Quote:

---

Every Democrat but one voted late March 3 for H.R. 1, a massive voting reform bill that has drawn harsh criticism from the GOP.

Every Republican voted against the bill. They were joined by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.).

Thompson told The Epoch Times that he heard from constituents who opposed certain portions of the legislation.

“My constituents opposed the redistricting portion of the bill as well as the section on public finances. I always listen and vote in the interest of my constituents,” he said in an emailed statement.

H.R. 1 would require congressional redistricting to be conducted through independent commissions, or a three-judge court.

Membership on the commissions would be open to any citizen of the state through an application process, barring people who have held or hold office, candidates for office, and people who have worked on political campaigns.

Six members would be chosen by “a nonpartisan agency established or designated by a State,” the bill states.

Two from each party, and two independents, would be chosen on a random basis from the approved selection pool.

Those members would then appoint three other members from each of the two major parties and three independents.

Commission members would be banned from “drawing maps to favor a political property” and would be required to meet other criteria [like what?] in deciding where lines go. They would also have to hear from the public before approving a final map.

The legislation would also prohibit mid-decade redistricting.

Another section deals with campaign finance.

The legislation condemns the Citizens United Supreme Court decision and calls for amending the Constitution “so that Congress and the States may regulate and set limits on the raising and spending of money to influence elections and may distinguish between natural persons and artificial entities, like corporations, that are created by law, including by prohibiting such artificial entities from spending money to influence elections.”

Additionally, it would reduce the number of members on the Federal Election Commission and limit those who could serve on the commission.

Republicans on the House floor before the vote denounced the bill, including portions that would require funding [by who?] for campaigns.

“Americans love election season. They love the endless political acts, having their phones blown up by political calls and texts, having their email inboxes littered with solicitations from wannabe politicians. My phone keeps ringing off the hook from all of my constituents just pleading for Congress to use their dollars to fund more campaign ads. This is the fantasy world that government bureaucrats and career politicians who want a federal takeover of our elections live in,” Rep. Carlos Gimenez (R-Fla.) told colleagues.

“They want to take Americans’ money and give it to campaigns in a 6:1 ratio, effectively forcing you to support political campaigns you don’t support.”

But Democrats said the bill would bring necessary changes to elections.

“As a former voting rights attorney, I have seen firsthand the devastation on the faces of Americans when they are denied their ability to make their voice heard in our elections because they missed an arbitrary deadline

---

Quote:

---

or showed up to their old polling place.

---

Quote:

---

It’s heartbreaking and not who we are as nation,” Rep. Colin Allred (D-Texas) said.

---

Quote:

---

“On today’s vote, we as a Congress have the opportunity to affirmatively expand access to voting. This bill would do so by allowing for automatic and same-day voter registration and establishing a national early voting period while also enacting key reforms that will make our elections more secure and will ensure Americans and only Americans take part in them.”

---

Quote:

---

Georgia House Passes Omnibus Election Reform Bill

---

Quote:

---

The Senate has prevailed in its nearly three-month battle to investigate the results of the 2020 election.

A Maricopa County judge on Friday ruled the Legislature “clearly has the power to investigate and examine election reform matters,” which means Maricopa County must hand over all 2.1 million ballots along with all equipment, software and machinery used to count those votes, along with detailed information on every person who voted.

Three things should now happen:
1. Don't appeal. Let the Senate do this

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors should not appeal the ruling. This thing has festered long enough and though there’s been no evidence that the election was stolen from President Donald Trump, there’s no convincing Republican voters of that.

Where reasonable people used to believe in our elections absent evidence of a reason not to, a shockingly high number of Republican voters now are absolutely convinced that democracy has been corrupted.

Pre- and post-election testing of the tabulation machinery and the sample hand counts of ballots that were required by state law and showed no evidence of a problem? They weren’t good enough.

Eight elections lawsuits in both state and federal court that turned up no evidence of fraud? They weren’t good enough.

Two independent audits clearing the Dominion Voting Systems machinery, completed just week in Republican-run Maricopa County? They didn’t change a single mind.

It’s now time to let Senate Republicans do a proctology exam on Joe Biden’s win in Arizona. Let them now prove that our elections are, as many of them have spent months telling us, rotten to the core.


