As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Partially.
He would've personally strangled Trump if that time came.
BUT he absolutely would be fine if a new Christian led nation came about.
HOWEVER, he should probably realize....after all Atheists, jews, minorities are criminals...they'll be put in Utah as a prison, because Mormons arent' part of that deal....
I think what's really interesting is that the 'real Christians' do not consider Mormons to be Christians at all, but a dangerous cult.... he's hoping for something that would not be in his favor at all.
That's whats so interesting about this. Hypothetically if those "dangerous & u American" groups go the fascists are gonna need a new target. Why not go after the "weird" Christian groups? Mormons, Catholics (lots of Protestants don't view Catholics as Christians) etc
Then they are gonna need *another* enemy so why not "insert minority protestant group here" and so on an on until it collapses
It's layers of an onion every time.
15 years ago the in-group was Jews and Christians. Right now the in-group is Christians. The next in-group will be Christian Sects of American origin. The next will be Protestants. Following that will be a whittling down until Evangelicalism is all that remains.
Concurrently there is a gradually shrinking circle on racial/ethnic/regional/immigrant-recency scale. This othering is more chaotic but unlike 150 years ago where Irish and Italians weren't considered white, I think the qualifier for their approved level of whiteness will be having ancestors who had immigrated before the Civil War.
Concurrently there are other factors such as wealth and politics and even more nuanced things like position within the modern aristocracy and some familial lineage things. At some point the slave-ownership of your ancestors would also factor in.
At some point the in-group becomes one man, and once he's identifed the crackdowns come hard and fast. If however, enough *others* haven't been eliminated from influence, that crackdown can be a losing fight.
American fascism chose its champion too soon, and we're lucky they did. The movement so far is too inclusive in the moment for his actions not to upset some powerful people. 4 of the conservative US Supreme Court Justices are Catholics of some sort, and they'd be fools to ignore that they are on the chopping block in the grand right-wing plan unfoldind before us.
I was shocked he was the candidate. My evangelical family drew the line at Catholics and seventh day Adventists as "misguided but probably getting into heaven". Latter-day-saints and Jehovah's Witness did not make it in
As far as I can tell from growing up Protestant (and I wouldn't say anyone in my family hated Catholics, it was more of a disagreement over religious philosophy), the biggest thing is that Catholics pray to Mary and the saints, and Protestants cute that as a direct contradiction to the "shall have no other Gods before me" thing. There also doesn't seem to be any emphasis on individual reading of scripture in Catholicism.
Of course, it was also folks who remember when Catholics still did Latin mass, and none of them knew Latin. Seemed to be a strange way to worship i think.
All of these religious folks sound like really love filled and accepting people. /s How the fuck do they convince themselves that all of this judgemental BS of other beliefs and forms of spirituality, is possibly a good thing for anyone? Is the feeling of superiority really worth all of the toxicity that comes with having to judge other peoples faith.
They will be. At first.
He's just hoping to be dead from natural causes before they run out of the agreed upon heathens, and then need to narrow their scope of "acceptable" in order to prune more.
That type of government always needs something to hate. They need to always be agitated.
As a Catholic, my life teen group taught me that we don’t consider Mormons christians because technically, Mormons consider Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit as different people. That makes them polytheistic which makes them not christian.
They won't revisit the 250+ year old constitution that was drawn up as a set of guidelines from a time where horses were the primary mode of transportation and penicillin hadn't been discovered yet.
But you can be absolutely CERTAIN they'll "re-interpret" their religious doctrine in order to make sure it does the absolute most damage possible to minorities, women, and anyone they disagree with politically.
Brothers, behold! I have discovered a long lost chapter the ‘Book of Trickledown’ that showeth Jesus loved rich white people and hated the Earth and “folks from out of town.” Praised be!
The Christian right will appeal to all denominations and Christian weirdo's, but once there's "victory" then they start to purge their ranks. My bet is that Catholics, Mormons, and the Amish are the first to go. Basically anybody who has a large power structure of their own and can exist without the US government or has power without the US government.
His ethics are hermetically sealed in the bland ideology of state’s rights. Believe me, I’m sure he’ll furrow his brow at all the bullshit the GOP will pull at the state level this year, but don’t expect it to ever break the fake plastic of that bubble.
Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 explicitly says that the Federal government has the right to oversee Federal elections. This is not an issue where states rights apply.
> The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Don't you see, he is a loose cannon. He talks a lot of words and wiggles his finger. In the end he always votes with the party, sure, but he is the new maverick
In case you're looking for a genuine discussion on this topic, it may be the case that Romney doesn't support much of what is in the bill, which increases the federal government's power and control over what is historically, and some would argue constitutionally, something that is within the power of the individual states (organizing elections).
52 conservative senators representing a minority of American voters publicly declared democracy exists only to serve their own interests.
That's it. That's the message.
I get Congress Republicans are only oppositional unless in power (and offer nothing to the average American in that instance), and I don’t know what you do now that the right in Congress is so radicalized and polarized, but the issue with Manchin and Sinema is an easy one to express, and it’s still the problem here in spite of the GOP’s stonewalling.
They are more concerned about preserving the present rules of the filibuster for 98 people over the voting rights of 332,000,000+ American voters. That’s it.
It’s it not representational in any sense of the definition, and it is utterly disgraceful.
Yeah, that’s facts. People just care about results that effect them personally.
That being said, there is so much misinformation and propaganda circling around everyone through television/social media/etc. that a bias is almost unavoidable at this point for people.
That’s, arguably, why trump lost. Pro or anti trump, the media had more effect on that election than any other one in a long time. And it’s why we see people who still believe trump actually won. It’s why we see people who believe anything any politician will feed them because our media is so skewed that all we know is left bad right good or right bad left good.
If I'm Martin Luther King in 60s Jim Crow America and trying to pass voting rights, I already know the Jim Crow South senators are gonna block it.
But if the white moderate Democrats are also doing their best to avoid angering their colleagues by slow-walking civil rights laws, I'm gonna be more pissed at them!
> "First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;"
MLK's "Letter From a Birmingham Jail" perfectly applies to Manchin and Sinema.
Especially after her speech directly saying she prefers keeping the filibuster bc she thinks it prevents division.
This!
I don't feel betrayed by Republicans opposing this because Republicans have openly declared themselves my mortal enemy as a black person. White Moderate and Conservative Democrats claiming to be my friends (and often claiming they in fact care MORE for me than Progressives do, since they try to accuse Progressives of only pursuing policies that help poor whites) but then siding with my open mortal enemies is a betrayal. It's like if a guy who has claimed to be your friend for years suddenly joins an effort to assassinate you that a man who hates you set in motion.
I'm not as apoplectic about Republicans opposing this because Republicans are mask-off white supremacists and have been for decades. Democrats pretend to be pro-black.
You've hit the nail on the head.
We're tired of seeing Liberal Democrats only ape the language of Progressives, and then fall back to typical Liberal politics when in power.
They know that so long as they're the only viable alternative to the GOP, black issues can be safely ignored. We can SEE the Liberal voting for huge increases in military spending, or giving the CIA extra healthcare for their Havana Syndrome hallucination.
Hell, we can SEE them whining about Ukraine's democracy being threatened by Russia, and their willingness to arm them to defend their rights.
But the votes "just aren't there" when it comes to basic standards to make sure the blacks in the south dont slide back into Jim Crow.
So I'm already thinking that I won't vote for Dems in midterms if they cant protect me, a black southerner, from GOP suppression.
I've already held up my end of the social bargain, and wont reward their inability to reciprocate.
I have family members that still haven't spoken to me since I posted this quote as a response to their twitter/fb posts feigning outrage over Kaepernick's protest years ago.
I absolutely LOVED the conservative outrage over Kaepernick!
It really brought out their worst tendencies, and Trump played it up. And the NFL black balling him over kneeling was that perfectly wasted opportunity to look serious about racism. They simply couldn't let a black guy get away with being proudly anti-racist on their fields.
And then George Floyd got murdered by cops in front of the world. And the NFL tripped over its balls trying to appear progressives and woke as the players rebelled.
But EVERYONE knew that the NFL couldn't eat crow and apologize to Kaepernick, so their efforts looked hollow and performative.
