|
nine-gear crow posted:True, but there was also an extremely brief window when actual voters had the chance to stop that, back when it was being workshopped in states like Wisconsin and people were trying to argue "Please, please, please, loving show up to vote because if the Republicans win, voting is going to go away, first slowly, then rapidly," and the response was a collective "Yeah, but I'm just not inspired... [15 years later] HOLY gently caress WHY CAN'T I VOTE ANYMORE?" So the Democrats defended organizations like ACORN that tried to get more people to vote in these elections right?
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 00:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
Nanomashoes posted:So the Democrats defended organizations like ACORN that tried to get more people to vote in these elections right? god. remember that time three years ago when democrats said "if you get us a trifecta, we'll pass voter protection laws" heady days. two thousand dollar checks were on the way, build back better was going to be the New New Deal, trump was finally going to face some legal consequences for his actions, and Joe Biden said he was going to cure cancer. then those fuckers in Georgia went and actually gave the democratic party the opportunity to make good on their promises, and ~whoopsie~, all that poo poo loving evaporated. imagine how much easier democratic messaging would have been this year, if only they hadn't made the mistake of winning the Senate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 00:23
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:True, but there was also an extremely brief window when actual voters had the chance to stop that, back when it was being workshopped in states like Wisconsin and people were trying to argue "Please, please, please, loving show up to vote because if the Republicans win, voting is going to go away, first slowly, then rapidly," and the response was a collective "Yeah, but I'm just not inspired... [15 years later] HOLY gently caress WHY CAN'T I VOTE ANYMORE?" "It's the voters fault they can't vote because they didn't vote hard enough" is an extremely interesting take. Have you got anything to back this up beyond a vague feeling that people voting harder in Wisconsin would have stopped gerrymandering?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 00:27
|
|
|
Criss-cross posted:This is stupid, why are you writing things you yourself don't even believe? Do you think there's no in-between between single family detached housing and whatever this is? Also, dense housing means tons of stores exist, this is the reality in many European cities. Oh there’s definitely an in between and it’s all extremely expensive. It’ll only get more expensive once people are actively being pushed out of suburbs and demand skyrockets. Tiny Timbs fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Jun 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 00:29
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:True, but there was also an extremely brief window when actual voters had the chance to stop that, back when it was being workshopped in states like Wisconsin and people were trying to argue "Please, please, please, loving show up to vote because if the Republicans win, voting is going to go away, first slowly, then rapidly," and the response was a collective "Yeah, but I'm just not inspired... [15 years later] HOLY gently caress WHY CAN'T I VOTE ANYMORE?" I can't actually wrap my head around what your meaning is here. That it's deserved? That our time to fix it by voting has passed? Pure frustration from being treated like a chicken little by people who... currently have a Democrat governor and a Republican advantage in districting because of their state supreme court?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 00:32
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:"It's the voters fault they can't vote because they didn't vote hard enough" is an extremely interesting take. Have you got anything to back this up beyond a vague feeling that people voting harder in Wisconsin would have stopped gerrymandering? Gerrymandering is put in place by elected officials. A party can't do poo poo like change the voting laws unless they already have majorities in the legislature, and they can't change the way elections are run at an executive level unless they hold the relevant executive positions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 00:58
|
|
|
Nanomashoes posted:So the Democrats defended organizations like ACORN that tried to get more people to vote in these elections right? The democrats not defending ACORN was bad. Just bad. They're a party that will capitulate to the GOP over and over again and then get pissy when people see that and don't want to vote for them
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 01:12
|
|
|
The Democrats' response to the slightest implication that votes are something they have to earn has been tantrums for how long now?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 01:13
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:The Democrats' response to the slightest implication that votes are something they have to earn has been tantrums for how long now? now now, they also destroy voter registration programs in the desperate hope it will make republicans like them from time to time
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 01:20
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Gerrymandering is put in place by elected officials. A party can't do poo poo like change the voting laws unless they already have majorities in the legislature, and they can't change the way elections are run at an executive level unless they hold the relevant executive positions. https://www.wpr.org/mappedout/help-two-supreme-courts-republican-map-prevails So if we're specifically talking Wisconsin the most recent redistricting was veto'd by the Governor and then over ruled and put into place by court rulings. And I think the bigger thing some plague rats are commenting on isn't an explanation that it's mechanically the voters fault because of how the system works. I see their comment as more a question of if you can vote to lose your voting rights is that a just system or one that should be accepted? Is oppression ok because the oppressed is too stupid to not vote for it? Do we allow it or do we see it as a red line that tells us the system is coming apart?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 01:22
