normal’ means of closing the gap?
Or ballot harvesting?
Or blowing off an actual Election Day, where you carry your little self down and place a vote into a box where both sides can supervise its placement and counting?
Or question why non citizens, jailbirds, or 16 years olds should be voting?
Or trying to overthrow the Federal system of using the EC?
Oh nevermind. I can already hear your ‘l never said l wanted any of these.’
Only, Marx never made that argument.
The gap of counted legal votes?
Lol if you think both sides don’t do this.
So what are you mad about? People have been voting on days other than Election Day for many cycles. This is only upsetting the right because
it’s not the form they did as much. They still did it in record numbers. This was purposefully baked by the President in advance so he would have an excuse if he lost, nothing more nothing less. And once he was against it so were the parrots.
Maybe it would have been less needed had we had a President who wasn’t anti doctor and scientist? Dunno that’s just what makes him Donald. Anything but boring.
Republicans voted in record numbers on days other than Election Day. Plus our Election Day on a Tuesday in November for a limited amount of hours has always been anti-democracy. Anything to push more time and more ways to let people participate should be supported.
How many of these voted? Is this the year we finally get the rampant voter fraud evidence that so far has trended towards voter fraud by the right?
We’ve done this battle recently, but I think the founders would start to wonder about a system if it was frequently rewarding minority rule. But we could not have known. clearly the GOP since 2000 has had less total voting Americans supporting them in every Presidential election but one.
I’ll have to take your word for that. I’m not an expert on shitty ideas or the men who dreamed them up.
How would you describe the ideology Harris shared in that video?
Well, it’s looking like Biden doesn’t need PA to win. With AZ, NV, WI, and MI (assuming Biden holds on) that puts him at 271.
1 Like
Agree on non citizens, but don’t think it is very many.
On jailbirds have paid their debt to society, IMO they should be able to do their civic duty to vote.
On 16 Y/O voting, the age is pretty arbitrary at 18. To me if we have a minimum age, why not a maximum age. Why should someone with months left to live make decisions for the rest of us? Ali G recommends going off of puberty for minimum age.
1 Like
Utopian. The real definition of utopian.
1 Like
While this could be a good idea in theory, could you imagine going to vote and being told “Sorry, looks to me like you’re about to die. No ballot for you.”
How about a person gets a certain number of votes based on a set of criteria. You have children, you get an extra vote. Own property, get an extra vote. Have a college degree, you lose a vote.
2 Likes
We could include obesity in that case and then only three people could vote in Alabama.
Well, we would have to set an arbitrary age limit like we do with minimum. I am not saying it will ever happen FWIW. Just that it is about as logical as the minimum age thing.
Open your eyes.
Half of the US is against the non ending idiocy and partisan change that power hungry Liberals crave.
BlueShift is the case that the vote always moves left because - oh here’s a full boxes that were in a trunk, under a table, in a closet…
And if you think the Founders were were for everyone and their dog voting twice, you are quite literally talking with zero substance. Only white male landholders voting, 50 (today anyway) state elections for president since we are a collection of 50 states.
1 Like
I know you’re not saying it’s eminent or probable. I certainly think this should be true for driving. Once you pass a certain age, you should need to take a driver’s test every year.
1 Like
I’m not really for a 16 voting age but it doesn’t really scare me or anything either. If 98 isn’t too old to vote I’m not sure how 16 isn’t too young. To me the let them have an impact on their future argument is better than “what could these kids possibly know!”
1 Like
The cognition of a 16 Y/O on average is probably better than most of the 90+ Y/O individuals I know (have known).
1 Like
Tried that argument on my Yello Dog 87 year old dad on Sun lunch.
Made a hasty retreat before he got his pocket knife fully opened. 
3 Likes
Ballot counting doesn’t work like that. Each vote has to be assigned to a registered voter.
This cannot be “look, here’s a box of 10,000 ballots with check marks for Biden. Let’s add them to his total”. Here’s an explanation from a election official:
The first thing we do when we receive the ballot is we make sure that that voter is registered and that they’ve only voted once and that the ballot envelope that we’ve received hasn’t been spoiled and actually belongs to them. The next thing we do is we look at their signature and we make sure that it matches the signature that we have on file.
All of these pre-checks are done with the envelope closed. So we can’t tell by looking at the envelope if the voter is Republican or Democrat or Independent or how they voted. When we slice open the envelope, we do it in a way where you can’t see the voter’s signature and the ballot at the same time. We remove the ballot, but don’t unfold it, and we do this, of course, around a table with multiple poll workers or election judges. And so everyone’s a check on each other to make sure that no one’s trying to be silly and trying to see how somebody voted.
Once those are removed, then we unfold the ballot and examine it, looking for tears, blood, sticky stuff that might get stuck in the machines. Then we place the ballots in batches from the time we receive them, and we reconcile at each point throughout the process to make sure we don’t lose any ballots or that no new ballots are introduced incorrectly or improperly into the system.
2 Likes
I’m not sure power hungry and change is what I would go with when a side just pushed a Supreme Court candidate in when a few years earlier they refused to even discuss it. The GOP is just as power hungry.
I don’t think some things are partisan change. Clearly some liberal policies like legal marijuana, higher minimum wage, etc have been passed in red states suggesting these people don’t just want the status quo. Is wanting change a bad thing when certain things need changed? Or do we want to do everything to protect corruption and advantages for wealthy people? I would think change in some areas much like lets count votes would be accepted by most.
Except we don’t have evidence of voter fraud. It’s just always assumed by some the Democrats are cheating even though Republicans so far this election have tried to do what they can to keep people from voting. It’s why they had lawsuits ready for Dem counties before anything started. Not because they had any evidence.
I think I know you well enough to know that Trumps stop counting call is absurd and should be called out as such. It would be like if you and I were having a mile race and I was ahead at the 50 meter mark and demanded I be called the winner.
2 Likes
So democrats are not smart enough to get their votes in, without endless exceptions and rule changes and multiple months windows of doing so.
Maybe they are too ignorant to be deciding which criminals get to make the laws.
1 Like