Options

How can we survive without the D and R?

124

Posts

  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    mrdobalina wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    mrdobalina wrote: »
    In order to reach that conclusion you have to state that black voters are incapable of voting based on merit and issues (in a LOCAL election, nonetheless) and are beholden to seeing a party affiliation label in order to exercise their rights.

    That's such a stretch, such an insult and such a....

    I mean, you wrote that by removing the "D", black people will have difficulties voting for their candidates. That strikes me as patronizingly racist.

    It would be true of most localities. I'm sure that the Democrats would love to remove partisan signifiers on ballots in Republican districts and I'm sure that if they proposed this you would object to it.

    Do you know the name, party affiliation and positions of every candidate running for dog-catcher in your district? Do you expect your neighbor to know this? So why to you so strongly expect black people in bumfuck SC to know this that to imply otherwise would be deeply offensive, racist, patronizing, etc?

    You're attributing an opinion to me that I don't hold.

    I couldn't care less if party affiliation is included at that level. I couldn't care less if it happened in a conservative area. All of that though is beside the point. This city made that decision. They did it in a way that doesn't seem to be fraudulent, racist, or designed to disenfranchise voters.

    The DOJ decided to come in and tell them that you don't know what's good for you, so you better listen to us.

    It does not matter if the referendum was intended to disinfranchise voters. All that matters is that it would have that effect.

    And telling people that they don't know what's good for them and they need to do things in a better way is specifically the perview of election commisions and federal oversight. You might be embarrassed for the South because they require it, but there you go. It's embarrassing to require federal oversight.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Saammiel wrote: »
    And this is not the reason ballot initiatives are stupid. Ballot initiatives are stupid when they allow people to make spending decisions with a simple majority and contain no provisions on how to actually pay for the spending.

    SO your average citizen is not capable of making responsible spending decisions on a ballot but are capable of making fair, responsible and judicious decisions concerning the conduct of elections in referenda?

    This makes no sense. If anything the sanctity of elections are a much more sacred, sensitive and non-correcting mechanism than spending or budget issues.

    I am not stating people are incapable of making governmental spending decisions. They do that all the time with school bond referenda.

    However in California initiatives are proposed with large amounts of spending attached and no method of funding. On top of that the legislative body requires a supermajority to pass spending bills. So basically I am saying ballots are not horrible, California is.

    Saammiel on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    Yall wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Yall wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »

    Would it be racist for a federal court to override a voting referendum in a white community because the court held that the referendum did not serve the purposes of democracy?

    Because the clear answer is "no".

    If the decision were to based on race and the voting preferences and relations to the race of the electorate, then possibly. Why can't you concede that as being a possiblity?

    Wait - are you really saying that simply acknowledging that black people in the South vote overwhelmingly Democratic is "racist"? Are you saying that it's "racist" that black people in the South will organize within the Democratic party for local elections?

    The court held that the effect of the law would be to make it difficult for black people in this district to continue voting for "their" candidates. This is, in fact, true, as is obvious to everyone here. In fact, it is precisely because this is true that you'd like to see the referendum upheld.

    I am really trying to get at what, specifically, you consider racist here. It is not clear to me, but it seems as though you are trying to get offended for someone else. It would be awfully chivalric if it weren't transparently self-serving.

    Perhaps if you spent more time considering what I've said and less time trying to insult me it would be more clear.

    But as a sucker for an argument, I guess I'll continue to explain and defend my assertion that the decision itself was racist, but I'll deal with that in a moment.

    Personal BS not germane to the topic :
    I'm not "trying to get offended". I saw something that I perceived as being racist. Regardless of whether I'm right or wrong in this instance, do you really have a problem with the fact that I find something racist offensive? I can assure you when I see something that my wee little mind perceives as unfair, it offends me. You could say it offends my sensibilities or whatever. Another way to phrase it might be "I don't like that because I believe it to be unfair". Would that be more to your liking?

    Apparently you are having difficulty understanding that, or based upon part of my posts are assuming something about me (like that I'm republican or racist - I'm neither) and it is causing you to view my opinion as one of ignorance or racism.
    Back on target. As stated earlier, I believe that this perceived necessary protection (where there is no reason to believe it is needed, as evidenced by the NAACP's comments) is in and of itself racist. It's tantamount to being told - "no, no without our intervention you poor black folk won't be able to decide things on your own".

    What you seem to believe is that any consideration based on race is racism. What I am telling you is that the system of overseeing southern elections is precisely based upon consideration of race because of historical injustices and the basic and proven inability of Southern localities to get their shit together vis a vis elections.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Saammiel wrote: »
    And this is not the reason ballot initiatives are stupid. Ballot initiatives are stupid when they allow people to make spending decisions with a simple majority and contain no provisions on how to actually pay for the spending.

    SO your average citizen is not capable of making responsible spending decisions on a ballot but are capable of making fair, responsible and judicious decisions concerning the conduct of elections in referenda?

    This makes no sense. If anything the sanctity of elections are a much more sacred, sensitive and non-correcting mechanism than spending or budget issues.

    I am not stating people are incapable of making governmental spending decisions. They do that all the time with school bond referenda.

    However in California initiatives are proposed with large amounts of spending attached and no method of funding. On top of that the legislative body requires a supermajority to pass spending bills. So basically I am saying ballots are not horrible, California is.

    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Do places even have dogcatchers anymore?

    Fencingsax on
  • Options
    SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).

    Saammiel on
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    … this is how that racist Eric Holder defines Racism..

    THIS… is racism… his name is Dr. Kamau Kambon, at the time of this video he was a professor at NC State Univ. Its my understanding shortly after this speech he was fired. However, he is a member of the New Black Panther Party… the same group of thugs that harassed voters in Philadelphia, to wit Eric Holder dropped all charges. Now who is Racist, Mr. Holder? Those that are blatant about it? Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts? My answer is BOTH!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN5StQAr7n0
    Yeah!

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    KanamitKanamit Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).
    Aside from the huge legislative districts that you mention, the main reasons the California state legislature is so dysfunctional is because of constraints put upon them via referenda.

    Kanamit on
  • Options
    YallYall Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    What you seem to believe is that any consideration based on race is racism. What I am telling you is that the system of overseeing southern elections is precisely based upon consideration of race because of historical injustices and the basic and proven inability of Southern localities to get their shit together vis a vis elections.

    A gross oversimplification, and one not supported by statements in previous posts (specifically the "possibly" in response to your query about the same decision in a primarily white area).

    I'm not saying race shouldn't be considered ever, nor that any decision involving race is necessarily racist in it's nature.

    I'm saying this one is, in my opinion.

    edit: for tree trimming

    Yall on
  • Options
    mrdobalinamrdobalina Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    … this is how that racist Eric Holder defines Racism..

    THIS… is racism… his name is Dr. Kamau Kambon, at the time of this video he was a professor at NC State Univ. Its my understanding shortly after this speech he was fired. However, he is a member of the New Black Panther Party… the same group of thugs that harassed voters in Philadelphia, to wit Eric Holder dropped all charges. Now who is Racist, Mr. Holder? Those that are blatant about it? Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts? My answer is BOTH!
    Yeah!

    Who exactly are you debating here?

    mrdobalina on
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    mrdobalina wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    … this is how that racist Eric Holder defines Racism..

    THIS… is racism… his name is Dr. Kamau Kambon, at the time of this video he was a professor at NC State Univ. Its my understanding shortly after this speech he was fired. However, he is a member of the New Black Panther Party… the same group of thugs that harassed voters in Philadelphia, to wit Eric Holder dropped all charges. Now who is Racist, Mr. Holder? Those that are blatant about it? Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts? My answer is BOTH!
    Yeah!

    Who exactly are you debating here?

    I'm discoursing with Will.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    mrdobalina wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    … this is how that racist Eric Holder defines Racism..

    THIS… is racism… his name is Dr. Kamau Kambon, at the time of this video he was a professor at NC State Univ. Its my understanding shortly after this speech he was fired. However, he is a member of the New Black Panther Party… the same group of thugs that harassed voters in Philadelphia, to wit Eric Holder dropped all charges. Now who is Racist, Mr. Holder? Those that are blatant about it? Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts? My answer is BOTH!
    Yeah!

    Who exactly are you debating here?

    I'm discoursing with Will.

    Well, you're more mocking the right wing internets, which is always good times.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    It's not really an internet thing. In my experience, conservatives and southerners only want to talk about racism to point to how "Affirmative Action is the REAL racism," "Democrats are the REAL racists," "the north is where the REAL racists live," or how "black people are really the REAL racists."

    It's not surprise to me this news-story elicits reactions like the one I posted. I didn't go fishing for it, it was on top of the first page I went to, staring me in the face.