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:now now, they also destroy voter registration programs in the desperate hope it will make republicans like them from time to time I also remember them trying to kick the Green Party off of the ballot in my state in the run up to 2020. They really didn’t want me to vote
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 01:28
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Gerrymandering is put in place by elected officials. A party can't do poo poo like change the voting laws unless they already have majorities in the legislature, and they can't change the way elections are run at an executive level unless they hold the relevant executive positions. This doesn't explain how voting harder in Wisconsin would have prevented the Republicans from ever doing gerrymandering? Unless nine-gear crow was trying to argue that people should just vote hard enough forever that republicans just never take power again, which is a tough sell considering how much of state politics has just been abandoned to them by the theoretical opposition. Not to mention that enough people voted for democrats to hand them control of the federal government, what are they doing to protect voting rights?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:I also remember them trying to kick the Green Party off of the ballot in my state in the run up to 2020. They really didn’t want me to vote Submitting thousands of fraudulent signatures should get you kicked off the ballot. The green party often uses the same organization the GOP uses to collect signatures. They also got their candidate getting purged from the ballot recently as well. Maybe the green party and GOP shouldn't collect so many fraudulent signatures. I'd be fine with any other party being booted if they did the same. Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Jun 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:30
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Submitting thousands of fraudulent signatures should get you kicked off the ballot. The green party uses the same organization the GOP uses to collect signatures in many cases and resulted in their candidate getting purged from the ballot recently as well. Wasn't the "fraud" in question that the VP candidate had the wrong home address listed when they were collected, and then when the Greens said "well we have more signatures with her updated address, here" they were told nope, too late? Yeah, I guess I'd try to obfuscate by shouting THEY USED THE SAME POLLSTER AS THE GOP if that was my reasoning, too. drat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:39
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Submitting thousands of fraudulent signatures should get you kicked off the ballot. The green party uses the same organization the GOP uses to collect signatures in many cases and resulted in their candidate getting purged from the ballot recently as well. That wasn’t the issue at the time. The Dems questioned Green Party candidates because they didn’t pay the new filing fees third parties had to pay for. Before then, third parties didn’t have to pay these fees. Only the Dems and GOP had to pay. The timing of the challenges was suspect because it came in after the deadline for write-in candidates had passed. As someone who was voting green, it really pissed me off
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:41
|
|
|
Seyser Koze posted:Wasn't the "fraud" in question that the VP candidate had the wrong home address listed when they were collected, and then when the Greens said "well we have more signatures with her updated address, here" they were told nope, too late? nah several states had very high rates of fake signatures that put them beneath the treshold (which parties generally get around by just submitting, like, 1.5 or 2x the signatures). what I think he's thinking of is that the gop was actually working to get the green party on the ballot in several states for what should be obvious reasons. It was part of the same effort that was trying to get kanye on a bunch of ballots Ironically, when I looked at the time, some of the races they were falling below the required signature counts on were like requirements of 300 signatures for certain senate races Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Jun 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:43
|
|
|
Seyser Koze posted:Wasn't the "fraud" in question that the VP candidate had the wrong home address listed when they were collected, and then when the Greens said "well we have more signatures with her updated address, here" they were told nope, too late? No you're thinking of a completely separate case of slightly lesser fraud and pretending all the others don't exist. The green party likes to pay for fake signatures. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:49
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:That wasn’t the issue at the time. The Dems questioned Green Party candidates because they didn’t pay the new filing fees third parties had to pay for. Before then, third parties didn’t have to pay these fees. Only the Dems and GOP had to pay. The timing of the challenges was suspect because it came in after the deadline for write-in candidates had passed. Yeah, it should piss you off that the green party is so incompetent and irresponsible. It would be nice to have a competitive third party that isn't full of complete failures. We already have the democrats for that!
