Court Cases About Voting Rights

[Wandering Monk]

Democracy Docket is a great site for staying up to date on attempts to suppress voting rights by right wing Republicans.

Here are some headlines:

Democracy Docket

The leading progressive platform for information, analysis and opinion about voting rights, elections and democracy.

www.democracydocket.com

 

[F1fan]

I watch the presentations Democracy Docket has on YouTube. These are stories that don't get a lot of press in the media, but are crucial to democracy in many states. It illustrates the differences between state laws that manage voting access.

 

[Stevicus]

I watch the presentations Democracy Docket has on YouTube. These are stories that don't get a lot of press in the media, but are crucial to democracy in many states. It illustrates the differences between state laws that manage voting access.

I think we've needed election reform in this country for a long time now, but all too often, I see proposals for reform rebuffed or rejected out of hand. Trouble is, people might want reform in theory, but they don't really want to rock the boat either.

Case in point: The differences in state laws that you mention. What seems to be happening is that we could be headed towards a kind of "cold war" among the states which would be controlled by one or the other party. For various reasons, the federal government appears hobbled and somewhat weakened through internal rot, which opens up holes and vulnerabilities that certain state-level demagogues (DeSantis, Abbott, Noem, as a few examples) can capitalize and take advantage of.

Another thing that seems noteworthy is that, lately, a lot of the key decisions about our democratic system have been made in the courts, by unelected judges and attorneys. And that's because the people elect crazy politicians who come up with really weird stuff which ultimately leads to lawsuits and more work for the courts.

I can understand the whole idea that democracy is better than the alternatives, but for Pete's sake, we sure do elect a lot of numbskulls to office. A government of the people, by the people, and for the people sounds fine, but it seems that a lot of "the people" have just gone off the deep end.

 

[wellwisher]

The Democrat party coddles criminals, such as the plague of shop lifting. The DNC justifies shop lifting under the perverted guise of social justice. It is not easy to trust the same people, in terms of being honest with voting, if shoplifting is called social justice. If they think shop lifting is fair and social justice, then if they can steal TV's, they can steal votes and this will be called justice. Their system is set up for corruption.

If you look at the rise in shoplifting, mostly in Democrats run cities, businesses are not allowed to confront the crooks and law enforcement does nothing, since they are told to stand down. This is the same direction the Democrats want the voter laws would go; support shop lifting votes and go after those who refuse to accept this. Until the victims of these crime mean more than the criminals, the RNC will have to become stricter with voter law enforcement. They believe in law and order, since you cannot have democracy, if the crooks are in control. Democracy is more than just voting or shop lifting voters. It also about property rights and civil rights which decrease with rising criminal behavior.

Pilot tests have been done to test if illegal aliens could be used to shop lift votes. Places like NYC, demonstrated that illegal immigrant crime will not be enforced, even when assaulting the police. If an illegal immigrant or gang of illegals were to shop lift votes, what is the worst that would happen if assaulting police gets a pass? Slap on the wrist? If 90% gets through and shop lifts votes, and this helps the cause and the crooks can gain or retain power, then they can change the rules, even more, to make cheating even easier; 100%.

The Democrats are complaining about their traditional methods of cheating being made harder to do. Their reaction is similar to how they react to business owners who catches a shop lifter and meter some justice. This upsets the criminals at the top, since it might discourage further cheating. They will try to make an example of the business owner; the victim. They intimidate in the proper direction of cheating.

I like the idea of ID requirements to vote. The argument I hear is this discriminates against minorities. If that was true, should we get rid of all ID, such as drivers license, since the same argument should apply? How about needing an ID to buy beer and cigarettes? That arguments has little to do with discrimination, or else we would extrapolate even to airports and the White House. The goal is not security, but to protect shop lifting votes. Voter ID laws pass in some states, and the DNC cries foul, as though being more honest, is more evil, than making cheating easier.

 

[Wandering Monk]

The Democrat party coddles criminals, such as the plague of shop lifting. The DNC justifies shop lifting under the perverted guise of social justice. It is not easy to trust the same people, in terms of being honest with voting, if shoplifting is called social justice. If they think shop lifting is fair and social justice, then if they can steal TV's, they can steal votes and this will be called justice. Their system is set up for corruption.

