Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

12 Very Real Voter-Suppression Tactics...

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/06/12-very-real-voter-suppression-tactics-experts-now-worry-will-come-back/6057/

1. Changing polling locations. An election official can make this call just days before an election.

2. Changing polling hours or eliminating early voting days. This may be particularly problematic in urban counties where long polling lines are most likely, as Henry Grabar reported last fall.

3. Reducing the number of polling places. This raises the same problem as above, particularly when the eliminated polling places had disproportionately served minority communities.

4. At-large elections. At-large elections for school-board members or city councils often dilute the voting power of minorities who have greater influence in single-candidate district elections. In an at-large election, a cohesive voting block with 51 percent of the vote can elect 100 percent of the officials.

5. Packing majority-minority districts. Election maps drawn to push all of a community's minorities in one or a handful of districts can dilute their voting power.

6. Dividing minority districts. Similarly, election maps can slice minority communities into multiple districts so that they have no cumulative influence in any one place. The line between these two tactics is a fine one (and also illustrates why the VRA was useful for assessing facts on the ground).

7. Voter ID laws: This increasingly popular tactic, sometimes likened to a modern-day poll tax, has the potential to disenfranchise voters who don't have a driver's license, or who don't have the money or ability to obtain one (a disproportionate share of these people are minorities). Such laws can also have a disproportionate impact in cities, where many people don't own cars.

8. Onerous candidate qualifications. In 2007, a Texas provision tried to limit those people eligible to become water district supervisors to landowners who were registered to vote.

9. Changing multi-lingual voter assistance. Making it harder for non-English language speakers to vote is a good way to dilute their power.

10. Changing election dates. Another trick that may not require legislative approval.

11. Creating new elections. In 2006, the DOJ objected to a plan in the Houston area that would have eliminated some joint elections and required voters to travel to multiple polling places.

12. Canceling elections. We're not even really sure how Kilmichael, Mississippi, thought they could get away with this.

--------------------------

These don't even take into account electronic voter fraud, insufficient voting machines, inaccurate mailers, voter intimidation at the polls, or people/signage at the polls on election day that violate statutes...

I did leave one thing out...the pathetic fraud on ACORN...and the latest ruling by the Supremes on easing former restrictions on those states that have a history of Jim Crow violations on the basis that our country no longer has a problem with racial prejudice. Hallelujah...just when I thought it was worse than ever.

Guest


Guest

Someone just needs to exclude u from voting.

Guest


Guest

Voting should only be for those people with an economic stake in the nation and not just voting themselves payments from the treasury.

stormwatch89

stormwatch89

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Voting should only be for those people with an economic stake in the nation and not just voting themselves payments from the treasury.

Excellent. It will never happen, though it certainly should.

knothead

knothead

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Voting should only be for those people with an economic stake in the nation and not just voting themselves payments from the treasury.


PD, like I've told you before . . . . we are grateful you do not serve on the judiciary . . .

2seaoat



Voting should only be for those people with an economic stake in the nation and not just voting themselves payments from the treasury.

Let me see....who would not be able to vote....farmers get subsidy.....any employee of the oil and gas industry because of those subsidies.....the banking industry......wall street and the loan guarantees......how about anybody who gets mortgage write offs, and how about tax credits for child care.......who will be left to vote with your exclusion.....I forgot....you do not recognize the subsidy to corporations and the 1% which are tenfold what we pay for food stamps.....to think that if we do not block access to the polls the people may want a 12 buck a month increase in food stamps may want to cut 85 billion subsidy to banks which are too big to fail........

Guest


Guest

I guess that would just leave me and Teo... hold onto your horses.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Voting should only be for those people with an economic stake in the nation and not just voting themselves payments from the treasury.
This point of view tries to make it sound as if people with money don't expect anything from the workings of government when they are the ones with inordinate power to effect lawmaking through groups like ALEC and straight up lobbying that costs money. You know the wealthy class votes Republican because they think that party will look out for their interests. The poor tend to vote for the Democrat if they have any sense for the same reason. Everyone votes in their own best interest as they see it not just those you are trying to point to.

2seaoat



I guess that would just leave me and Teo... hold onto your horses.


When both of you decline your ss, I will but into the jibberish, but in the meantime let's sell the horses for glue.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

PACEDOG#1 wrote:Someone just needs to exclude u from voting.

