Ohio Early Voting Will No Longer Take Place On Sundays, Weekday Evenings

[emperus]

Post 136 maybe?

It's probably best to look at posts in context.

Post 135

Vast right wing conspiracy for sure!

Post 136

This is all part and parcel of a bigger strategy. It's actually been written about a lot. Why do you think the GOP won less votes then the Dems last election and still picked up seats?

[URL="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-republicans-rig-the-game-20131111"]http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-republicans-rig-the-game-20131111[/URL]

I responded to Doc's sarcastic statement of whether this was some some vast right wing conspiracy. Wasn't planning on having a discussion about gerrymandering.

But does it seem like the convo tends to shifts to areas where you guys can blame the Democrats as well?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

You brought up gerrymandering as if your links somehow prove there's a vast right wing conspiracy. Then you wonder how this thread diverged into gerrymandering...a topic you brought up? Really?

 

[Matt1970]

Not only did you bring up gerrymandering, you actually thought the GOP picked up seats in the last election. Get back to us when that sinks in, if it ever does.

 

[emperus]

Not only did you bring up gerrymandering, you actually thought the GOP picked up seats in the last election. Get back to us when that sinks in, if it ever does.

I posted the link to article and 4 subsequent articles talking all about the 2012 election. It was clearly an as I meant to say the held on the House, even though they probably should have lost it (I.e. they picked up seats that should have been lost).

But this is your typical argumentative style, pick a point that is easily a mistake (like correcting people's grammar) and hammer away at that. The thread then devolves into personal attacks. Look at the last few pages; you, Terry, and boomerang play your parts quite well. That usually signifies you lack an ability to make any greater logical point.

Why don't you try to discuss the topic of hand. It just seems ur too vapid to have a thought Fox News hasn't put there. And when that thought meets the harsh reality of the truth. You guys break down into ad hominem attacks as quickly as your arguments do.

 

[boomerang]

And in Illinois they abuse gerrymandering like a red-headed stepchild. And Dems have the audacity to be outraged when it's used against them? WTF? Here's one the the districts they drew.

I give them an A+ for creativity though.

Excellent example! I'm truly glad there are people like yourself that are willing to go through the extra work to prove a point. Unfortunately, it's like water off a duck's back to the left. A true does not compute moment. They look at that illustration and it might as well be an eye test for colorblindness because their agenda is the righteous and just agenda. They know this because they were taught this. There are no rules for the righteous and the just.

 

[boomerang]

Why don't you try to discuss the topic of hand.

What is the topic at hand?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I posted the link to article and 4 subsequent articles talking all about the 2012 election. It was clearly an as I meant to say the held on the House, even though they probably should have lost it (I.e. they picked up seats that should have been lost).

But this is your typical argumentative style, pick a point that is easily a mistake (like correcting people's grammar) and hammer away at that. The thread then devolves into personal attacks. Look at the last few pages; you, Terry, and boomerang play your parts quite well. That usually signifies you lack an ability to make any greater logical point.

Why don't you try to discuss the topic of hand. It just seems ur too vapid to have a thought Fox News hasn't put there. And when that thought meets the harsh reality of the truth. You guys break down into ad hominem attacks as quickly as your arguments do.

You continue to regurgitate "poor liberals got screwed by Republican gerrymandering" bullshit. Did you not read (or understand) the article I posted that explains exactly what actually happened in 2012? Or do you really give a shit about the truth? Do you even care that Democrats commonly do this as well and have actively fought against anti-gerrymandering legislation efforts? Democrats have no high ground to stand on this issue...unless standing on a mountain of hypocrisy somehow counts for something.

 

[Nintendesert]

What is the topic at hand?

That Voting Day should be a National holiday. :thumbsup:

 

[Jhhnn]

Excellent example! I'm truly glad there are people like yourself that are willing to go through the extra work to prove a point. Unfortunately, it's like water off a duck's back to the left. A true does not compute moment. They look at that illustration and it might as well be an eye test for colorblindness because their agenda is the righteous and just agenda. They know this because they were taught this. There are no rules for the righteous and the just.