If you look at the rise in shoplifting, mostly in Democrats run cities, businesses are not allowed to confront the crooks and law enforcement does nothing, since they are told to stand down. This is the same direction the Democrats want the voter laws would go; support shop lifting votes and go after those who refuse to accept this. Until the victims of these crime mean more than the criminals, the RNC will have to become stricter with voter law enforcement. They believe in law and order, since you cannot have democracy, if the crooks are in control. Democracy is more than just voting or shop lifting voters. It also about property rights and civil rights which decrease with rising criminal behavior.

Pilot tests have been done to test if illegal aliens could be used to shop lift votes. Places like NYC, demonstrated that illegal immigrant crime will not be enforced, even when assaulting the police. If an illegal immigrant or gang of illegals were to shop lift votes, what is the worst that would happen if assaulting police gets a pass? Slap on the wrist? If 90% gets through and shop lifts votes, and this helps the cause and the crooks can gain or retain power, then they can change the rules, even more, to make cheating even easier; 100%.

The Democrats are complaining about their traditional methods of cheating being made harder to do. Their reaction is similar to how they react to business owners who catches a shop lifter and meter some justice. This upsets the criminals at the top, since it might discourage further cheating. They will try to make an example of the business owner; the victim. They intimidate in the proper direction of cheating.

I like the idea of ID requirements to vote. The argument I hear is this discriminates against minorities. If that was true, should we get rid of all ID, such as drivers license, since the same argument should apply? How about needing an ID to buy beer and cigarettes? That arguments has little to do with discrimination, or else we would extrapolate even to airports and the White House. The goal is not security, but to protect shop lifting votes. Voter ID laws pass in some states, and the DNC cries foul, as though being more honest, is more evil, than making cheating easier.

So shoplifting from stores results in shoplifting votes? Oh brudda.

Polling places have observers from ALL parties keeping an eye out for irregularities. Any candidate can challenge results.

For all the bold assertions of voter fraud by the MAGA crowd, they have never produced actual evidence of enough fraud to change the results. In fact, the Trump campaign commissioned TWO organizations to look for voter fraud after the 2020 general election: Simpatico Software Systems and Berkely Research Group. Additionally, Republicans in Arizona hired Cyber Ninjas to find voter fraud in Maricopa County. NOT ONE OF THESE INVESTIGATIONS FOUND FRAUD ENOUGH TO CHANGE THE ELECTION OUTCOME. In fact Cyber Ninjas actually found 200 some more votes for BIDEN!.

My last point: if Democrats are so damned good at stealing elections, why didn't they steal the House and Senate as well, eh?

 

[Revoltingest]

The Democrat party coddles criminals, such as the plague of shop lifting. The DNC justifies shop lifting under the perverted guise of social justice. It is not easy to trust the same people, in terms of being honest with voting, if shoplifting is called social justice. If they think shop lifting is fair and social justice, then if they can steal TV's, they can steal votes and this will be called justice. Their system is set up for corruption.

If you look at the rise in shoplifting, mostly in Democrats run cities, businesses are not allowed to confront the crooks and law enforcement does nothing, since they are told to stand down. This is the same direction the Democrats want the voter laws would go; support shop lifting votes and go after those who refuse to accept this. Until the victims of these crime mean more than the criminals, the RNC will have to become stricter with voter law enforcement. They believe in law and order, since you cannot have democracy, if the crooks are in control. Democracy is more than just voting or shop lifting voters. It also about property rights and civil rights which decrease with rising criminal behavior.

Pilot tests have been done to test if illegal aliens could be used to shop lift votes. Places like NYC, demonstrated that illegal immigrant crime will not be enforced, even when assaulting the police. If an illegal immigrant or gang of illegals were to shop lift votes, what is the worst that would happen if assaulting police gets a pass? Slap on the wrist? If 90% gets through and shop lifts votes, and this helps the cause and the crooks can gain or retain power, then they can change the rules, even more, to make cheating even easier; 100%.

The Democrats are complaining about their traditional methods of cheating being made harder to do. Their reaction is similar to how they react to business owners who catches a shop lifter and meter some justice. This upsets the criminals at the top, since it might discourage further cheating. They will try to make an example of the business owner; the victim. They intimidate in the proper direction of cheating.

