MLB pulls draft, All-Star game from Atlanta over voting rights

thisisinsane said:
No, but you guys don’t seem to grasp that the food/water thing is designed to keep the door shut on paying for votes. You really think it will stop at just food and water? Isn’t that the same for all people anyways? White or black can’t receive water/food in that manner? I fail to see how that affects minority voters but not “white” voters? Did I miss something? Are white people allowed to receive the water/food but black people aren’t? Do minorities have to show ID but white people don’t? That would be racist, I wouldn’t agree with that...
Click to expand...
Please cite where I've whined about the 'food/water' thing. I answered a question from WBP based upon the law in Colorado. This whole provision is ancillary to the other nonsense, IMO.
 
fish82 said:
I said they aren’t allowed to approach people in line…which is true, unless someone is chucking bottles from 100 feet away. ?‍♂️
Click to expand...
Sure they are.

Campaign workers are allowed outside of polling places to offer water, snacks, and other items to voters who are waiting to vote. These "comfort teams," however, may NOT campaign or wear any apparel or accessories bearing the name or image of a candidate, political party, or ballot measure if they operate within 100 feet of the polling place.

No need to chuck a bottle from 100 feet as long as you aren't wearing an "Uncle Joe" button. ?‍♂️
 
utsherman said:
Please cite where I've whined about the 'food/water' thing. I answered a question from WBP based upon the law in Colorado. This whole provision is ancillary to the other nonsense, IMO.
Click to expand...
Please cite where I said you “whined”, I simply responded as to why it’s not “just food and water”. And that is important because it opens the door for more. Kind of like “we just have to do this for a couple of weeks to flatten the curve.” Many people coalesced to that. Then it was “masks help”, “masks are the answer”, “heck, wear two masks”, “it’s unsafe to vote in person”, on and on and on, just how Johnny built his car “one piece at a time”.
 
thisisinsane said:
Please cite where I said you “whined”, I simply responded as to why it’s not “just food and water”. And that is important because it opens the door for more. Kind of like “we just have to do this for a couple of weeks to flatten the curve.” Many people coalesced to that. Then it was “masks help”, “masks are the answer”, “heck, wear two masks”, “it’s unsafe to vote in person”, on and on and on, just how Johnny built his car “one piece at a time”.
Click to expand...

Your slipperly slopes have a LOT of grease. :D

It's just food and water.

I agree with the law BTW, regards THAT aspect. I had some over-eager campaigner numbskull practically run up to me as I opened the door to the polling place. I hope my response left them a nightmare or two.
 
thisisinsane said:
Please cite where I said you “whined”, I simply responded as to why it’s not “just food and water”. And that is important because it opens the door for more. Kind of like “we just have to do this for a couple of weeks to flatten the curve.” Many people coalesced to that. Then it was “masks help”, “masks are the answer”, “heck, wear two masks”, “it’s unsafe to vote in person”, on and on and on, just how Johnny built his car “one piece at a time”.
Click to expand...
We clearly have a difference of opinion where self-awareness and common sense reasonability are concerned - seemingly based upon your examples around voting rights and COVID. And that's okay. I can't speak for those gullible enough to gobble it up. Most of this stuff just makes my eyes roll toward the back of my head more than anything else.
 
Prohibiting electioneering and handing out water bottles are 2 different things.

Many states have numerous electioneering prohibitions. Which is good. Not controversial. None prohibit handing out water bottles or sammiches.

If they were sincere you'd think they would at least pretend to address the root cause - exceedingly long wait times in certain populated areas. They didn't because they like it that way.
 
TigerPaw said:
Prohibiting electioneering and handing out water bottles are 2 different things.

Many states have numerous electioneering prohibitions. Which is good. Not controversial. None prohibit handing out water bottles or sammiches.

If they were sincere you'd think they would at least pretend to address the root cause - exceedingly long wait times in certain populated areas. They didn't because they like it that way.
Click to expand...
We know. Free food is important to you. Libs love free stuff.
 