Yeh, confronted with nationwide gerrymandering by Repubs wherever they have the opportunity, cite Illinois, invoke false equivalence.

I just knew you had it in you. Truly.

"They're just as bad" is an extremely lame excuse, particularly when it's not true.

 

[boomerang]

That Voting Day should be a National holiday. :thumbsup:

Could be, or maybe that we need 50 national holidays in a row so people in Ohio can vote? We get it done in one day here and we share a border with Ohio. Something's different there. I know, we need a bi-partisan commission to determine what. Yeah, that's the ticket...

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Excellent example! I'm truly glad there are people like yourself that are willing to go through the extra work to prove a point. Unfortunately, it's like water off a duck's back to the left. A true does not compute moment. They look at that illustration and it might as well be an eye test for colorblindness because their agenda is the righteous and just agenda. They know this because they were taught this. There are no rules for the righteous and the just.

That map is a perfect example of the extremes Democrats will go to in order to effectively disenfranchise as many Republican voters as possible. Then they throw a tantrum when a State follows the recommendation of a bipartisan commission to reduce the number of in-person early voting from 35 days to 29 days which is still way, way more than most states offer.

 

[TerryMathews]

Why don't you try to discuss the topic of hand. It just seems ur too vapid to have a thought Fox News hasn't put there. And when that thought meets the harsh reality of the truth. You guys break down into ad hominem attacks as quickly as your arguments do.

I'm not sure what else you would want me to say regarding this topic. Could you elaborate? I made a pretty comprehensive statement of my position.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I'm not sure what else you would want me to say regarding this topic. Could you elaborate? I made a pretty comprehensive statement of my position.

I love how he personally insults you and then complains about ad hominem attacks. That guy is a piece of work.

 

[boomerang]

That map is a perfect example of the extremes Democrats will go to in order to effectively disenfranchise as many Republican voters as possible. Then they throw a tantrum when a State follows the recommendation of a bipartisan commission to reduce the number of in-person early voting from 35 days to 29 days which is still way, way more than most states offer.

I've said it numerous times before. They think like children. Their thought processes are stuck in adolescence. They want what they want and they want it now! They don't care how much it costs. They don't care about the consequences, in fact they never even consider that their could be repercussions. And when things go to shit, they blame somebody else.

When you hear a crash in the living room and you rush in to see that the lamp is broken and your kids are standing there, you ask who broke the lamp. As kids are prone to do, they both answer not me or each point their fingers at the other. At that point your kids are Democrats. If you teach them not to lie, that people make mistakes and that there are consequences to their actions, and they get it, you just created a Republican.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

I've said it numerous times before. They think like children. Their thought processes are stuck in adolescence. They want what they want and they want it now! They don't care how much it costs. They don't care about the consequences, in fact they never even consider that their could be repercussions. And when things go to shit, they blame somebody else.

When you hear a crash in the living room and you rush in to see that the lamp is broken and your kids are standing there, you ask who broke the lamp. As kids are prone to do, they both answer not me or each point their fingers at the other. At that point your kids are Democrats. If you teach them not to lie, that people make mistakes and that there are consequences to their actions, and they get it, you just created a Republican.

I'm personally very disappointed with Republicans and think they're just as bad as Democrats. However, I generally argue the Republican side in order to get liberals to think and be somewhat reasonable/objective...which I might say is no mean feat for anybody. Occasionally I have to eat crow...which is going to happen as I get my facts wrong at times...but I'm OK with that as I hope I'm not deluding myself when I say I'm more interested in learning than not being wrong.

 

[Bowfinger]

Here's an interesting and fair (imo) article regarding gerrymandering . What's interesting is that other "studies" regarding recent gerrymandering don't take into account the huge value of incumbency...which essentially negates the apparent pro-Republican shift that occurred between 2010 and 2012. It appears that the 'Great Gerrymander of 2012' is more myth than fact.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...edistricting-didnt-win-republicans-the-house/

For what it's worth, I agree this looks to be a well-researched and balanced look at the actual impact of gerrymandering. They make a persuasive case that it has been a much smaller factor than many Democrats have claimed. I think it is worth reading and considering.

That said, I still prefer to see nationwide use of non-partisan redistricting, perhaps similar to California's (though I have no expertise in the details of their process). This could eliminate gerrymandering as a factor entirely and would improve confidence that our process is fair and honest.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

For what it's worth, I agree this looks to be a well-researched and balanced look at the actual impact of gerrymandering. They make a persuasive case that it has been a much smaller factor than many Democrats have claimed. I think it is worth reading and considering.

That said, I still prefer to see nationwide use of non-partisan redistricting, perhaps similar to California's (though I have no expertise in the details of their process). This could eliminate gerrymandering as a factor entirely and would improve confidence that our process is fair and honest.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[emperus]

You continue to regurgitate "poor liberals got screwed by Republican gerrymandering" bullshit. Did you not read (or understand) the article I posted that explains exactly what actually happened in 2012? Or do you really give a shit about the truth? Do you even care that Democrats commonly do this as well and have actively fought against anti-gerrymandering legislation efforts? Democrats have no high ground to stand on this issue...unless standing on a mountain of hypocrisy somehow counts for something.

It seems you are determined to redefine the discussion to a point you think you have a chance on. So let's do this in parts and I've only been interested in arguing the 1st part as it relates closely to this thread and why I think we see this new Ohio voting law come out now. If you want to argue the 2nd part you should probably start a new thread.

Part 1.)
So for the final time. I pointed out the Rolling Stone article to point out an overarching GOP strategy tied to disenfranchising votes. Whether you believed that the Gerry Mandering worked in 2012 doesn't mean that there isn't an overarching Republican Strategy, which at it's core is voter disenfranchisement, having seen all the new voting rights bills spring up in Republican controlled states over the last 8 years. Again you seem not to want to discuss that but find it easier to discuss Florida 2000 and now gerrymandering 2012.


Part 2.)
I didn't want to get into a full blown discussion about this because I'm sure it's been discussed subsequent to the 2102 election.

a.)You basically found a single source that aligned with your views and thus you believe that source presents the absolute truth. Basically, you've written a research paper with only one source. I don't even think you could get away that in highschool.

b.) Drilling down deeper into your one source, they aren't saying that the gerrymandering didn't have any effect, they are arguing that the effect wasn't large enough to change the house. So again, every source admits that there was an effect, the issue is quantifying the effect. That's obvious as people wouldn't GerryMander if there wasn't an effect, right?

c.) Now to ur source. I read it when it came out at the time. I respected the article but believed they made some assumptions and didn't account for other things. Like, gerrymandering not only made some Republican seats easier to hold but it also eliminated some Democrat seats all together, forcing two incumbent Democrats at times to campaign in a combined district.

d.) Lastly, like all Republican causes, there are a lot of studies done, but you guys pick the one study amidst the many and argue that that singularly is the truth representing reality. Normal people look at all the studies and try to form a picture based on ALL the information they have. Cause after cause after cause it's like a Republican truth. I have a gut feeling about something, let me find what aligns with that gut feeling and argue it as it is the truth sent down by GOD himself. Lol.

 

[Jhhnn]

Here's an interesting and fair (imo) article regarding gerrymandering . What's interesting is that other "studies" regarding recent gerrymandering don't take into account the huge value of incumbency...which essentially negates the apparent pro-Republican shift that occurred between 2010 and 2012. It appears that the 'Great Gerrymander of 2012' is more myth than fact.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...edistricting-didnt-win-republicans-the-house/

So, uhh, gerrymandering didn't work as well as the perps had hoped?

Can you cite more apologisms?

