• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:794]Bloomberg pays fines for 32,000 felons in Florida so they can vote

ASHES

A Person
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
430
Location
Canada
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
That isn't what's happening. If someone commits a crime that requires restitution, they must pay their debt to society and their victims before their rights are restored. Its happening by choice, not as a condition of voting. They chose to break the law, there are consequences associated with that choice. Its not a tax because the actions of the person involved caused the consequences and the victims of their crimes deserve to be compensated by the criminal who committed the crime.

Somehow you are under the assumption that victims should have to suffer without compensation when wronged by a criminal but the criminal can just resume their rights and life without consequences. That is not justice---that's political maneuvering disguised at playing criminals off as victims when they made choices that left them with debts to society and the people they wronged.

Just because you want to win an election it doesn't mean we can ignore what they did.
I agree with most of that, but it's complicated by the fact that the fines don't go to victim compensation they go to court costs.
 

Aunt Antifa

Hunter of my heart
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
3,341
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
That isn't what's happening.
How do you mean? You agree that a person cannot vote until their entire tax is paid. If they cannot afford to do that, they don’t vote. A person who can afford to do that, can vote.

Tell me which part I got wrong? I dont’ care about your personal philosophies about victims and what they’re owed and justice and whatever else you think matters here. Discuss the law. You support htis law. Support it. The scenario I just laid out is a consequence of the law as it is currently written.

The minute you guys are pressed on legality, you shrivel up and get super emotional about victims and justice instead of sticking to the cold eyed reading of *the law*.
 

Aunt Antifa

Hunter of my heart
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
3,341
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
I agree with most of that, but it's complicated by the fact that the fines don't go to victim compensation they go to court costs.
Who cares where the money goes? He wouldn’t answer it, but since you agree with him: do you support a law that disenfranchises people for being poor?
 

bomberfox

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2019
Messages
10,124
Reaction score
2,285
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Anyone still remember trumpists essentially doing the same thing?
 

ASHES

A Person
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
430
Location
Canada
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Who cares where the money goes? He wouldn’t answer it, but since you agree with him: do you support a law that disenfranchises people for being poor?
Of course not. I don't see it that way though, I see it as a law that disenfranchises criminals by their own choice, knowing the consequences. Since they knew or should have known before they committed the crime that it would take longer for them to pay off than someone who makes more money, that was still their choice to take that risk.
 

Aunt Antifa

Hunter of my heart
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
3,341
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Of course not. I don't see it that way though, I see it as a law that disenfranchises criminals by their own choice, knowing the consequences. Since they knew or should have known before they committed the crime that it would take longer for them to pay off than someone who makes more money, that was still their choice to take that risk.
You do realize that answer isn’t even close to legal per our constitution, yes? You cannot allow access to a right based on wealth. You can talk around it, but until you square up that loophole, it’s a poll tax.
 

ASHES

A Person
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
430
Location
Canada
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal

Aunt Antifa

Hunter of my heart
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2020
Messages
8,616
Reaction score
3,341
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Voting isn't an inalienable right in the constitution. It's a little more complicated than you're trying to make it seem.
Nooope. I am familiar. Ya’ll throw that up anytime you want to snicker about gunz being a right vs voting. Problem is the same token of faith you take 2A to mean was a relatively new interpretation that started just a few decades ago. It is now popular enough that it is a 3rd rail to even discuss limiting gun rights. Voting as a right is enshrined in the minds of citizens of this country, and there is enough legal documentation even among originalists to argue voting as an individual right was very much part of our history.

And allowing rich people to skate while crushing poor people from voting is still illegal in that it is denying franchise due to wealth.
 

ASHES

A Person
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
430
Location
Canada
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Nooope. I am familiar. Ya’ll throw that up anytime you want to snicker about gunz being a right vs voting. Problem is the same token of faith you take 2A to mean was a relatively new interpretation that started just a few decades ago. It is now popular enough that it is a 3rd rail to even discuss limiting gun rights. Voting as a right is enshrined in the minds of citizens of this country, and there is enough legal documentation even among originalists to argue voting as an individual right was very much part of our history.

And allowing rich people to skate while crushing poor people from voting is still illegal in that it is denying franchise due to wealth.
I hope they change the law then. In the mean time, rich people can continue bailing out whoever they want as long as there isn't a quid pro quo. Also, just a reminder, you are not arguing with the Right with me, you're arguing TO the right of you.
 

Visbek

Stuck In The Circle
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
16,813
Reaction score
10,397
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Of course not. I don't see it that way though, I see it as a law that disenfranchises criminals by their own choice, knowing the consequences. Since they knew or should have known before they committed the crime that it would take longer for them to pay off than someone who makes more money, that was still their choice to take that risk.
The voters of Florida decided to change the law, and allow the restoration of voting rights to those who are released.

It was Republican elected officials who deliberately chose to thwart the will of Florida's voters, and impose the additional requirement to repay court costs as yet another anti-democratic (and anti-Democrat) attempt to suppress votes that they don't think will favor them.

The demand to repay fees has nothing to do with justice or fairness. It's just another example of Republicans' crass voter suppression efforts.
 

ASHES

A Person
Joined
Sep 10, 2020
Messages
1,137
Reaction score
430
Location
Canada
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
The voters of Florida decided to change the law, and allow the restoration of voting rights to those who are released.

