I suspect that it's a nothing burger. A lot of folk in minority neighborhoods move a lot and may never receive them or may never mail the application back in or may never receive the absentee ballot itself or may never mail that in. It's a lot more complicated than just showing up to vote.
Link: https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/05/19/all-michigan-voters-get-absentee-ballot-applications-in-mail/5218266002/
(no message)
(no message)
own racist views on me? Please enlighten me. It may be deplorable’s which in that case is acceptable. Huh?
“I suspect that it's a nothing burger. A lot of folk in minority neighborhoods move a lot and may never receive them or may never mail the application back in or may never receive the absentee ballot itself or may never mail that in. It's a lot more complicated than just showing up to vote.”
Dead people will vote. Out of state people will vote.
Personally, I think mail voting should be prohibited but for very special cases in small enough numbers to allow the extra checking needed for them. Only those with a vested interest in either (I) voter fraud, or (II) lazy (and therefore low information) voters support mass mail voting.
(no message)
(no message)
Link: https://apnews.com/555282eacee64bd493ef909fdaa8abd7
vote. Problem is when it comes to politicians, 90% of them are the most dishonorable things on earth, so lots of things will happen.
workers. Of course they know a lot of absentee and mail-in voter ballots won't be returned by voters. Their next step is organizing social workers like JB, ND521 and 64 to collect them. R should condemn and fight this radical and ridiculous practice.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
Their concept is to allow mail in voters for elderly white people, but make everyone else physically show up to vote.
Even without a pandemic, the GOP will create numerous obstacles to suppress votes in predominately blue polling stations.
The pandemic gives them the perfect cover to create more obstacles.
(no message)
Testicules, of course, being the least popular. He was the balls.
(no message)
Again, I like dark comedies.
Re educate everyone.
(no message)
for them.
(no message)
Among the first lessons is how to properly fill out your mail-in ballot.
(no message)
Or because the Dems will exploit the inherent lack of security in mail voting?
Either way, your statement is not favorable to the Dems.
Trump and plenty of Americans have voted by mail in the past. What changed?
Now imagine long crowded lines at urban polling stations ... with someone taking temperatures.
Build up as many obstacles as possible to suppress votes. That is the GOP strategy and playbook.
Why would Dems be thwarted more easily than R's by polling place voting?
If we can go to Target, why not a polling place?
2020 is all about voter turnout.
due to the gerrymandering by Republicans over these last few decades and the constant erosion of our democracy by said state Republicans. Let’s just use the state of Georgia election for Governor as an example.
people vote, the R’s tend to lose.
This statement does not apply to third world nations, but it does apply to the US.
If people don't care, then their votes will be uninformed, and the uninformed are easily manipulated by the oligarchy. Thus, when graphing "voter turnout" vs. democracy...it looks like a bell curve...for a while, as you increase turnout from zero, you increase democracy...but at some point, democracy starts to decrease as the "stupid voters" (remember Gruber?) start to vote (e.g., in favor of oligarchical trends...so that the rich get richer). The Dems properly recognize that our traditions in this country naturally place us near the top of the curve (and therefore at maximal beneficial democracy), which is why they are always trying to get the vote out--they want the stupid and lazy voters to participate--their pitch is often directed at the stupid voter (again, Gruber admitted this). But that decreases beneficial democracy.
just wrong. Only you would claim that seeking a low turnout benefits democracy. It also certainly doesn’t stop the less educated, low info Orange voter.
Now let’s see the shuffle.
There are legitimate reasons to disagree with what I wrote, but a strawman like your post is not helpful. You know one thing for certain: you disagree with me...but sometimes in your scramble to disagree, you come up with nothing but crap.
I said that in the United States, our traditions and culture put us at or near the sweet spot for beneficial democracy. There is no need to increase turnout as we are already at maximal beneficial democracy.
Our Founding Fathers knew that too much democracy can be a bad thing, which is why the Constitution provides for a Democratic Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy. I suppose you think they hate democracy, too, but that is inaccurate.
My argument just builds on this principle that some is good but too much can be bad. Surely you see the point, even if you disagree with it.
You just said that lower tutrnout benefits democracy which is patently untrue. Now you are saying “beneficial democracy” as you define the term. Big difference.
The founding fathers didn’t want a democracy or anything close to it. They wanted only landowning, white males to vote. The may have founded a constitutional republic but not a democratic one. We have moved past that constitutionally. We are not in a pure democracy but we are much closer to one now. And where we currently stand, all eligible should be afforded the opportunity to vote and it should be made as convenient as possible. And we certainly shouldn’t be forcing in person voting during a pandemic even though it hurts Neddie’s side.