SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Guardian reports:
Georgia secretary of state and gubernatorial candidate Brian Kemp improperly purged more than 340,000 voters from the state's registration rolls, an investigation charges.
Greg Palast, a journalist and the director of the Palast Investigative Fund, said an analysis he commissioned found 340,134 voters were removed from the rolls on the grounds that they had moved - but they actually still live at the address where they are registered.
"Their registration is cancelled. Not pending, not inactive – cancelled. If they show up to vote on 6 November, they will not be allowed to vote. That's wrong," Palast told reporters on a call on Friday. "We can prove they're still there. They should be allowed to vote."
[...] Palast and the Georgia Coalition for the People's Agenda filed a lawsuit against Kemp on Friday to force him to release additional records related to the state's removal of voters.
Under Georgia procedures, registered voters who have not cast ballots for three years are sent a notice asking them to confirm they still live at their address. If they don't return it, they are marked inactive. If they don't vote for two more general elections after that, they are removed from the rolls.
(Score: 1) by Mainframe Bloke on Wednesday October 24 2018, @03:06AM (4 children)
I was listening to a radio show yesterday, the main point of which is that discussion has degenerated into brick-throwing from both sides. Instead of people seeing the point of a discussion as being to reach some sort of mutually-agreed outcome, they now see it as a form of entertainment where the more extreme the argument the better the "crowd value".
I found myself nodding my head in agreement. I was doing the same when I read your penultimate paragraph.
I despair at the state of critical thinking these days: people (myself included sometimes when in a bad mood) can't seem to see beyond their own backyard. The world's complexity is at a point where we need some kind of "reset", perhaps a "Universal Bill of Human Rights" that extends the US one (and perhaps changes some of its more antique entries, but that's another discussion).
The sense of a common ground, where we recognise that all humans have some things in common, is sorely lacking these days. One such thing, for example, is that we are all native Earthlings...now what does that mean and where does it lead?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Whoever on Wednesday October 24 2018, @06:18AM (3 children)
Ah, the old "they are both as bad as each other" fallacy.
No, one side is not like the other. One side worships the ultra-wealthy. One side ignores science. One side is actively racist. One side works to suppress votes. Etc..
There is no "common ground" with nutjobs. That has been the failing of the Democratic party: to fail to realize that "bipartisanship" has mostly meant: "give the Republicans what they want in exchange for some minor and unimportant concessions".
The Democrats are far from perfect, but to think that there is no difference between the parties is the real lunacy.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday October 24 2018, @03:06PM (2 children)
and has abandoned the dream of Martin Luther King.
I had to fix that for you. THAT side flourishes on identity politics. They simply CANNOT not notice who is black, who is gay, who is female, who is Muslim. THAT side caters to every single identity group on earth - EXCEPT for white male hetero Christians. THAT side is openly hateful of any such person. Well - such a person might be acceptable, if they happen to be self-loathing hetero white male Christians. Those self-loathing persons can easily be manipulated, like any other useful idiot.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Wednesday October 24 2018, @08:39PM (1 child)
Is this a drinking game? Do we all have to take a drink now that you wrote the words "identity politics"?
I propose a new form of bingo. For each day, we pick one of the dog whistles that the alt-right use and see how many times each comes up. I'm going to start with "identity politics".
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 25 2018, @12:24AM
The whole point of "dog whistles" is that only one side can hear them. Everybody is crystal clear on what "identity politics" means - or should be, by now.
Example of a dog whistle: "I support self defence." - really means: "I am pro-gun." That way politicians can try to cozy up to one side without alienating the other.
Given that the whole "identity is important" schtick came from the democrats, who apparently just retooled their dixiecrat heritage to appeal to the other side, I don't really see a dog whistle here. The democrats are saying: "We CARE about you!" while the republicans are saying: "They care about bribing narrow slices of the electorate, one at a time."
Of course, given that the republicans are pretty firm on bribing slices themselves, it's kind of weird.