It was Republican elected officials who deliberately chose to thwart the will of Florida's voters, and impose the additional requirement to repay court costs as yet another anti-democratic (and anti-Democrat) attempt to suppress votes that they don't think will favor them.

The demand to repay fees has nothing to do with justice or fairness. It's just another example of Republicans' crass voter suppression efforts.
I know, change it back to it's original state I mean. It's up to the voters to put the pressure on politicians though, not mobs.
 

roguenuke

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
40,098
Reaction score
12,943
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
No, you are the one who claims that there are no Republicans receiving his bribes. You are welcome to attempt to find any. A lack of response (finding an R who will take his bribe) will be taken as agreeing with my position.
I'm saying these aren't bribes at all. I'm also saying if anyone wants to claim he was selective in who got their fines paid based on Party, it is on them to prove. I did not say "there are no Republicans" getting their fines paid.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 

roguenuke

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
40,098
Reaction score
12,943
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Lwt me know when you want to answer.
Or you could explain the reason that offering free rides, free gym workouts, free foods/drinks/etc for voting is not illegal, while giving people more opportunities to vote by removing financial hindrances is.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 

AlphaOmega

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
19,882
Reaction score
3,780
The white privilege of... being a white billionaire with money paying off people's fines and court costs so they can vote? I would applaud anyone who does this regardless of their skin color or income level.

Lmao. You're desperate after all that tick tocking.

Can't even get the punctuation right.


------------------------

Thought had by person at the White House: If you can remember, man, woman, car, camera, TV, you are fit to lead a country and no one has anything to worry about
Not desperate at all. Tick tock ****ers....tick tock.
 

AlphaOmega

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
19,882
Reaction score
3,780
Or you could explain the reason that offering free rides, free gym workouts, free foods/drinks/etc for voting is not illegal, while giving people more opportunities to vote by removing financial hindrances is.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Or ....OR...you guys could read the law.
 

AlphaOmega

Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 31, 2018
Messages
19,882
Reaction score
3,780
We did. Nothing about paying fines for felons violates that law. They are not being asked to vote in exchange for their fines being paid.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
We have the words from bloomberg. He paid the fines so they could VOTE.
 

roguenuke

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
40,098
Reaction score
12,943
Location
Rolesville, NC
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
We have the words from bloomberg. He paid the fines so they could VOTE.
If they wanted to. There was no obligation for them to vote. They can all sit home and not cast any vote at all this election day.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 

W_Heisenberg

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
8,127
Reaction score
4,424
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Criminal Kingpin Bloomberg bribes 32,000 felons to vote for Biden.

Corruption is a MASSIVE part of the democrat campaign strategy.
There's a huge difference between paying to help someone become eligible to vote and paying someone to vote, and if you say people can't vote until their debts are paid and then object to their debts being paid, all you're really doing is confirming that your true purpose was to prevent voting rather than to collect the debt.
 

W_Heisenberg

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
8,127
Reaction score
4,424
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
This is totally illegal thus approved by Democrats.
There's a difference between paying to help someone become eligible to vote and paying someone to vote. And we also have to keep in mind the voters of Florida actually amended the constitution of Florida to allow ex-felons to vote via ballot initiative. What did the Republicans do? They changed the rules to make it harder for ex-felons to vote thereby going against the will of the voters of Florida. Bloomberg's actions are in line with the will of the people of Florida. It's only Republicans that are going against the will of the people of Florida. And they are doing this in two ways, first by contradicting the whole point of the ballot initiative, and second by making it harder for ex-felons to vote. The bottom is that Trump supporters and Republicans hate Democracy. Robertinfremont, why do you hate Democracy?
 

Vadinho

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
4,125
Reaction score
1,793
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
There's a difference between paying to help someone become eligible to vote and paying someone to vote. And we also have to keep in mind the voters of Florida actually amended the constitution of Florida to allow ex-felons to vote via ballot initiative. What did the Republicans do? They changed the rules to make it harder for ex-felons to vote thereby going against the will of the voters of Florida. Bloomberg's actions are in line with the will of the people of Florida. It's only Republicans that are going against the will of the people of Florida. And they are doing this in two ways, first by contradicting the whole point of the ballot initiative, and second by making it harder for ex-felons to vote. The bottom is that Trump supporters and Republicans hate Democracy. Robertinfremont, why do you hate Democracy?
Exactly. The reasons used by the GOP were simply dug up by some lawyers and PR folks to justify ignoring the will of the people who voted to give them back their voting rights. If the GOP thought it would help them if felons got the vote, they would be on the other side of this in two seconds.
 

Casper

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
24,252
Reaction score
9,704
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The voters of Florida decided to change the law, and allow the restoration of voting rights to those who are released.

It was Republican elected officials who deliberately chose to thwart the will of Florida's voters, and impose the additional requirement to repay court costs as yet another anti-democratic (and anti-Democrat) attempt to suppress votes that they don't think will favor them.

The demand to repay fees has nothing to do with justice or fairness. It's just another example of Republicans' crass voter suppression efforts.
Perfect reply to the whining here, Truth always outshines Lies and Foot-Stomping.(y) (y) (y)
 

Casper

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
24,252
Reaction score
9,704
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I know, change it back to it's original state I mean. It's up to the voters to put the pressure on politicians though, not mobs.
What Mobs?
 
Top Bottom