I like the idea of ID requirements to vote. The argument I hear is this discriminates against minorities. If that was true, should we get rid of all ID, such as drivers license, since the same argument should apply? How about needing an ID to buy beer and cigarettes? That arguments has little to do with discrimination, or else we would extrapolate even to airports and the White House. The goal is not security, but to protect shop lifting votes. Voter ID laws pass in some states, and the DNC cries foul, as though being more honest, is more evil, than making cheating easier.

I favor identification for voting.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Democracy Docket is a great site for staying up to date on attempts to suppress voting rights by right wing Republicans.

Here are some headlines:

View attachment 91472

Democracy Docket

The leading progressive platform for information, analysis and opinion about voting rights, elections and democracy.

www.democracydocket.com

Massively left leaning biased site. What does one expect it to say? *yawn*

 

[SkepticThinker]

The Democrat party coddles criminals, such as the plague of shop lifting. The DNC justifies shop lifting under the perverted guise of social justice. It is not easy to trust the same people, in terms of being honest with voting, if shoplifting is called social justice. If they think shop lifting is fair and social justice, then if they can steal TV's, they can steal votes and this will be called justice. Their system is set up for corruption.

If you look at the rise in shoplifting, mostly in Democrats run cities, businesses are not allowed to confront the crooks and law enforcement does nothing, since they are told to stand down. This is the same direction the Democrats want the voter laws would go; support shop lifting votes and go after those who refuse to accept this. Until the victims of these crime mean more than the criminals, the RNC will have to become stricter with voter law enforcement. They believe in law and order, since you cannot have democracy, if the crooks are in control. Democracy is more than just voting or shop lifting voters. It also about property rights and civil rights which decrease with rising criminal behavior.

Pilot tests have been done to test if illegal aliens could be used to shop lift votes. Places like NYC, demonstrated that illegal immigrant crime will not be enforced, even when assaulting the police. If an illegal immigrant or gang of illegals were to shop lift votes, what is the worst that would happen if assaulting police gets a pass? Slap on the wrist? If 90% gets through and shop lifts votes, and this helps the cause and the crooks can gain or retain power, then they can change the rules, even more, to make cheating even easier; 100%.

The Democrats are complaining about their traditional methods of cheating being made harder to do. Their reaction is similar to how they react to business owners who catches a shop lifter and meter some justice. This upsets the criminals at the top, since it might discourage further cheating. They will try to make an example of the business owner; the victim. They intimidate in the proper direction of cheating.

I like the idea of ID requirements to vote. The argument I hear is this discriminates against minorities. If that was true, should we get rid of all ID, such as drivers license, since the same argument should apply? How about needing an ID to buy beer and cigarettes? That arguments has little to do with discrimination, or else we would extrapolate even to airports and the White House. The goal is not security, but to protect shop lifting votes. Voter ID laws pass in some states, and the DNC cries foul, as though being more honest, is more evil, than making cheating easier.

"There are three primary problems with the current retail theft narrative, which require policymakers’ and the public’s attention.

The first is a big one: Existing data on retail theft is highly unreliable and imprecise. First, “retail theft” is not an independent category reported by most police departments. Moreover, the terms increasingly used by industry and government officials—“organized retail crime” or “organized retail theft”—have no consistent legal definition across states and often encompass broader crimes such as cargo and employee theft (which are already associated with more severe sanctions). Even the California Retailers Association has acknowledged a lack of comprehensive and reliable data on retail theft.

The second is that shoplifting in major cities did not actually spike in the ways that media has reported. According to the Council on Criminal Justice, only 24 cities consistently reported shoplifting data over the past five years, and of those cities, shoplifting decreased in 17. Moreover, looking across all 24 cities, the prevalence of shoplifting in 2023 remained below 2018 and 2019 levels. Even San Francisco—which has often been cited as having a “shoplifting epidemic”—saw a 5% decline in shoplifting between 2019 and 2023.

Finally, corporate claims are not holding up to scrutiny, and are being used to close stores that are essential assets for many communities. For instance, the CEO of Walgreens has acknowledged that perhaps retailers “cried too much last year” and overspent on security measures that failed to reflect real needs. And although the National Retail Federation said that “organized retail crime” drove nearly half of all inventory losses in 2021, the group later retracted its claim; it now no longer attaches a dollar amount to money that is lost due to retail theft. And in memorable cases, major retailers have chosen to maintain stores with much higher rates of crime, while closing others."

Retail theft in US cities: Separating fact from fiction

www.brookings.edu