jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (10 posts)

CaseOhio- Is it not clear that the GOP intention is to disenfranchise

  1. Credence2 profile image81
    Credence2posted 5 years ago

    Doesn't the right winger ever cease with his lies and distortions? I was furious with their Voter ID Law where they wanted to extend voting days and time for the active duty military, but eliminate them for everybody else. The excuse was that the adminstrative costs associated with the extended hours were not justified. Well, Romney in his stupid way accused the Dems of attempting to disenfranchise the military. Nonsense, I would be more than happy to provide for the additional time to  resident active duty military located OUTSIDE of Ohio/or through absentee ballot, otherwise why are they treated differently than anyone else? It is clear what the intent of the GOP is, and what is that boys and girls? It is to adversely affect the voting patterns of demographic groups most likely to vote Democratic. No nonsense about voter fraud and the like, the GOP are scum. Well, this is checkmate and as Al Sharpton says, GOTCHA!

    Sorry, this is partisan and I do not apologize.

    But regardless of what side you are on, your thoughts please.

    1. Xenonlit profile image60
      Xenonlitposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      This is a racist and sexist coup d'etat in the making. It  is disenfranchisement of anyone who will not vote Republican. The courts need to shut it down.

      1. profile image0
        SassySue1963posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Sexist? Racist? Really?
        Yes because only women and minorities would come out to vote early. Get a grip, you're really reaching here. The fact is that the majority of states only allow early voting for military personnel. This law in Ohio was not just passed either. Another Great Lie and brainwash of the Democrats. That these ID laws and the Ohio Law were just now passed to somehow sway the election. It is actually the other way around. Suddenly the DNC is concerned, but not about EVERYONE, only about certain people in certain states. Romney misstated to a point. The fact is the lawsuit by the WH makes the claim that if everyone can't vote early then the military should not either, which is what he was referring to. If anyone is trying to "rig" this election it is the Democrats. Trying to cherry pick in the swing states which polls will open early and remain open late, that Ohio lawsuit, which if successful could just cancel early voting, discounting many military votes. And attacking voter ID laws which were already ruled Constitutional in 2005 by the Supreme Court that have been on the books for years.

        1. Credence2 profile image81
          Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Sue, Republicans faulted the extra time for civilians as too costly for local governments and prone to fraud and abuse. Meanwhile, service members were exempt from the restrictions, allowing them to vote at any time before polls close, an extra three days without restrictions.

          There was no basis to treat the civilians any different from the military particularely those that could vote in person like any civilian.
          Ohio has no justifiable reason to treat any of those that can vote in person differently. This is why it was shot down by the court as it should have been. Sue, we are not children, this is going on throughout the country, there are relatively mild Voter ID states and the harsh and unfair ones. Virginia is an example of the former. Texas, Pennsyvania, South Carolina Florida and Ohio are example of problematic ones
          We have got the courts to overturn the GOP legislative mischief for all but Penn. and that is next.....
          What is good for the goose is good for the gander,  a resident of the state in the military who can  vote in person should be treated no differently than a civilian, and for the Ohio GOP to try to make such a distinction and make it stick, is psychotalk.

      2. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Xenonlit, We have got the courts on a roll with the overturning and Pennsylvania is next!

    2. Repairguy47 profile image61
      Repairguy47posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Isn't it funny that the girl from San Antonio who testified before Congress on how it was so difficult to get to her local license office to get an ID had no problem getting to DC? I find the irony hilarious.

      1. Credence2 profile image81
        Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, it is to laugh, but the exception is hardly the rule. I stand with Holder and say to Texas, you cannot get away with your racist redistricting and disenfranchisement of minority groups by design. Who knows in the next election cycle or two Texas may well turn Blue

        1. Repairguy47 profile image61
          Repairguy47posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          You really have your finger on the political pulse of Texas dontcha?

          1. Credence2 profile image81
            Credence2posted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Thats a big 10-4!

  2. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 5 years ago

    They have to do more than just spend oooodles of money and rig the electronic voting machines.