So, are you equating get-out-the-vote efforts in traditional Democratic districts as voter suppression? That's a stretch even by anyone's standards. I would think that it is just plain old common sense to get your core supporters to the polls. Wow! Never heard it put quite like that before.

stlouiedipalma;1378065 wrote:So, are you equating get-out-the-vote efforts in traditional Democratic districts as voter suppression? That's a stretch even by anyone's standards. I would think that it is just plain old common sense to get your core supporters to the polls. Wow! Never heard it put quite like that before.

Their methods certainly are. The reason they objected to the early voting days, despite ample number of days and times, was because of the tradition where blacks go to mass, get ginned up by a powerful sermon, and then go group vote. Just one example.

It's really not different from early voting days the Repubs passed that allegedly favored their supporters.

You'd have to be completely ignorant to actually believe the Dems play the game any differently. Al Gore is a perfect example - first thing he did was try to cherry pick districts for a recount, and he was just getting started.

Please explain to me how firing up your base and helping them get to the polls is considered voter suppression? Shouldn't the goal of both political parties be to make voting easier, to make turnout as high as possible? We should be looking at ways to make voting a simple operation, not something which requires an eight-hour wait on Election Day. I watched Gen. Colin Powell the other day on Bill O'Reilly's show. Bill was trying to defend voter ID laws and asked Gen. Powell if it was asking too much to show ID? Gen. Powell responded that it isn't too much to ask at all, when you register to vote. Once that is done you shouldn't have to do it again when you cast your vote.

stlouiedipalma;1379001 wrote:Gen. Powell responded that it isn't too much to ask at all, when you register to vote. Once that is done you shouldn't have to do it again when you cast your vote.

That makes good sense. Just implement the same renewal period for voter registration. No fee of course for the voter registration renewal. Kill two birds with one stone. Ties right in to the motor voter act.

stlouiedipalma;1379001 wrote:Please explain to me how firing up your base and helping them get to the polls is considered voter suppression?

I will happily explain when you can tell me why early voting on TWENTY different days is somehow voter suppression because a very specific day wasn't included.

It's all the same -it's picking and choosing what you perceive to maximize your votes and perhaps even discourage the otherside. You appear to be the only one hear under the illusion that the Dems don't engage in this.

I know what you're getting at. You're talking about the traditionally black churches which bus their congregations to the polls on the Sunday before Election Day. The Republicans tried to stop this by limiting the number of days in which early voting was allowed. The way I see it, voter suppression is the use of any means in order to keep people from voting, or to make it extremely difficult to cast their ballots. The Republicans' ploy obviously fit this description, as the courts ruled against them. As I stated earlier, the goal of both parties should be to increase voter turnout. Going to court to get that Sunday back into the early voting schedule obviously pisses you off, but I can't fathom how you turn that into suppression. Republicans were allowed to vote on that day as well. It's pretty simple. Increase the number of days (or hours) of voting=larger turnout.

When you look at the real sacrifices people make to vote around the world, anyone who complains about any minor inconveniences here should be ashamed. Completely ashamed.

stlouiedipalma;1379745 wrote:The Republicans' ploy obviously fit this description, as the courts ruled against them.

And that ruling was complete BS. You CANNOT disenfranchise someone simply because you don't provide enough convenient times for early voting. Disenfranchising means to deny one the ability to vote. Early voting, regardless of how it is set-up, does not prevent anyone from voting on election day, or casting an absentee ballot.

What I find problematic about the plans to change how electoral votes are allocated is that they are clearly being coordinated on a national level as opposed to being done on matters of principle at the state level i.e. making sure to only do it in states like Pennsylvania that go Blue in national elections.

That's the Republicans' way. A little cherry-picking to give them an unfair advantage. Hell, their policies are being soundly rejected by the minorities who will some day be in the majority. Why change the brand when you can jimmy the process?