Discussion for article #228721
Doesnât matter if itâs one, 100, 1,000, or 100,000. Amongst us, who would like to have their vote cancelled out by a government that believes it should get to cherry pick who gets to use their Constitutional rights.
There. Fixed it for you.
Youâre welcome.
Why is this dead-eyed union-busting misanthrope winning?
Why?
Money and stupid people.
Shorter Walker âWe donât want those stinking minorities to vote. They vote for Democrats.â
Maybe if Wisconsin Republicans didnât support such odeous positions and embraced the idea of doing things to grow Wisconsin for all, they would find they like giving all citiizens the opportunity to vote.
Because the Democratic party hasnât done enough party building across the state.
Voter suppresssion is all that theyâve gotâŚ
Walker is doctrinaire - and willing to spend scarce tax dollars - in some things and wiggly in others, e.g. influence peddling in which he is NOT willing to spend scarce tax dollars to route out. Heâs a fraud.
Agree that itâs a dying party but they are doing a lot of damage in their death throes.
âMinorâ point: The high court didnât strike down a similar law in Texas, a district court in Corpus Christi did. Texas is appealing to the Fifth Circuit. Only after the Fifth Circuit rules will the high court become involved.
Walker accidentally gave away the GOP plan----preventing several hundred thousand voters from casting ballots to negate the remote possibility of one case of in-person voter fraud (which so far has not happened in Wisconsin.)
Heâs not even subtle about his desire to suppress the vote.
Burke pointed out that the majority of the people in question are minorities.
Yes, thatâs the basic principle behind the voter suppression laws. Voter fraud has little to do with it.
The irony is that the voter fraud that was uncovered in Wisconsin was a man who voted 7 times for Scott Walker during the recall and crossed state lines, voting multiple times for Romney. He is currently awaiting sentencing.
Any lawyer will tell you that when you deal with laws that infringe on constitutional rights, and voting is a Federal constitutional right enshrined in four amendments to the constitution, you have to balance the infringements against the benefits to the government of having the law. In this case using such a balancing test should lead to laws being declared unconstitutional since when dealing with fundamental rights courts use a strict scrutiny analysis. The fact that Walker believes that is a justification for his voter id law to potentially disenfranchise thousands of Wisconsin voters to stop one person from voting illegally is sad, although not unexpected.
If youâve never seen this little snippet, it lays out the whole republican strategy. Paul Weyrich, Godfather of the Conservative movement, founder of ALEC, discussing why he doesnât want everybody to vote:
There is a simple, devastating response to this argument, which is why you so rarely hear public figures make it: How is it that the certainty of preventing thousands from casting ballots doesnât affect the integrity of the system but the possibility a fraudulent vote does?
So, of course no Democrat is ever prepared to make it.
Doesnât matter if itâs one,100, 1000, or 100k people that are disenfranchised.
Signed,
Scotty Walkabout
âAmongst us, who would be that one person who would like to have our vote canceled out by a vote that was cast illegally?â
Especially when that vote is cast by a dark, swarthy person. BTW, who says âamongstâ anymore?
First it was âmassive, organized voter fraud.â
Now itâs an old lady who voted at an elementary school for years and wasnât paying attention when they changed the location of the pollling place to another school.
burke should have also pointed out that there have been several recent investigations of voter fraud; and the findings of those engaging in it donât come close to the numbers cited by republicans. and of those recent cases, most appear to have been committed by republicans⌠go figureâŚ