2. Hire a truly independent auditor

If they want the credibility they refused to give to Maricopa County, then Senate Republicans should hire an elections expert who is truly independent to sift through the county’s 2.1 million ballots and examine all the equipment and machinery used to count those votes.

This shouldn’t be a political witch hunt, but there have been some indications that it might be.

Senate President Karen Fann was all set to hire Allied Security Operations Group to conduct the audit, until reporters got wind of it. This is the company that supplied error-riddled information to Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell as they ran around the country howling about krakens and crooked elections and such.

Just this week, one of ASOG’s employees, Phil Waldron, appeared on One America News segment entitled “The Arizona Election Heist.”

Fann quickly back pedaled after reporters obtained internal emails from Senate attorneys to ASOG, outlining the scope of work.

But on what planet could Fann have even considered that these so-called "experts" would be an acceptable choice for an independent examination of Arizona’s ballots and voting equipment?

Even so, I’m going to take Fann at her word that she intends an unbiased examination of the election. And that someone will be there watching the experts to ensure there is no funny business with the ballots.

“Hopefully, with a proper, independent and detailed audit, we will start to restore voter confidence in election integrity,” Senate Republicans said in a statement issued after Judge Thomason’s ruling.


3. Hold folks accountable, fraud or not

Speaking of restoring voter confidence, Senate Republicans should agree that the end result of this audit should not just bring us the usual bills to try to make it more difficult to vote in the future. We also need actual accountability for what happened in 2020.

If widespread fraud or error is found, as so many Republicans believe, then break out the Lysol and commence with a wholesale disinfection of Arizona’s elections offices. Heads should roll like bowling balls, whether it’s to the unemployment office or prison.

BUT, if the coming proctology exam turns up no evidence of fraud or human error of the sort that changed the outcome, then the politicians who have spent months spreading baseless lies about a stolen election should be held accountable for their actions.

It's a given that Reps. Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs and Debbie Lesko would need to go. These three Arizona congressional representatives stood on the House floor and voted to invalidate their own state’s election results.

But don't forget state Rep. Mark Finchem and Sens. Kelly Townsend and Wendy Rogers and the nearly two dozen other Republicans who have slandered our system to the point where it may take years to restore voter confidence in our elections — and thus in those who we elect.

Should the coming Senate audit result in a finding that nothing nefarious happened here, every Republican official who screamed “Stop the Steal” should resign in shame.

Every. Last. One Of Them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

The Constitution clearly gives states the right to decide how to conduct their voting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The problem with centralized control is that it is just as likely to be partisan at the national level as at the state level, and this is what we have here.

HR1 attempts to fix "problems" that are not demonstrated to be problems, in order to create advantage for Democrats.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

I read that bill a month or 2 ago. Unless it's been changed in that time, the one thing it DOESN'T have that would definitely improve the entire election process is a validation requirement and protocol, specifically, statistical study like the one highlighted by the Mitofsky Report, as a basis for closer vote examination.

It sure would be nice to be able to demonstrate there were no signs of mass cheating, and if there were, to be able to go back and conduct a good examination of when, how, and who.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

What part of statistical analysis (as in the Mitofsky Report and per recommendation by the CalTech/ MIT Vote Project) for validation (as opposed to verification) is in the bill?

---

Quote:

---

PART 1 -PROMOTING INTERNET REGISTRATION

---

Quote:

---

PART 2- AUTOMATIC VOTER REGISTRATION

---

Quote:

---

PART 3 - SAME DAY VOTER REGISTRATION

---

Quote:

---

PART 4 - CONDITIONS ON REMOVAL ON BASIS OF INTERSTATE CROSS CHECKS

---

Quote:

---

PART 5- OTHER INITIATIVES TO PROMOTE VOTER REGISTRATION

---

Quote:

---

PART 6- AVAILABILITY OF HAVA PAYMENTS REQUIREMENTS

---

Quote:

---

PART 7 - PROHIBITING INTERFERNCE WITH VOTER REGISTRATION

---

Quote:

---

PART 8- VOTER REGISTRATION EFFICIENCY ACT

---

Quote:

---

PART 9 - PROVIDING VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION TO SECONDAR SCHOOL STUDENTS

---

Quote:

---

PART 10 - VOTER REGISTRATION OF MINORS

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE B- ACCESS TO VOTING FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE C- PROHIBITING VOTER CAGING

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE D - PROHIBITING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND PREVENTING VOTER INTIMIDATION

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE E- DEMOCRACY RESTORIATION

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE F - PROMOTING ACCURACY, INTEGRITY, AND SECURITY THROUGH VOTER-VERIFIED PERMANENT PAPER BALLOT

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE G- PROVISIONAL BALLOT

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE H - EARLY VOTING

---

Quote:

---

SUBTITLE I- VOTE BY MAIL

---

Quote:

---

Key Things You Need to Know About HR 1, the For the People Act of 2021
By Masooma Haq
March 6, 2021 Updated: March 6, 2021


On Wednesday, Democrats in the House passed H.R. 1, the For the People Act of 2021, which was introduced by Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.). The election reform package, if passed by the Senate, would transfer authority over how elections are administered from states to the federal government, subject private citizens to intimidation and harassment for their private and political beliefs, and make permanent many voting rules that opponents say lead to voter fraud.

The 791 page-long H.R. 1 legislation package, which was marked up by members of the 116th Congress, was adopted without much debate. Some provisions, like ensuring that all voting machines used in U.S. elections are also manufactured in the United States or increasing access for voters with disabilities, are supported by both sides, but most other provisions are contentious.

The sweeping election reform package is divided into three major sections; the second section is the main body of the legislation, with three subsections: a) Voting, b) Campaign Finance, and c) Ethics. Section three is the Findings of General Constitutional Authority and section four is the Standards for Judicial Review.

These are some of the key changes to election laws in H.R. 1:

Gives the federal government authority to administer elections: Although the U.S. Constitution gives states the authority to run their elections as they see fit, Democrats have interpreted the Constitution in their favor, stating in H.R. 1, “Congress finds that it has broad authority to regulate the time, place, and manner of congressional elections under the Elections Clause of the Constitution, Article I, section 4.”

Limits a plaintiff’s access to federal courts when challenging H.R. 1: It would mandate that any lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of H.R. 1 could only be filed in the District Court for the District of Columbia and all plaintiffs would be required “to file joint papers or to be represented by a single attorney at oral argument.”

Mandates automatic voter registration (AVR) in all 50 states (19 states currently have AVR): Democrats call this “modernizing” elections, meaning automatically registering any person that has given information to designated government agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, a public university, or a social service agency would be registered. It mandates same-day and online registration.

Mandates no-fault absentee ballots: This provision would do away with witness signature or notarization requirements for absentee ballots. Additionally, it would force states to accept absentee ballots received up to 10 days after Election Day.

Prevents election officials from removing ineligible voters from registries or confirming the eligibility and qualifications of voters: The bill would make it illegal to verify the address of registered voters, cross-checking voter registration lists to find individuals registered in multiple states, or ever removing registrants no matter how much time has elapsed.

Restores the Voting Rights Act: This provision would require states to obtain approval from the federal government before implementing any voting rules changes. H.R. 1 would add a provision criminalizing “hindering, interfering, or preventing” anyone from registering or voting.

Bans state voter ID laws: It would force states to allow individuals to vote without an ID and instead they could merely sign a statement in which they claim they are who they say they are.

Ensures illegal immigrants can vote: The bill would shield non-citizens from prosecution if they are registered to vote automatically and agencies are not required to keep records of who declined to affirm their citizenship.

Allows same-day voter registration: “Each State shall permit any eligible individual on the day of a Federal election and on any day when voting, including early voting, is permitted for a Federal election—to register to vote in such election at the polling place … [and] to cast a vote in such election.” The section includes a clause that requires same-day voter registration to be implemented in time for the upcoming elections in 2022.

Requires registration for those under 18: “States to carry out a plan to increase the involvement of individuals under 18 years of age in public election activities in the State.”

Prohibits the publication of “misleading information” about elections: The bill makes it a federal crime to “communicate or cause to be communicated information” that is knowingly false, and designed to discourage voting, carrying with it a sentence of up to five years.

Allows felons to vote: It limits federal dollars to prisons of those states who do not register ex-convicts to vote. The provision is called the “Democracy Restoration Act.” The bill says that all felons can vote unless they are “serving a felony sentence in a correctional institution or facility at the time of the election.”