    Elki on
    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    The real racism is that some shithole town in South Carolina still has party ID labels on their ballots even though there was a local referendum!

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    It's not really an internet thing. In my experience, conservatives and southerners only want to talk about racism to point to how "Affirmative Action is the REAL racism," "Democrats are the REAL racists," "the north is where the REAL racists live," or how "black people are really the REAL racists."

    It's not surprise to me this news-story elicits reactions like the one I posted. I didn't go fishing for it, it was on top of the first page I went to, staring me in the face.

    Complaints about racism are far more problematic than actual racism. Duh.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    I will say though that in my experience there is a lot of crazy among even relatively mainstream black people when it comes to political opinions. I have come to expect the paranoia and crazy when talking to white talk-radio listeners but for some reason it never fails to shock me when otherwise normal-seeming black person starts going off on some conspiracy theory.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).

    The rule that they can't raise taxes but are obligated to spend on referendums is what's fucked California

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    The rule that they can't raise taxes but are obligated to spend on referendums is what's fucked California

    And this rule was brought to us by...

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    It's not really an internet thing. In my experience, conservatives and southerners only want to talk about racism to point to how "Affirmative Action is the REAL racism," "Democrats are the REAL racists," "the north is where the REAL racists live," or how "black people are really the REAL racists."

    It's not surprise to me this news-story elicits reactions like the one I posted. I didn't go fishing for it, it was on top of the first page I went to, staring me in the face.

    Complaints about racism are far more problematic than actual racism. Duh.

    Honestly, even actual racism isn't all that problematic when compared to structural racism. Which always gets overlooked in favour of judging someone's heart of hearts. All the while ignoring endemic poverty due to centuries worth of governmental policy continually robbing people of trans-generational wealth and economic opportunity. There's a reason that the South Side of Chicago is cut up by highways and doesn't have good transit access to downtown unlike the North and West sides, and arguing over whether or not ___ is a racist doesn't do a damn thing about it. But it does put asses in seats.

    moniker on
  • Options
    YallYall Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    mrdobalina wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    … this is how that racist Eric Holder defines Racism..

    THIS… is racism… his name is Dr. Kamau Kambon, at the time of this video he was a professor at NC State Univ. Its my understanding shortly after this speech he was fired. However, he is a member of the New Black Panther Party… the same group of thugs that harassed voters in Philadelphia, to wit Eric Holder dropped all charges. Now who is Racist, Mr. Holder? Those that are blatant about it? Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts? My answer is BOTH!
    Yeah!

    Who exactly are you debating here?

    I'm discoursing with Will.

    Well, you're more mocking the right wing internets, which is always good times.

    Yeah - god forbid you spend a calorie mocking the guy in the video. :P

    Yall on
  • Options
    Irond WillIrond Will WARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!! Cambridge. MAModerator Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    Yall wrote: »
    Yeah - god forbid you spend a calorie mocking the guy in the video. :P

    Let's be honest - the guy is clearly mentally ill. I don't think you'd find anyone here to defend him.

    On the other hand, Glenn Beck is nearly as unstable as crazy dreadlock man and he has a whole fuckin army of supporters.

    Irond Will on
    Wqdwp8l.png
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Not actually a mod. Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    Elki wrote: »
    Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts?

    This is the strangest metaphor I've seen all week.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Elki wrote: »
    Or those that hide behind decisions concocted in the Australian Petting Zoos known as liberal courts?

    This is the strangest metaphor I've seen all week.

    You haven't been posting much, that's why.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    juice for jesusjuice for jesus Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Kangaroo courts.

    juice for jesus on
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Not actually a mod. Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).

    The rule that they can't raise taxes but are obligated to spend on referendums is what's fucked California

    To be fair, I'd wager that the people of most states would vote themselves into a similar clusterfuck if you gave them the opportunity.

    Which is why you should never give them the opportunity.

    En masse, people are fucking dumb.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Not actually a mod. Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    Kangaroo courts.

    Ohhhhh.

    ...

    Now I want to pet a kangaroo.

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Kangaroo courts.

    Ohhhhh.

    ...

    Now I want to pet a kangaroo.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_FVD0BR2Mc

    moniker on
  • Options
    SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »

    To be fair, I'd wager that the people of most states would vote themselves into a similar clusterfuck if you gave them the opportunity.

    Which is why you should never give them the opportunity.

    En masse, people are fucking dumb.

