Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 11
It seems Chucky 'Child's Play' Schumer is going to force a Senate vote on S1, For The (radical left wing) Peoples Act. This act would essentially be a Federal take over of state voting. Some of its highlights: The act would federalize components of the election system, eliminating nearly all qualifications such as photo identification. It would also require states to implement a system of automatic voter registration and to allow same-day registration on any day voting is allowed.

Can you say VOTER FRAUD MADE EASY?. It should probably be retitled The Institutionalizing and Promoting Voter Cheating and Fraud Act

Fortunately, this bill is facing strong headwinds. To pass the Senate, it must garner 60 votes, meaning 10 Republicans would have to vote for it. Ain't gonna happen. The 60 vote reconcilliation rule could be voted out by a simply majority, but Manchen and Sinema have both said they will not vote a rule change when it is purely along party lines. Add to this a small number of Democrat Senators who have been cool on this idea of trying to Federalize what has historically been the state's responsibility.

And then there's a bevy of States and Senators who have said they will file lawsuits to the SCOTUS on the constitutionality of Federal usurpation of state's rights.

Stay tuned

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
It seems Sen Sinema (D-AZ) reconfirmed her position of NOT voting to resend the Senate rule of filibuster requiring 60% to pass legislation. This really pizzed off Democrat leadership.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Can you say VOTER FRAUD MADE EASY?.

Spankee says it all the time. Yet, virtually the ONLY people caught committing voter fraud are RWNJs.

Found all those "thousands" of fake votes Spankee says happened in NH in 2006? Or NOT? LOL !!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
For once we need to be more like Europe.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2021/06/04/study-46-...

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It seems like the Democrats want to make voting easy, even if that means making voter fraud easy. Republicans appear to want to make voter fraud difficult, even if that makes voting somewhat difficult (like having to provide an ID, or not allowing unfettered voting by mail).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Republicans appear to want to make voter fraud difficult

Because it is so easy now?

There are very few cases of actual fraud (e.g. we are not talking about the Kraken here) so the optics of this are that they are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and/or using that as their excuse to make voting more difficult to tilt things in their favor.

Found this to be an interesting read on some numbers behind voter fraud:
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/B...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
It seems like the Democrats want to make voting easy, even if that means making voter fraud easy.

I disagree. Nothing they are pushing, IMHO, makes voting the least bit easier. However, it does make vote fraud easier. So I have to believe that the latter is the intent.

After all, what if the voters don't vote for the right candidates?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
It seems like the Democrats want to make voting easy, even if that means making voter fraud easy. Republicans appear to want to make voter fraud difficult, even if that makes voting somewhat difficult (like having to provide an ID, or not allowing unfettered voting by mail).

Precisely

Progressives want to make any expense, bend every rule, sacrifice any safeguard, all to make sure they get the most votes by any means, and the Constitution be dammed.

Conservatives demand integrity first. With a low integrity system, many voters will say 'why bother' and the democratic process will be lost. If some cannot vote as a consequence of high voter system integrity, then some may not be able to vote. Voter access within the sphere of a system of integrity, is the responsibility of the state.

BruceM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"get the most votes by any means, and the Constitution be dammed"
Seems to me that both sides have the same agenda. They are just going about it in different ways.

"Conservatives demand integrity first"
I think that conservative's have lost that claim to fame in any capacity.

"With a low integrity system, many voters will say 'why bother' and the democratic process will be lost"
That is one side of the coin. The opposite is also true. With a high integrity system many voters may say "why bother" and the democratic process would also be lost. The difference is in the minds of the voter.

Question: If there was a fool proof system that could:
... Determine the voting eligibility of every United States citizen.
... Provide an easy simple means of registering their vote when needed
... Require their participation in a vote. Noting that "abstain" would be a valid option, but it would be proof that they were given the opportunity to vote.

Would you be for or against such a system? Why or why not. (Don't sweat the nuts and bolts of what is is or who it would work, just focus of the bigger issue of the principle and exercise of democracy)
Print the post Back To Top