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:52
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Yeah, it should piss you off that the green party is so incompetent and irresponsible. It would be nice to have a competitive third party that isn't full of complete failures. We already have the democrats for that! Nah, it was the Dems who pissed me off. And we both know that they will pass laws to make it harder for third parties to get into power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 02:59
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Nah, it was the Dems who pissed me off. And we both know that they will pass laws to make it harder for third parties to get into power. It didn't stop the libertarians.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:01
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Nah, it was the Dems who pissed me off. And we both know that they will pass laws to make it harder for third parties to get into power. the signature threshold for a lot of races is honestly tiny
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:02
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:the signature threshold for a lot of races is honestly tiny You keep bringing up the signature threshold but that wasn’t the issue back then. Did you even read the post?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:05
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:You keep bringing up the signature threshold but that wasn’t the issue back then. Did you even read the post? Tell us all what the fee amount was. Up to $5,000 Heck Yes! Loam! fucked around with this message at 03:19 on Jun 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:15
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Tell us all what the fee amount was. Is the Green Party well funded? I doubt it. They might have trouble getting that kind of money for each race.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:29
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Is the Green Party well funded? I doubt it. They might have trouble getting that kind of money for each race. That is an absolutely tiny amount of money for a national election. If you can't scrape together five grand for a senatorial campaign what are you even doing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
barriers suck, but as a single person that literally just walked around my own town to get double/triple the amount if sigs I needed for a thing, lol at Ye West or other peeps/orgs with access to literally several orders magnitude more money, manpower and other resources not being able to pass them without faking. Also Jill Stien had a dinner with Putin, surelly she could literally get like 50K no strings attached to help greens across the country.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:45
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:You keep bringing up the signature threshold but that wasn’t the issue back then. Did you even read the post? It was the main thing that they got kicked off ballots for
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:45
|
|
|
Why should it cost money to run for office at all? That doesn't seem very democratic
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 03:48
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:That is an absolutely tiny amount of money for a national election. If you can't scrape together five grand for a senatorial campaign what are you even doing? This is why I support poll taxes. If you can't scrape together five bucks or proof of land ownership to vote what are you even doing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 04:29
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:Why should it cost money to run for office at all? That doesn't seem very democratic There is no fee to run for office in Wisconsin. The main reason other states do it is because states have to run and pay for every election, so they look for ways to defer costs by preventing frivolous candidates and have the people running partial pay for the election. Because, if there is no barrier to entry, then you get a ballot that is 1,000 people long for every single office where most of them don't even want the office, but are doing it for publicity. That makes elections more expensive and difficult to run. California has a relatively high threshold to get on the ballot, but their recall elections always get 50+ candidates even with those high barriers to entry. Most states have fairly low filing fees. It's only $2 in New Hampshire. Some states make the fees 1% of the total salary for the position and use the fees to pay the salary. In 46 states, you can get the filing fee waived if you get enough signatures.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 04:38
|
|
|
the SA 10$ paywall is an example of a paywall thats good low enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 04:42
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:Is the Green Party well funded? I doubt it. They might have trouble getting that kind of money for each race. According to that article, it sounded like they didn't pay for ideological reasons, not financial ones: quote:The Democrats are largely targeting Green Party candidates because they have not paid filing fees — a new requirement for third parties under a law passed by the Legislature last year. The filing fees were already required of Democratic and Republican candidates. Multiple lawsuits that remain pending are challenging the new law, and the Green Party of Texas has been upfront that most of its candidates are not paying the fees while they await a resolution to the litigation. Maybe you should be mad at the 6 Green Party nominees who knowingly didn't feel like following the requirements? E: On top of this, even if finances were a concern, Texas does allow a petition to waive the filing fee as well (as LT2012 stated): https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/article/Texas-appellate-court-upholds-third-party-15555207.php quote:A state appellate court this week upheld a 2019 law that extended a requirement that candidates pay a filing fee or submit a petition to appear on the ballot to minor party candidates Kalit fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Jun 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 04:42
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:There is no fee to run for office in Wisconsin. I don't think that's a good reason PhazonLink posted:the SA 10$ paywall is an example of a paywall thats good low enough. Not sure we're arguing about the concept of paywalls in general so much as fees to participate in a nominally democratic system
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 04:44
|
|
|
This whole thing seems silly considering the greens are not in power or a current event. Those Republican maps suck though, hope someone does something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 04:56
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:This doesn't explain how voting harder in Wisconsin would have prevented the Republicans from ever doing gerrymandering? Unless nine-gear crow was trying to argue that people should just vote hard enough forever that republicans just never take power again, which is a tough sell considering how much of state politics has just been abandoned to them by the theoretical opposition. Not to mention that enough people voted for democrats to hand them control of the federal government, what are they doing to protect voting rights? When one party has massive majorities in both houses of the legislature during a redistricting year, it's pretty hard to stop them from gerrymandering. The GOP have a 61-38 majority in the Wisconsin State Assembly, and a 21-12 majority in the Wisconsin State Senate. Moreover, the GOP has been dominant in the Wisconsin state legislature for more than a quarter-century, and they held hefty majorities in the previous redistricting year, as well as the one before that. They've been able to make their mark on three redistrictings in a row. Of course, the maps this time were a subject of a dispute between the Democratic governor and the GOP legislature, and therefore went to the courts. But those are influenced by elections too! The Wisconsin Supreme Court judges are all elected in statewide (i.e., non-gerrymandered) elections, and have to win reelection every ten years. And as for the US Supreme Court, it's well-known even among non-politics-followers that justices are chosen by the currently-elected president and affirmed or denied by the current Senate. What all this comes down to is that everyone in the above description only gained the power to influence district maps due to the results of elections. These gerrymanders haven't spontaneously materialized out of thin air: they're happening because people have been voting for the GOP gerrymanderers, repeatedly and often, over the course of decades.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 05:09
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:I don't know that this is really the case. Most people are so uninformed about everything that their opinions are almost indistinguishable from being randomly assigned. Here and on Twitter or Reddit you get a lot of impassioned arguments for and against things, but the average person's opinion is more or less "I haven't thought about this until you just asked." A lot of voters simply vote out of inertia. If you were to ask them what they believed, they'd say that they're lifelong republicans or democrats, but when pressed on policy they either don't know at all what the party they vote for espouses, or they think it aligns with whatever they already think even if it's literally the opposite. Food for thought. I remember seeing a video or transcript of a focus group some years back (2015-16-ish I think) where the guy running it kept asking people questions about their political stances in ways the highlighted that not only did they have no real understanding of what the party's platforms were but also that depending on how he asked the questions they would unknowingly completely contradict their previously stated political stances. Wish I could find it again. Obviously not anywhere near a representative sample but the responses here are still somehow slightly better than I would have expected. Also, probably related. The one bit of armchair psychology about Conservatives that's always struck me as the most generally accurate is that they're conveniently often rather liberal on issues that they have personal experience with (though this is true of pretty much everyone). And while that can make for some poignant moments, ultimately, they still pretty consistently vote Republican. -Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Jun 20, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 05:53
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:When one party has massive majorities in both houses of the legislature during a redistricting year, it's pretty hard to stop them from gerrymandering. The GOP have a 61-38 majority in the Wisconsin State Assembly, and a 21-12 majority in the Wisconsin State Senate. The problem is that all of this (incredibly patronizing, seriously) spiel seems to assume there's literally no possible federal response and states should just be allowed to get on with it, and doesn't do anything to address the original point of contention with crow, which is that if as you so repeatedly point out the gerrymandering was allowed by elections, how does "people should have voted harder 15 years ago" possibly constitute a meaningful anything unless your plan is to just win every election forever?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 06:37
|
|
|
Tiny Timbs posted:Oh there’s definitely an in between and it’s all extremely expensive. It’ll only get more expensive once people are actively being pushed out of suburbs and demand skyrockets. Where are people being "actively pushed out of suburbs"? People want denser transit-oriented new development instead of more expensive and wasteful single-unit detached housing entirely dependent on cars.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 07:04
|
|
|
theCalamity posted:I also remember them trying to kick the Green Party off of the ballot in my state in the run up to 2020. They really didn’t want me to vote It says a lot there is no equivalent of this with the Republicans, the Libertarians compete more for their votes than the Greens ever did for the Democrats, and they never talk about them. Republicans know and accept that they have to earn votes through words and actions, and they have nothing to gain from petulant, condescending and entitled whining about how you don't vote hard enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 07:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 22:57 |
|
|
some plague rats posted:The problem is that all of this (incredibly patronizing, seriously) spiel seems to assume there's literally no possible federal response and states should just be allowed to get on with it, and doesn't do anything to address the original point of contention with crow, which is that if as you so repeatedly point out the gerrymandering was allowed by elections, how does "people should have voted harder 15 years ago" possibly constitute a meaningful anything unless your plan is to just win every election forever? The only way to save the US is through conversion to a one party state. The communists understand this and it works out well enough for them. When you allow other groups whose central ideology is anathema to your own ideology to share power you inevitably get an incoherent government paralyzed by infighting. Multiparty democracy is a failed experiment, anyone can see this. We just need to embrace one party rule, preferably by an actually good party like Cuba's PCC or China's CCP. In the meantime it surely would be nice if the democrats could stop saying how great the republicans are or how necessary they are to governance. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2022 07:22
|
|