 

[emperus]

Could be, or maybe that we need 50 national holidays in a row so people in Ohio can vote? We get it done in one day here and we share a border with Ohio. Something's different there. I know, we need a bi-partisan commission to determine what. Yeah, that's the ticket...

So, seeing that you get it done in one day and Ohio can't doesn't lead you to wonder why? Or do you start and then give up because it challenges everything you believe?

Why do you think that in some Ohio districts people are waiting hours and hours to vote? And generally those people waiting are minority voters? Do you think minority voters are generally slower at voting? Or could it be seeing that it happens election after election that there is a strategy to underman polling stations in this district to disenfranchise votes?

Is it that complex an issue?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Part 1 - Both parties gerrymander and seek to disenfranchise voters not aligned with their parties. The fact that you want to only demonize Republicans for this makes you appear to be a huge hypocrite and a partisan hack imo. I mentioned other areas involving real voter disenfranchisement to give context. I also brought up how other states approach early in-person voting to show you that 29 days is not even close to being a voter disenfranchisement issue. Yet you hang onto this as if it's just another manifestation of an evil Republican conspiracy in spite of the fact that the recommendation came from a bipartisan commission. You seem determined to be outraged.

Part 2 - I found a source. I didn't hail it as absolute truth as you state (another example of incredibly twisted thinking). The article brings up a very valid point regarding the value of incumbency that was not factored in the sources you cited. If you have information which downplays the significance of incumbency, now is the time to present that information and stop with your nonsense that I'm somehow cherry-picking. Otherwise, this is all you...believing what you want to believe and disregarding the rest.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

So, uhh, gerrymandering didn't work as well as the perps had hoped?

Can you cite more apologisms?

I'm not justifying it, I'm opposed to it. Is this really that hard to understand?

 

[Thebobo]

That Voting Day should be a National holiday. :thumbsup:

yes that way we can have VOTING DAYS SALES!

 

[emperus]

Part 1 - Both parties gerrymander and seek to disenfranchise voters not aligned with their parties. The fact that you want to only demonize Republicans for this makes you appear to be a huge hypocrite and a partisan hack imo. I mentioned other areas involving real voter disenfranchisement to give context. I also brought up how other states approach early in-person voting to show you that 29 days is not even close to being a voter disenfranchisement issue. Yet you hang onto this as if it's just another manifestation of an evil Republican conspiracy in spite of the fact that the recommendation came from a bipartisan commission. You seem determined to be outraged.

Part 2 - I found a source. I didn't hail it as absolute truth as you state (another example of incredibly twisted thinking). The article brings up a very valid point regarding the value of incumbency that was not factored in the sources you cited. If you have information which downplays the significance of incumbency, now is the time to present that information and stop with your nonsense that I'm somehow cherry-picking. Otherwise, this is all you...believing what you want to believe and disregarding the rest.

I give up. I write something, and it's like your not even reading it, because you are clearly not responding to it. Just start a new thread about gerrymandering so you can make all the false equivalencies you want in peace. That seems like the daily talking point.

 

[Matt1970]

I posted the link to article and 4 subsequent articles talking all about the 2012 election. It was clearly an as I meant to say the held on the House, even though they probably should have lost it (I.e. they picked up seats that should have been lost).

But this is your typical argumentative style, pick a point that is easily a mistake (like correcting people's grammar) and hammer away at that. The thread then devolves into personal attacks. Look at the last few pages; you, Terry, and boomerang play your parts quite well. That usually signifies you lack an ability to make any greater logical point.

Why don't you try to discuss the topic of hand. It just seems ur too vapid to have a thought Fox News hasn't put there. And when that thought meets the harsh reality of the truth. You guys break down into ad hominem attacks as quickly as your arguments do.

Personal attacks not found, at least not from me and we didn't pick the topic at hand, you did. A 1% difference in the popular vote for the house will not change 50 seats when it took a 7% difference to change 63 seats. And of course, accuse me of being a Fox News parrot when I only have basic cable that doesn't even include Fox News. And this thread seems to be proof the truth is something you are having a hard time accepting.