Mandates early voting: “Each State shall allow individuals to vote in an election for Federal office during an early voting period which occurs prior to the date of the election, in the same manner as voting is allowed on such date.”

Legalizes nationwide vote-by-mail, without photo ID: States are required to provide for an absentee vote-by-mail in elections for Federal offices and “may not require an individual to provide any form of identification as a condition of obtaining an absentee ballot.” A witness signature will not be required.

Promotes ballot harvesting: The bill says states “shall permit a voter to designate any person to return a voted and sealed absentee ballot to the post office, a ballot drop-off location, tribally designated building, or election office so long as the person designated to return the ballot does not receive any form of compensation based on the number of ballots” and ” may not put any limit on how many voted and sealed absentee ballots any designated person can return.”

Requires states to accept ballots 10 days after Election Day: The bill requires states to accept any mailed ballots postmarked before, or on, Election Day if they arrive within 10 days of the election. It allows states to expand that deadline.

Prohibits state election officials from campaigning in federal elections: The bill bans “a chief State election administration official to take an active part in political management or in a political campaign with respect to any election for Federal office over which such official has supervisory authority.”

Requires “Campus Vote Coordinators” at higher institutes of learning: The bill would require colleges and universities to hire an official whose responsibility would be to inform students about elections and encourage voter registration. It would incentivize voter registration by giving grants to institutions that have a high registration rate.

Mandates that states make absentee voter boxes available for 45 days within an election. “In each county in the State, each State shall provide in-person, secured, and clearly labeled drop boxes at which individuals may, at any time during the period described in subsection (b), drop off voted absentee ballots in an election for Federal office.” These boxes should be “available to all voters on a non-discriminatory basis” and “during all hours of the day.”

Requires curbside voting: States may not “prohibit any jurisdiction administering an election for Federal office in the State from utilizing curbside voting as a method by which individuals may cast ballots in the election.”

Urges D.C. statehood and representation for territories: The bill complains that D.C. is not yet a state, adding, “The United States is the only democratic country that denies both voting representation in the national legislature and local self-government to the residents of its Nation’s capital.” The bill also appoints a commission that would advocate for congressional representation and presidential votes.

Requires that “independent” congressional district commissions be set up, taking power away from the state legislature, but evidence shows that “independent” redistricting commissions are in truth run by Democrats for their advantage.

Creates a “National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions.” The commission would study elections and produce a report after 18 months with recommendations for improving elections but would consist of 10 members, only four of whom would be selected by the minority party, giving the majority (Democrat) party control.

Mandates new disclosure for corporations: The bill codifies the Democrats’ DISCLOSE Act, to restrict corporate participation in elections. Democrats say this provision will shed light on dark money. Republicans counter that the legislation’s transparency requirements would violate free speech rights.

Oversight of online political advertising: The provision called the “Stand By Every Ad Act” would stop campaign dollars from covering any form of advertising over the Internet. Opponents say this would increase the cost of campaigning.

Weakens the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United, calling it “erroneous”: “The Supreme Court’s misinterpretation of the Constitution to empower monied interests at the expense of the American people in elections has seriously eroded over 100 years of congressional action to promote fairness and protect elections from the toxic influence of money.” It goes further to suggest “the Constitution should be amended so that Congress and the States may regulate and set limits on the raising and spending of money.”

Allows politicians to use campaign funds for personal use: Under a provision called the “Help America Run Act,” the bill legalizes the use of campaign donations for personal expenses such as child care.

Changes the composition of the FEC: The bill would decrease the number of the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) members from six to five. Four members can be associated with a particular political party, making the fifth member “independent” but who would be nominated by a president associated with a party. Former FEC members have written to Congress, warning about this change and other related provisions.

Changes rules “around conflicts of interest” for the president and vice president: It would require the president or vice president to divest all financial interests that could pose a conflict of interest for them, their families, or anyone with whom they are negotiating or who is seeking employment in their administration.

Changes FEC rules to require presidential candidates to provide their tax returns: The bill states, “Not later than the date that is 15 days after the date on which an individual becomes a covered candidate, the individual shall submit to the Federal Election Commission a copy of the individual’s income tax returns for the 10 most recent taxable years for which a return has been filed with the Internal Revenue Service.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

PART 9 - PROVIDING VOTER REGISTRATION INFORMATION TO SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS

---

Um, OK. Voting age... is it the same from state to state?