KMA, toad.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

stormwatch89 wrote:
PACEDOG#1 wrote:Voting should only be for those people with an economic stake in the nation and not just voting themselves payments from the treasury.

Excellent.  It will never happen, though it certainly should.

Are you serious? You AGREE with that statement?

Guest


Guest

Floridatexan wrote:
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/06/12-very-real-voter-suppression-tactics-experts-now-worry-will-come-back/6057/

1. Changing polling locations. An election official can make this call just days before an election.

2. Changing polling hours or eliminating early voting days. This may be particularly problematic in urban counties where long polling lines are most likely, as Henry Grabar reported last fall.

3. Reducing the number of polling places. This raises the same problem as above, particularly when the eliminated polling places had disproportionately served minority communities.

4. At-large elections. At-large elections for school-board members or city councils often dilute the voting power of minorities who have greater influence in single-candidate district elections. In an at-large election, a cohesive voting block with 51 percent of the vote can elect 100 percent of the officials.

5. Packing majority-minority districts. Election maps drawn to push all of a community's minorities in one or a handful of districts can dilute their voting power.

6. Dividing minority districts. Similarly, election maps can slice minority communities into multiple districts so that they have no cumulative influence in any one place. The line between these two tactics is a fine one (and also illustrates why the VRA was useful for assessing facts on the ground).

7. Voter ID laws: This increasingly popular tactic, sometimes likened to a modern-day poll tax, has the potential to disenfranchise voters who don't have a driver's license, or who don't have the money or ability to obtain one (a disproportionate share of these people are minorities). Such laws can also have a disproportionate impact in cities, where many people don't own cars.

8. Onerous candidate qualifications. In 2007, a Texas provision tried to limit those people eligible to become water district supervisors to landowners who were registered to vote.

9. Changing multi-lingual voter assistance. Making it harder for non-English language speakers to vote is a good way to dilute their power.

10. Changing election dates. Another trick that may not require legislative approval.

11. Creating new elections. In 2006, the DOJ objected to a plan in the Houston area that would have eliminated some joint elections and required voters to travel to multiple polling places.

12. Canceling elections. We're not even really sure how Kilmichael, Mississippi, thought they could get away with this.

--------------------------

These don't even take into account electronic voter fraud, insufficient voting machines, inaccurate mailers, voter intimidation at the polls, or people/signage at the polls on election day that violate statutes...

I did leave one thing out...the pathetic fraud on ACORN...and the latest ruling by the Supremes on easing former restrictions on those states that have a history of Jim Crow violations on the basis that our country no longer has a problem with racial prejudice.  Hallelujah...just when I thought it was worse than ever.


Don't forget the New Black Panther intimidation scheme to suppress "certain" voters in Philadelphia.

Guest


Guest

12 Very Real Voter-Suppression Tactics... Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSCPNzl9zWuxXgPSiStu64W-p2LxBVTsvn-JZwGctf426H3l2dmBg

Voting should be limited only to those who have one of the many new Obamajob's that would have been created in the last few years if those damn Republican obstructionists and Bush would quit interfering with the legislation of renaming welfare and unemployment a Obamajob.

Did I mention that it's Republican obstructionists and Bush who won't let these new Obamajobs be created for FT and the other supposedly enlightened progressive liberals who support this measure?

OK we're good.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRvCvsRp5ho

 Very Happy



Last edited by Damaged Eagle on 1/23/2014, 8:15 pm; edited 1 time in total

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

colaguy wrote:

--------------------------

These don't even take into account electronic voter fraud, insufficient voting machines, inaccurate mailers, voter intimidation at the polls, or people/signage at the polls on election day that violate statutes...

I did leave one thing out...the pathetic fraud on ACORN...and the latest ruling by the Supremes on easing former restrictions on those states that have a history of Jim Crow violations on the basis that our country no longer has a problem with racial prejudice.  Hallelujah...just when I thought it was worse than ever.


Don't forget the New Black Panther intimidation scheme to suppress "certain" voters in Philadelphia. [/quote]

FT brings up 12 examples of activities that have widespread implications on voters in general along with mention of insufficient voting machines in polling places and you come up with an example of ONE group, possibly three people, who were involved in one city. This hardly has an equivalent impact!

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum