Iowa governor signs controversial law shortening early and Election Day voting

[gbg3]

What on earth do you mean monitored????? There were multitudes of unrequested ballots sent all over the place, including to addresses where people hadn't lived in years. There were unattended and unmonitored (via even cameras) drop boxes put up all over the country. There were great and completely unreasonable distances between ballot processing staff and legal observers, to the point where nothing could be seen by observers. There was cardboard put up on windows so no one could see what was going on where ballots were being counted. I could write paragraphs of situations like this and you think it was the most monitored election in history? What are you drinking or smoking?

 

[Craig234]

I'd totally be in favor of a single, in person (only) voting day and making it a national holiday. Frankly, that would be the absolute best and ideal scenario IMO. There would be a need for absentee voting but I wish it were in only a very few and very provable cases (proof of disability, military out of the country, honest and provable age and health related reasons, and provable travel plans). Pair this in person voting national holiday with strict voter ID laws and we could actually have a very secure election.

And would you support universal, free, ID's for everyone, very easy to get?

No, because that would defeat your purpose of keeping certain groups of voters from voting?

You need to decide.

Are you part of the real reason for restricting voting, to prevent Democratic votes and steal elections? Or are you just foolishly falling for the lies by those who do about 'voter fraud' that doesn't exist? If you want actually accurate elections with people voting, we just had that, and you need to stop repeating lies otherwise, whatever your motive for doing so.

Your goal obviously is not having as many people vote as we can. Those are the only reasons I see for opposing it: corrupt desire to steal elections, or falling for lies about 'voter fraud' told by the people who are corruptly suppressing votes to steal elections. I notice how many comments you make about things like slashing the number of voting locations in black areas and 8-hour lines - no concern whatsoever.

 

[Craig234]

What on earth do you mean monitored????? There were multitudes of unrequested ballots sent all over the place, including to addresses where people hadn't lived in years. There were unattended and unmonitored (via even cameras) drop boxes put up all over the country. There were great and completely unreasonable distances between ballot processing staff and legal observers, to the point where nothing could be seen by observers. There was cardboard put up on windows so no one could see what was going on where ballots were being counted. I could write paragraphs of situations like this and you think it was the most monitored election in history? What are you drinking or smoking?

The same thing trump's own Department of Homeland Security smoked: " “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history. Right now, across the country, election officials are reviewing and double-checking the entire election process prior to finalizing the result,” the coordinating bodies on election infrastructure and security said in a joint statement issued by the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)."

Of course, trump then fired his head of election security for telling the truth. You, on the other hand, bought the bridge trump was selling.

 

[gbg3]

And would you support universal, free, ID's for everyone, very easy to get?

No, because that would defeat your purpose of keeping certain groups of voters from voting?

I'd absolutely support free voter IDs, that are not necessarily easy to get but can only be obtained upon absolute, certain, and undisputed proof of citizenship. For some that might be easy, if they have all the documents they've used for numerous other citizenship related purposes throughout their lives. For others, it may not be easy and ONLY those who can prove citizenship without a doubt should ever be allowed to vote. But, if voter IDs are a requirement, the citizenship proof process will take place apart from election day - and it should.

 

[Craig234]

I'd absolutely support free voter IDs, that are not necessarily easy to get but can only be obtained upon absolute, certain, and undisputed proof of citizenship.

So, Obama wouldn't qualify for a voter ID, because the same liar you are a sucker for, and millions of your fellow suckers, say he wasn't clearly a citizen because trump said so. The same millions who say the election was fraudulent because trump lied about that. You dodged my question on your motive.

 

[Nickyjo]

There was a tremendous lack of confidence in the integrity of the 2020 election. Not a few, but a huge number of people questioning the election process. Anything that can be done to restore everyone's confidence in voter integrity is useful. Absentee ballots should only be obtained by request with all documentation necessary to ascertain citizenship and careful signature checking once returned. Whether or not fraud did occurred in 2020, the fraud door was wide open and HR-1 is nothing but a bill to legalize fraud. This is the United States and that is not an okay situation in this country. Nothing about these changes prevents anyone from any party or anyone of any color from being legally able to cast their vote with a minimum of effort. EVERY motivated legal voter who has the desire and interest in voting will have that opportunity. It's disgusting that Dems play this "racist" narrative over simple and useful election integrity measures and it's disgusting that Dems actually want plenty of fraud doors left wide open.