Quote:

---

PART 10 - VOTER REGISTRATION OF MINORS

---

Nakedly partisan act. Minors can't enter into contracts, purchase addictive substances, drive after dark an without an adult, or serve on a jury, join the military, but they can vote???

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
An 18-year-old isn't a "minor", SECONDRATE.

---

Quote:

---

SECONDRATE: The kids who drop out are the ones who should be voting when they turn 18

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

SECONDRATE: The kids who drop out are the ones who should be voting when they turn 18

---

And, you think dropping out is a good qualification for voting?

Seems like the dropouts have already made their first big, bad choice. How about making high school graduation a requirement instead?

---

Quote:

---

A 10th grader who is about to drop out of school forever, ending all civics education for that kid, is a minor.

---

Quote:

---

PART 10—VOTER REGISTRATION OF MINORS 4SEC. 1094.
ACCEPTANCE OF VOTER REGISTRATION APPLICATIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE.

(1) IN GENERAL.— A State may not refuse to accept or process an individual’s application to register to vote in elections for Federal office on the grounds that the individual is under 18 years of age at the time the individual submits the application, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time.
(2) NO EFFECT ON STATE VOTING AGE REQUIREMENTS.— Nothing in paragraph (1) may be construed to require a State to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for Federal office to vote in the election.

---

Quote:

---

PART 10—VOTER REGISTRATION OF MINORS 4SEC. 1094.
ACCEPTANCE OF VOTER REGISTRATION APPLICATIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE.

(1) IN GENERAL.— A State may not refuse to accept or process an individual’s application to register to vote in elections for Federal office on the grounds that the individual is under 18 years of age at the time the individual submits the application, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time.
(2) NO EFFECT ON STATE VOTING AGE REQUIREMENTS.— Nothing in paragraph (1) may be construed to require a State to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for Federal office to vote in the election.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by reaverfan:
More Russian troll lies, from our usual troll cunts who need to kill themselves.

You are shit. Die like it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

A 10th grader who is about to drop out of school forever, ending all civics education for that kid, is a minor.

---

What does that have to do with registering minors?

Quote:

---

PART 10—VOTER REGISTRATION OF MINORS 4SEC. 1094.
ACCEPTANCE OF VOTER REGISTRATION APPLICATIONS FROM INDIVIDUALS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE.

(1) IN GENERAL.— A State may not refuse to accept or process an individual’s application to register to vote in elections for Federal office on the grounds that the individual is under 18 years of age at the time the individual submits the application, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time.
(2) NO EFFECT ON STATE VOTING AGE REQUIREMENTS.— Nothing in paragraph (1) may be construed to require a State to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for Federal office to vote in the election.

---

So, minors 16 and over are allowed to REGISTER but not to VOTE. What a mess THAT could make of the voting process, adding one more area of complexity where it doesn't need to exist.

That's how I read it. It's one more step to create loopholes in who may register, and who may vote.

---

Quote:

---

SECONDRATE: In Texas, the zip codes with the higher percent registered voters get better services.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Does it seem coincidence that those seem to be the only States which Obiden may have actually "won" in 2020? Other than AK, WV, GA, MI.
hmmm??

---

Quote:

---

In Texas, the zip codes with the higher percent registered voters get better services.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

In Texas, the zip codes with the higher percent registered voters get better services.

---

What does that have to do with registering MINORS in the House bill?

---

Quote:

---

It has everything to do with why Trumptards would be opposed to HR-1. They do NOT want to be pressured to provide more services to zip codes with more youngsters.

---

Quote:

---

SECONDRATE: These sort of stories really make Trumptards crazy :

More than two-thirds of Texans under age 19 are non-white, according to new census figures.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/23/texas-children-make-most-diver
se-generation/

The U.S. Census Bureau projects that, by the middle of 2020, nonwhites will account for the majority of the nation’s 74 million children.
https://today.tamu.edu/2020/01/13/children-of-color-already-make-up-th
e-majority-of-kids-in-many-us-states/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

SECONDRATE: These sort of stories really make Trumptards crazy :

More than two-thirds of Texans under age 19 are non-white, according to new census figures.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/23/texas-children-make-most-diver
se-generation/

The U.S. Census Bureau projects that, by the middle of 2020, nonwhites will account for the majority of the nation’s 74 million children.
https://today.tamu.edu/2020/01/13/children-of-color-already-make-up-th
e-majority-of-kids-in-many-us-states/

---

So, SECONDRATE has bascially admitted that much of HR1 is a partisan Dem effort to change the voting demographic so that Republicans will never be voted into office again.

It's not about "reform".

Yep, I noticed that, too. Thanks for admitting that, SECONDRATE.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
The quantity of old, white Trumptards is shrinking while the quantity of young, non-white Libtards is growing. That is why the Republican Party is opposed to HR-1. If the GOP had a strategy to win young, non-white voters, the GOP would NOT be opposed to HR-1. But the GOP doesn't have such a strategy, which is why the GOP partisans hate HR-1.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
The quantity of old, white Trumptards is shrinking while the quantity of young, non-white Libtards is growing. That is why the Republican Party is opposed to HR-1. If the GOP had a strategy to win young, non-white voters, the GOP would NOT be opposed to HR-1. But the GOP doesn't have such a strategy, which is why the GOP partisans hate HR-1.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Too bad for that racist theory that EVERY house seat that Democrats lost in 2020 were to minority and female Republicans.

It's true. Look it up. I'll wait.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
First off, it's March 7th and you can't even go a single day without talking about Trump.

YOU are now the Trumptard.

Secondly, that doesn't sound like an argument. That sounds like any way you look at it you lose.



If I were you, I wouldn't be so worried about the minority members of Congress that are being voted in on the Republican side. I'd be more worried about all the minority voters that stray from your narrative and vote the way that you don't like.

Democrats don't do shit for minority Citizens. The real "Woke" going on in this country is the minorities figuring that out for themselves.

All that Democrats are doing by making Race take the spotlight on every issue is shining a light on their own racism and how little they think about the willpower, drive and ability of anybody who isn't white.

It's insulting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
I will insult you and your kind some more:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Don't care. Didn't read.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Georgia House Passes Omnibus Election Reform Bill

---

https://www.theepochtimes.com/georgia-house-passes-omnibus-election-re
form-bill_3716434.html

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
I will insult you and your kind some more:

---

Don't care. Didn't read.

---

Quote:

---

The problem with centralized control is that it is just as likely to be partisan at the national level as at the state level, and this is what we have here.

---

Quote:

---

Most people are center-left, center-right, or apolitical in their views. This doesn’t mean they never vote, but more that they struggle to find candidates that align with their values and their identity. They’re unstable and unreliable voters. And of course many don’t vote that often, because it is hard to vote if the options are “bad” or “misaligned” with your own identity.

Let’s compare the US Senate breakdown. It is far less polarized. It more closely reflects the US population as a whole, because states cannot be Gerrymandered. There’s still a huge rural-voter-bias in the Senate (each rural vote is equivalent to 1.5-to-3 urban votes), leading to a near even split between the parties in 2018

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

So, I have a question for you, SECOND: If the demographic trend is inexorable, why is the DNC working so hard to punch it forward?
Might it not be because even THEY are concerned that people will catch on to their hypocrisy, corruption, and greed, and leave the party as fast as the un-accelerated demographic shift will bring them in?

The Democrat Party is steadily losing members to that unaffiliated group called "indepdendents". (as, btw, is the Republican Party.)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I noticed that when SECONDRATE runs out of on-point posts, he resorts to slagging other posters.

Really, SECONDRATE?
And you call yourself intelligent????

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM:So, I have a question for you, SECOND: If the demographic trend is inexorable, why is the DNC working so hard to punch it forward?
Might it not be because even THEY are concerned that people will catch on to their hypocrisy, corruption, and greed, and leave the party as fast as the un-accelerated demographic shift will bring them in?

The Democrat Party is steadily losing members to that unaffiliated group called "indepdendents". (as, btw, is the Republican Party.)

SECONDRATE: Is there some important reason why Republicans don't want people to vote?

---

Quote:

---

There is. The GOP has introduced hundreds of bills in the state legislatures in the last 3 months to reduce the number of voters.

---