SCOTUS about to kill Voting Rights Act

[Dark_Ansem]

According to me, those chosen not to vote, voted neutral. Projecting that everyone not voting is against Trump is wishful thinking. Xzi already mentioned the historic low of his popularity. There have been coups where the dictator was more popular... So why not in the USA?

Not related to what I said. my point is that saying somehow Dump got 50% of us populace to vote for him is a lie.

 

[mikefor20]

Everything this administration says is a lie or a dog whistle to other bigoted fascists. That's pretty much it. They lie, misdirect and steal. No way 50% of America voted for someone to steal from the poor and destroy the country. Trump loves stupid people and they love him but 50%? I still don't buy it. So many single issue voters and complete idiots in America .. but 50%? Everyone has to see he's a fascist! He loves dictators. He says smart people don't like him and they line up to prove how dumb they are? I don't believe it. The election was paid for. THAT I believe. He said fElon did it. That i believe. He thanked Putin for"helping", that i believe. But 50%?! I can't believe it.

Is half of America really that stupid? How could it be?

 

[gamefan5]

Is half of America really that stupid? How could it be?

... Please don't make us answer that question. There's already a long list of things supporting that possiblity.

 

[SeltzerMist]

Is half of America really that stupid? How could it be?

IIRC it's only 20% of Americans who actually voted for Trump. I have no issue stating that 20% of the US population is absolutely stupid

 

[gnmmarechal]

IIRC it's only 20% of Americans who actually voted for Trump. I have no issue stating that 20% of the US population is absolutely stupid

The fact that so many others *let it happen* because "both candidates are bad" or "I don't care", and therefore did not vote at all, suggests more than just 20%. They're just as responsible for the shitshow.

 

[titan_tim]

Just disgusting. It's estimated that the red states that this would affect already have new maps drawn out to give them around an extra 19 seats. They're just licking their lips and salivating at the idea of disenfranchising their own constituents in their quest to keep power in the midterms.

 

[RAHelllord]

Not related to what I said. my point is that saying somehow Dump got 50% of us populace to vote for him is a lie.

Pretty sure the guy mixed up "popular vote" with "population", which, you know, easy mistake to make if your education came from the US.

 

[SeltzerMist]

The fact that so many others *let it happen* because "both candidates are bad" or "I don't care", and therefore did not vote at all, suggests more than just 20%. They're just as responsible for the shitshow.

A lot of people are simply apolitical which is it's own issue

 

[titan_tim]

A lot of people are simply apolitical which is it's own issue

It really didn't matter that much in the past. Both parties did what they could to keep things mostly going forward in their own ways while following the rule of law. That isn't the case anymore.

 

[gnmmarechal]

A lot of people are simply apolitical which is it's own issue

There's no such thing as being "apolitical", and political disengagement is by no means a neutral act.

 

[The Catboy]

The Catboy needs context, what's going on?

 

[titan_tim]

The Catboy needs context, what's going on?

In a nutshell, the SCOTUS is looking to gut the civil rights voting act.

When they do, it'll make it much easier for states to disenfranchise minority voters. Instead of the federal government stepping in to say that a new law is discriminatory or unconstitutional, it'll be left to individuals or civil rights groups to sue.

The bigger problem with that is that the law would be enacted even if the people sue. So they could make a horrible law right before an election, the people will sue to have it removed, the election completes, and even if the GOP run government loses in court, the damage is done.

So for example, a week before an election, the state decides that you MUST have photo ID, lots of people wouldn't be able to vote. Even though this topic has been litigated countless times and lost, they'd still do it last second, cause tons of people to not be able to vote, the lose the case in court. Do you think they'd hold another election after that? Hell no! They get exactly what they want with zero repercussions.

 

[Vixi]

It really didn't matter that much in the past. Both parties did what they could to keep things mostly going forward in their own ways while following the rule of law. That isn't the case anymore.

The 2008 global financial crisis was the result of Clinton administration deregulating banks.

 

[titan_tim]

The 2008 global financial crisis was the result of Clinton administration deregulating banks.

The deregulation was horrible, but it was also fully bipartisan. The GOP would never turn down an opportunity to remove regulations.

The subprime loan issue was still happening before the deregulation ever happened. But yes, it definitely allowed it to happen on a larger scale.

 

[DiscostewSM]

Enjoy your favorite moments of "According to the DHS" on 12 cassette tapes, with such hits like "the Espstein files are on my desk" and who can forget "writing on bullet casings"....

 

[chrisrlink]

What the hell are you talking about?

war is drinking that kool aid again i guess

 

[Moe87]

If US Supreme Court strike Section 2 of VRA down, so long term GOP majority is very unlikely if democrats take more aggressive with redistricting.

Also, it will destroy the relationship with between GOP and minority voters (especially blacks), so they know that judges were appointed under GOP Presidents that strike Section 2 down, so it means very overwhelmingly numbers of minority would vote for democrats in long term unless GOP opt to reconcile with democrats to make Section 2 as enforceable and end the partisan gerrymandering. I do think that aggressive redistricting by democrats and nearly complete loss of black voters for GOP are going to force GOP to consider the reconcile with democrats to end the crisis.

It is going to be a ugly picture of GOP to make them looks like Discrimination Party or Racist Party.

It is dangerous precedent if US Supreme Court went with routine, also GOP need some black voters to win the election in tossup states.

If the house is republican controlled and if senate is democrat controlled, so it is obviously that partisan gerrymandering has effect on congressional maps, especially if democrats decide to not become aggressive with redistricting.

Even without democrat's aggressive redistricting, GOP gerrymandering will become less and less effect within 10-15 years as demographic changes further, so politicians will get annoyed with obstruction that destabilize the country and they could be done with gerrymandering for good.

 

[Reualed]

If US Supreme Court strike Section 2 of VRA down, so long term GOP majority is very unlikely if democrats take more aggressive with redistricting.

Also, it will destroy the relationship with between GOP and minority voters (especially blacks), so they know that judges were appointed under GOP Presidents that strike Section 2 down, so it means very overwhelmingly numbers of minority would vote for democrats in long term unless GOP opt to reconcile with democrats to make Section 2 as enforceable and end the partisan gerrymandering. I do think that aggressive redistricting by democrats and nearly complete loss of black voters for GOP are going to force GOP to consider the reconcile with democrats to end the crisis.

It is going to be a ugly picture of GOP to make them looks like Discrimination Party or Racist Party.

It is dangerous precedent if US Supreme Court went with routine, also GOP need some black voters to win the election in tossup states.

If the house is republican controlled and if senate is democrat controlled, so it is obviously that partisan gerrymandering has effect on congressional maps, especially if democrats decide to not become aggressive with redistricting.

Even without democrat's aggressive redistricting, GOP gerrymandering will become less and less effect within 10-15 years as demographic changes further, so politicians will get annoyed with obstruction that destabilize the country and they could be done with gerrymandering for good.

Well this totally didn't happen /s
Oh wait. Here we go again, just like the Iran war, we called exactly what would happen, and it was right. Shocker.

 

[Dark_Ansem]

Let's hope it blows up in their face like it did in georgia

 

[Moe87]

Well this totally didn't happen /s
Oh wait. Here we go again, just like the Iran war, we called exactly what would happen, and it was right. Shocker.

Also, US Supreme Court opt to shot the map down in Louisiana instead of all states that surprised me.

That is going to fuel the confusion and very messy legal battles from state to state.

Of course, US Supreme Court would become a full of hypocrisy.

Now, Alabama want to redraw the map but it is already too late.

New picture would be democrat controlled president and senate with republican control the house due to gerrymandering with house seats - it lead to complete gridlock.