Um, who besides Trump questioned the 2020 election? Not Bill Barr, his loyal AG, not republicans in charge of elections. And I have asked for direction to a site or study that casts doubt on the election, receiving none.

But tell me, when you evaluate this issue, do you consider Trump's record of not accepting the results of the 2016 popular vote, his false claim to have had the largest EC victory since Reagan, his predictions about a year ago that he only could lose in 2020 if it was rigged, and/or his record of lies and fraud? True the boy who cried wolf was telling the truth eventually, but there is a reason he wasn't believed when a wolf did show up. Maybe Trump finally isn't lying, but if people don't believe him, who's to blame but... him?

 

[Nickyjo]

The greater the number of people that vote, the greater the influence of the unintelligent and uneducated. Hence the whining about having "only" 20 days to figure out how to cast a vote. How does that benefit the country?

Couldn't find a more succinct expression of fascism than in your first sentence.

 

[Jason Warfield]

It's up to the individual states but what bullshit is it you're talking about? 20 days vs 29 days? I just don't see that as anything, let alone bullshit. Why the drama about nothing?

If it’s nothing, then why change it from 29 to 20? Why change the law to begin with?

 

[Nickyjo]

There are a few almost unassailable truths on this issue:
- in general, democrats benefit when more people vote
- democrats understandably generally try to make it easier to vote
- republicans understandably generally have tried to make it more difficult to vote
- democrats cry voter suppression, plenty of circumstantial and direct evidence of this
- republicans cry fraud, not so much evidence

Some of the above actions of voter suppression come from a GOP facing demographic change, change that tends to benefit democrats, with more brown people in the electorate. Democrats did much the same, more viciously, post-Reconstruction, with more black people in the electorate.

Once one accepts the general validity of the above, the arguments in this thread become more clear.

 

[Court Jester]

20 instead of 29 days and closing an hour earlier on election day is making voting difficult and discouraging? Come on, man! Anyone who has any interest in voting can certainly manage to pull it off in 20 days or manage to actually request an absentee ballot if they be out of town for that entire time. I just don't see the difficult and discouraging aspect of these oh so dramatic measures

Democrats love pandering to losers, it is where they get all of their power.

I recall how when Obamacare rolled out, the government had so spend many months and millions of dollars holding people's hands to show them how to fill out simple forms so they could get their free taxpayer supported healthcare.

I'm very tired of how we constantly need to make everything in the nanny state so easy for losers. Maybe it better if fewer losers are voting? I never had any difficulty voting on ONE DAY in a limited time window. If people are capable of standing in line to get free George Floyd funeral tickets, they could pretty much go out and vote on one specified day if they wanted to.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Democrats love pandering to losers, it is where they get all of their power.

I recall how when Obamacare rolled out, the government had so spend many months and millions of dollars holding people's hands to show them how to fill out simple forms so they could get their free taxpayer supported healthcare.

I'm very tired of how we constantly need to make everything in the nanny state so easy for losers. Maybe it better if fewer losers are voting? I never had any difficulty voting on ONE DAY in a limited time window. If people are capable of standing in line to get free George Floyd funeral tickets, they could pretty much go out and vote on one specified day if they wanted to.

And you’re welcome to do that. But voting isn’t a hazing ritual. As many citizens as possible should have access to voting. It should be super easy.

 

[Taylor]

Couldn't find a more succinct expression of fascism than in your first sentence.

Don't I know it. Some of you on the far left have become downright delusional.

 

[Nickyjo]

Don't I know it. Some of you on the far left have become downright delusional.

View attachment 67322915

One of the characteristics of fascism are proclamations that certain people are lesser humans. Talk of the uneducated, the less intelligent, the losers, qualifies.

 

[Taylor]

One of the characteristics of fascism are proclamations that certain people are lesser humans. Talk of the uneducated, the less intelligent, the losers, qualifies.

See post 212.

 

[Nickyjo]

See post 212.

Why? No reference of certain people as lesser humans by Woody and Buzz.