    Yeah but most states are smart enough to make it a little bit harder to fuck everything up. I mean contrast Nebraska state law;
    The legislature can repeal and amend initiative
    statutes by a simple majority. There is also a statutory restriction on the use
    of the initiative for issues that interfere with the Legislature's prerogative to
    raise the necessary revenue for the state and its political subdivisions. In
    addition, the same measure may not be placed on the ballot more often
    than once in three years.

    With California state law;
    The legislature cannot amend or repeal an
    initiative, unless it is permitted by the initiative.

    I mean, we have ballot initiatives too and in some ways it is even easier to get one going (we need a greater percent of the population to get that ball started but I'd imagine getting 76,000 people in Nebraska to sign a petition is easier than roughly half a million in California, and we get more time). And yet we have yet to commit slow motion financial suicide by amending in all sorts of crazy shit.

    I mean, the blame probably belongs to a lot of people spread across long assed periods of time, starting with the creation of the California constitution. I don't think Nebraskans are some special breed of person or anything. I also don't think referenda are inherently evil. They can be, if the rules surrounding them are assinine. I just don't think it is a foregone conclusion.

    Saammiel on
  • Options
    SenjutsuSenjutsu thot enthusiast Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    This is interesting. I've always thought it was kind of odd that American political parties extended down to the civic/municipal level. Elects below the provincial level in Canada tend to involve candidates not running under the auspices of a provincial or federal party, simply because the concerns of the local position are almost always wholly disconnected from the provincial or federal party platform.

    Off hand I can only think of two municipalities where the mayoral races have involved party-affiliated mayoral candidates, Toronto and Montreal. And the parties they were affiliated with were largely municipality-specific.

    Senjutsu on
  • Options
    SaammielSaammiel Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    This is interesting. I've always thought it was kind of odd that American political parties extended down to the civic/municipal level. Elects below the provincial level in Canada tend to involve candidates not running under the auspices of a provincial or federal party, simply because the concerns of the local position are almost always wholly disconnected from the provincial or federal party platform.

    Off hand I can only think of two municipalities where the mayoral races have involved party-affiliated mayoral candidates, Toronto and Montreal. And the parties they were affiliated with were largely municipality-specific.

    It is a hodge podge. In NC where this whole situation coccured, almost all municipalities are non-partisan. It is pretty common really, just not above the level of an individual county or city.

    Saammiel on
  • Options
    YallYall Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Yall wrote: »
    Yeah - god forbid you spend a calorie mocking the guy in the video. :P

    Let's be honest - the guy is clearly mentally ill. I don't think you'd find anyone here to defend him.

    On the other hand, Glenn Beck is nearly as unstable as crazy dreadlock man and he has a whole fuckin army of supporters.

    On this we agree.

    Yall on
  • Options
    Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Senjutsu wrote: »
    Off hand I can only think of two municipalities where the mayoral races have involved party-affiliated mayoral candidates, Toronto and Montreal. And the parties they were affiliated with were largely municipality-specific.
    Vancouver too, but again, the parties were unique to the city, not branches of any provincial or federal party. And when these municipal "parties" do exist, they're very informal.

    Andrew_Jay on
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).

    The rule that they can't raise taxes but are obligated to spend on referendums is what's fucked California

    To be fair, I'd wager that the people of most states would vote themselves into a similar clusterfuck if you gave them the opportunity.

    Which is why you should never give them the opportunity.

    En masse, people are fucking dumb.

    To quote Tommy Lee Jones: A person is smart. People are dumb panicky idiots

    override367 on
  • Options
    SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).

    The rule that they can't raise taxes but are obligated to spend on referendums is what's fucked California

    To be fair, I'd wager that the people of most states would vote themselves into a similar clusterfuck if you gave them the opportunity.

    Which is why you should never give them the opportunity.

    En masse, people are fucking dumb.

    To quote Tommy Lee Jones: A person is smart. People are dumb panicky idiots

    Glenn Beck has already proven Agent Kay wrong: A person is plenty capable of being as dumb and panicky as any group of people. And sadly, they frequently are. Especially when they're alone in a voting booth.

    Synthesis on
  • Options
    AtomikaAtomika Live fast and get fucked or whatever Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    So what's the ultimate ruling of the Carolina labeling decision? That not letting people know what the candidates' race and party is somehow disenfranchising? I though we fought for years to keep those kind of things off of forms?

