Republicans Use Filibuster To Block Debate On Voting Rights Bill

[Tahuyaman]

It's odd how Republicans such as your self are so unable to back up anything they say with facts. Reality is that you just don't care about being right, you care about clinging to your idiotic dogma because your entire identity is built around being part of the "in" group of Trump Republican cultists. You have no ability to think through anything critically at all.

What have I said which you claim isn’t factual? All you did there was an ad hom attack. Nothing to support your attack

 

[Khayembii Communique]

What have I said which you claim isn’t factual?

People aren't fleeing California in droves. There are no relevant issues with voter fraud. Both of these are republican fantasies.

 

[Tahuyaman]

People aren't fleeing California in droves…

They certainly are.
Heavy sigh………

Redirect Notice

 

[Khayembii Communique]

They certainly are.

Again, California's population growth was flat in 2020 if you adjust for COVID deaths, which, again, is remarkable given that it's a state where many people travel to from further away to settle and weren't able to do so because of the lockdowns.

And again, you can try providing some facts if you would like. So far you haven't presented any.

 

[Tahuyaman]

Again, California's population growth was flat in 2020 if you adjust for COVID deaths, which, again, is remarkable given that it's a state where many people travel to from further away to settle and weren't able to do so because of the lockdowns.

And again, you can try providing some facts if you would like. So far you haven't presented any.

Redirect Notice

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Redirect Notice

State your argument and the backup for it. This is just an article headline. Again, you are incapable of making any sort of coherent argument based on actual facts.

 

[Tahuyaman]

State your argument and the backup for it. This is just an article headline. Again, you are incapable of making any sort of coherent argument based on actual facts.

I’m guessing you didn’t read it. That’s one debate technique. Not a effective one, but.

I’m not going to cut and paste the entire article for you.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

I’m guessing you didn’t read it. That’s one debate technique. Not a effective one, but.

I’m not going to cut and paste the entire article for you.

Sure I did. It used a shitty "survey" from some random moving company that can't even explain the data it reviewed or how it was reviewed. Typical worthless "source" from a conservative that you just googled and linked the first article you found whose headline matched your worldview.

 

[j-mac]

Sure I did. It used a shitty "survey" from some random moving company that can't even explain the data it reviewed or how it was reviewed. Typical worthless "source" from a conservative that you just googled and linked the first article you found whose headline matched your worldview.

Noth American moving services is one of the largest movers in America…”random company” indeed….

 

[JustAFella]

You said that you want them drawn in a bipartisan manner. Bipartisan is partisan.


The only way you could do it in a non partisan way would be to just blindly draw verticle and horizontal lines on a map and number the squares as congressional districts.

Now, show me where I said your former governor was wrong? That's the strawman I was referring to.

Excuse me. I guess bi-partisan. I am just saying one party shouldn't be drawing the districts.

So, why is the GOP fighting this?

edit: See how easy it is to admit to being mistaken?

 

[Tahuyaman]

Excuse me. I guess bi-partisan. I am just saying one party shouldn't be drawing the districts.

So, why is the GOP fighting this?

edit: See how easy it is to admit to being mistaken?

They are fighting it because they dont want congressional districts drawn by one party. That’s what the Dems want.

 

[JustAFella]

They are fighting it because they dont want congressional districts drawn by one party. That’s what the Dems want.

The bill straight up calls for bi-partisan gerrymandering. That's what we do in CA. The GOP straight up is passing legislation making them the sole deciders of the lines.

You are telling a liberal I want to draw all the lines. I don't. Guy, you are losing this debate. In a hilarious fashion, to your credit, but losing all the same.

 

[Athanasius68]

No its not. Stop lying.

It is quite accurate. The proponents are quite honest about it.
As its defenders often point out, passage of it would negate the various state reforms that have been occurring over this past year.

 

[Athanasius68]

Thanks for the right-wing propaganda term, “nationalizing of elections.” You use the same argument Southern segregationists used in the 1960s — “elections are local matters.” Another mint julep, please.

The 15th Amendment says:

Section 1.​

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Section 2.​

The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was equally nationalizing elections, which means it wasn’t doing so at all. Congress has a right to pass laws to enforce the 15th Amendment.

States and localities used to have laws and rules that restricted racial minorities from voting — like requiring that if you want to register to vote, two already registered citizens have to sign the application. Since no blacks within 100 miles were registered, a black person couldn’t register. The new laws being passed by Republican legislatures are Jim Crow 2. They put obstacles in the way of black people voting and are just as much a violation of the 15th Amendment as Jim Crow. As such, Congress has a right and duty to pass legislation outlawing these practices.

There have been no laws recently passed that limit a persons right to vote based upon race.
Where do you guys come up with such absurdities?

 

[Athanasius68]

it's the exact opposite actually. the constitution gives the congress control over federal representatives elections, not the president.

No, because the Constitution states that Congress can say when states choose electors for president.
It has done this. States in turn hold their Congressional and state elections same day for the sake of convenience.

 

[Athanasius68]

McConnell didn’t want to eliminate the filibuster because it works to his advantage. He doesn’t want to pass anything. He wants to prevent others from passing legislation. The filibuster is an excellent tool to pass nothing against the will of the majority.

The problem, of course, is that the Democrats filibustered legislation when the GOP was in control of the Senate.
In other words, the theory that McConnell had no interest in passing legislation is without factual basis.

 

[Plasmaball]

It is quite accurate. The proponents are quite honest about it.
As its defenders often point out, passage of it would negate the various state reforms that have been occurring over this past year.

Federal law has some power over local elections. This was never meant to pass

 

[Athanasius68]

Federal law has some power over local elections. This was never meant to pass

Of course it was meant to pass. The Dems have been yelling about it since Trump was inaugurated. It was supposed to save democracy. Surely, you don't argue that the they were never serious about it? Do they actually believe democracy is in danger? Or is just pap for the rubes of their base?

 

[Athanasius68]

Thank God! Finally, someone who gets it!

To be clear, you are the one with evidence of the massive voter fraud justifying restricting voting rights, correct? We have been asking since November and no one has produced it.

I have never argued there was massive voter in 2020.
Of course, the various new legislation across the country do not restrict voting rights.

 

[Plasmaball]

Of course it was meant to pass. The Dems have been yelling about it since Trump was inaugurated. It was supposed to save democracy. Surely, you don't argue that the they were never serious about it? Do they actually believe democracy is in danger? Or is just pap for the rubes of their base?

Messenger bill.

 

[rahl]

No, because the Constitution states that Congress can say when states choose electors for president.

no it doesn't.

It has done this. States in turn hold their Congressional and state elections same day for the sake of convenience.

It hasn't done this, as it can't.

 

[lwf]

I mean, if the Republicans say those things...is that not allowed by the Constitution either?

It certainly is allowed. That's why Republicans didn't want to give them the chance.

 

[JustAFella]

I have never argued there was massive voter in 2020.
Of course, the various new legislation across the country do not restrict voting rights.

Does the various legislation make it easier or harder to vote?

 

[dcsports]

Again, California's population growth was flat in 2020 if you adjust for COVID deaths, which, again, is remarkable given that it's a state where many people travel to from further away to settle and weren't able to do so because of the lockdowns.

And again, you can try providing some facts if you would like. So far you haven't presented any.

Flat growth would mean that people are leaving the state in droves. Probably more concerning to California is the businesses are leaving in droves.

If people couldn't come to California, why didn't they have trouble leaving?

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Flat growth would mean that people are leaving the state in droves. Probably more concerning to California is the businesses are leaving in droves.

If people couldn't come to California, why didn't they have trouble leaving?

No it doesn't? It means that the population hasn't changed...