TigerPaw said:
Prohibiting electioneering and handing out water bottles are 2 different things.

Many states have numerous electioneering prohibitions. Which is good. Not controversial. None prohibit handing out water bottles or sammiches.
Click to expand...

False. The vast majority prohibit approaching voters in line for any reason.

TigerPaw said:
If they were sincere you'd think they would at least pretend to address the root cause - exceedingly long wait times in certain populated areas. They didn't because they like it that way.
Click to expand...

Which falls squarely at the feet of the local election boards…not the “scary GQP.” ?‍♂️
 
D4fan said:
The only way we can defeat racism is to act in a total ban against white people. Once all white businesses are eliminated then the names of the southern states can be changed to proper African names and we can get back to normal.
Click to expand...
Have you noticed any correlation between liberal cities and racist police? I mean, it seems to me that many of the most liberal cities have the most racist police, like Los Angeles (Rodney King), New York (Eric Garner), Minneapolis (George Floyd). Maybe it is just the liberal cities that are really racist (that does seem to be where the highest concentrations of people complaining about racism are as well). :unsure:
 
TigerPaw said:
If they were sincere you'd think they would at least pretend to address the root cause - exceedingly long wait times in certain populated areas. They didn't because they like it that way.
Click to expand...
Actually, the legislation did address that:

The law also attempts to address long lines, demanding that counties with any precinct with over 2,000 voters in the last election or one that kept voters waiting for over an hour to vote must create an additional precinct or add more resources to reduce wait times.
Click to expand...

What Georgia's new voting law really does — 9 facts - CBS News
 
TigerPaw said:
Prohibiting electioneering and handing out water bottles are 2 different things.

Many states have numerous electioneering prohibitions. Which is good. Not controversial. None prohibit handing out water bottles or sammiches.

If they were sincere you'd think they would at least pretend to address the root cause - exceedingly long wait times in certain populated areas. They didn't because they like it that way.
Click to expand...
You prohibit things sometimes - not because you are concerned about that particular thing, but because of what that particular thing may be stretched into. We see this in a myriad of places, for example, the OHSAA trying to prevent recruiting. A law or rule draws a line. The speed limit is an example. Some people will drive at or below it. Many people will stretch it 5-10 over. Some will totally ignore it. The lines drawn are always debatable, but the reason for the line is obvious and reasonable.

In this case, the law does not prohibit Dems from providing water to voters. If they have a sincere concern for hydration during voting, my understanding is they can do that x feet from the polling place or they can give the water to voting precinct officials who can hand it out as needed. But, everyone knows that the purpose of this conniption fit has nothing to do with a concern for voter hydration. It is a lie to support a narrative - a made up "FACT" to support a false narrative, and they do not want to lose the ability to campaign at or near polling places. In addition, how many people standing in line are persuadable? The whole premise is absurd. What isn't absurd is that campaigning could be stretched to intimidation, so let's just keep partisans away from voters. Reasonable? Of course it is.

BTW, you still haven't described my narrative and that is noted. Do you have a logical response or is narrative all you can do? Asking for a friend.
 
TigerPaw said:
Many states have numerous electioneering prohibitions. Which is good. Not controversial. None prohibit handing out water bottles or sammiches.
Click to expand...
HOLD ON A SECOND HERE!!! I completely glossed over this very important point ...

WHERE are they handing out FREE Sammiches??? :oops:
 
fish82 said:
False. The vast majority prohibit approaching voters in line for any reason.
Click to expand...
Which is the way it should be. Of course, you'll have the creative whiny people saying "we were just giving them water". The reason it was put into the Bill is because it must be a problem. Quit cutting corners and looking for loopholes in everything and we wouldn't need stupid laws that should be common sense. This is more of an indictment of the disgusting campaigners than the government that had to make a dumb law for the unscrupulous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top