    And mainstream black America is chock full of conspiracy theory and bad logic, as much or more so than Evangelicals, saying nothing of homophobia. I'm curious as to how "making sure black voters elect black politicians" isn't defrauding the system, for everyone.

    Atomika on
  • Options
    TalonSETalonSE Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Irond Will wrote: »
    The real racism is that some shithole town in South Carolina still has party ID labels on their ballots even though there was a local referendum!
    You know, you'd have a lot more luck using "lol everyone that disagrees with me is ignorant" if you weren't repeatedly confusing North Carolina, where this story took place, with South Carolina, where it didn't. I know there's likely little difference between the two states in your mind, but really, little facts like these do matter.

    TalonSE on
  • Options
    kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    I can't find any record of the phrasing of this initiative, it's vote date, or the results that are not from a news article. Does anyone have a statistical source, like a board of elections with a record of the item in question?

    I'm curious, since I cannot find more details beyond "the vote happened in 2008" and "it passed". And the DoJ is pretty solid on it's reading of the VRA. The city can do this if they get a district court to agree to their reasons why this would not result in a negative effect on a black voter's ability to vote for the person they would normally desire to vote for with the party ID present. In other words, you can do it if the end result would be no different than the usual. Expanding information provided is fine. Reducing information provided screams "prove this isn't an attempt at disenfranchisement"

    kildy on
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Not actually a mod. Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    edited October 2009
    kildy wrote: »
    The city can do this if they get a district court to agree to their reasons why this would not result in a negative effect on a black voter's ability to vote for the person they would normally desire to vote for with the party ID present. In other words, you can do it if the end result would be no different than the usual. Expanding information provided is fine. Reducing information provided screams "prove this isn't an attempt at disenfranchisement"

    I get what you're saying, but at the same time this sort of reading sounds like "you can only do it if it would have no effect". And if it would have no effect, then why bother doing it?

    ElJeffe on
    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    kildykildy Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    kildy wrote: »
    The city can do this if they get a district court to agree to their reasons why this would not result in a negative effect on a black voter's ability to vote for the person they would normally desire to vote for with the party ID present. In other words, you can do it if the end result would be no different than the usual. Expanding information provided is fine. Reducing information provided screams "prove this isn't an attempt at disenfranchisement"

    I get what you're saying, but at the same time this sort of reading sounds like "you can only do it if it would have no effect". And if it would have no effect, then why bother doing it?

    I'm just referring to the DoJ's opinion on the matter. Which pretty much is "the VRA says you can do it if it's either got no effect or a beneficial effect on minorities, and you can prove it", and then snickers to itself in that it's burden of evidence is pretty freaking high. So essentially it's "you can't do anything but change the color of the ballot paper", but with a theoretical out if you can prove that whatever you want would only help minority voters.

    It's a really broad reading, but it's also pretty much the only way to give the VRA teeth without making every possible voting activity require senate intervention.

    kildy on
  • Options
    override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited October 2009
    Synthesis wrote: »
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Saammiel wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    I think you and I would agree that California has been brought to its knees because of its referenda. I do not see this as a problem with just the spending-related referenda. I see this as a basic problem with direct democracy and legislation-through-referendum. If your average voter is ignorant enough to destroy the finances of their state, then the average voter is not to be trusted with tinkering with the conduct of elections.

    Referendums are a part of the problem in California, but they certainly aren't the only culprit. Legislative bodies have made messes out of the finances of a large swathe of states, so I don't think it is particularly compelling to lay the blame at referendum in general. Sure, California is the most fucked of the fucked, but that is because it is California, land of terrible governance at all levels. I mean they have 'local' representatives that cover a population ten times the size of the comparitive body in Minnesota. (My mind is still reeling that their representatives in the state House number almost the same as their congressional reps).

    The rule that they can't raise taxes but are obligated to spend on referendums is what's fucked California

    To be fair, I'd wager that the people of most states would vote themselves into a similar clusterfuck if you gave them the opportunity.

    Which is why you should never give them the opportunity.

    En masse, people are fucking dumb.

    To quote Tommy Lee Jones: A person is smart. People are dumb panicky idiots

    Glenn Beck has already proven Agent Kay wrong: A person is plenty capable of being as dumb and panicky as any group of people. And sadly, they frequently are. Especially when they're alone in a voting booth.

    Well Beck actually destroys your brain, and I don't think Kay was talking about the retarded

    override367 on
Sign In or Register to comment.