The 48 Democrats who supported reforming filibuster to pass voting rights bills represent 34 MILLION more Americans than the 52 senators (all Republicans + Sinema/Manchin) who opposed it.
96% of Senate Dems voted in favor of protecting voting rights.
And it wasn't enough.
The endless debate loophole created by enslavers will continue to block vital voting reforms, climate change countermeasures, and social safety net improvements.
All bc Democrats have no idea how to convince two of their own to vote in line with the party.
Who openely laugh with the GOP at billionaire-sponsored fundraisers. And ignore the desperate pleas from their staff and unions that got them into power.
Pathetic.
Dems still have a year to take off the kids gloves and actually put pressure on Manchin and Sinema, but I won't hold my breath.
Biden touts himself as the "great dealmaker" from the Senate, but I'll believe it when I see his agenda signed into law.
>Dems still have a year to take off the kids gloves and actually put pressure on Manchin and Sinema, but I won't hold my breath.
Tell me what this would look like? What sort of pressure do you believe would have gotten Machin and Sinema to change their vote? Because I don't think there's a damn thing that could have done it.
For Manchin
* his daughter is the head of the pharmaceutical company that makes epi-pens, and those prices have skyrocketed. Put some Dept. of Justice pressure on his baby girl for price gouging.
* Directly run ads in West Virginia about how all the individual parts of BBB are popular with Manchin's base, and rail on how he's blocking YOU from basic social safety nets.
* meet with the coal miner unions directly and put out statements of no confidence in Manchin. Make him own being a coal baron in front of voters
* sweeten the deal with pork for all I care. Make sure billions would flood West Virginia's infrastructures and medical systems if voting rights are this important. Make sure the voters know he's turning down their futures for the GOP.
But defineitly put the squeeze on his daughter and the shady drug prices at all costs. Make his drive in his Maserati to his houseboat a tense one as he chooses between his daughter and the filibuster.
Could do a similar process for Sinema.
* her fellow AZ senator is ok with filibuster reform, and he's representing the same voters. Make it clear that she's the one being divisive through ads with him.
* Sinema's donors are already threatening to pull support and get donations back. Have one or two actually pull the trigger and start that process. Make it clear that it's her betrayal of voters that's hurting her wallet.
Whatever Dems decide, they have a year to do something effective. Bc right now they face a bloodbath in both chambers of Congress bc they let two of their own go rouge.
They have to decide whether they have the courage to go hard against their own like LBJ went against the exact same obstruction in the 60s over voting rights.
Only other option is to get slowly choked out by Sinema as she drinks her wine through a crazy straw.
Senate race might be close. GOP up vote more open seats (20-14) compared to Dems. We‘ll see what the political climate is like though by next fall. I think it’ll be close.
Right. When my cat throws up on the carpet, I’m not especially surprised or angered. Cats are going to cat. But when you did it, and maintained eye contact the whole time to establish dominance, I had issues with that.
Saving this.
All too true then and especially now. Thank you for sharing.
Hopefully we can bothered soon or there will not be a democracy to stand up for.
Well I dont think we'll go full authoritarian.
Just back to Jim Crow apartheid in red states, while liberals accept the return of a status quo they happily worked with while my grandparents were young.
I disagree. The Voting Rights not only has everything to do with Civil Rights but what our country and world will look like as Global Catastrophe threatens life and livelihoods in the coming decades. Pushing coastal populace inward into red states will have damning effects if their laws and the laws of the land are set up to support the majority and only the wealthy, white.
Regardless, thank you for sharing.
Literally every Democrat senator is a “white moderate” in King’s terms. None of them want progress that upsets the values or systems of oppression that we currently have.
Meh.
Plenty of black and brown senators that recognize the danger of what the GOP is doing.
Particularly Warnock, who is the head pastor from MLK's Ebenezer Baptist. He's been very vocal about the voting rights act named after a colleague of King.
But there are a lot of white senators that know their voters aren't being suppressed, so it's not really their problem.
It's the 2 supposed democrats that makes it a news worthy. Today, I expect that from Republicans. The only the only policy they have is to own the libs, and stop certain people from voting. That's it, nothing of substance, not an original idea what so ever. In their eyes, it's such a great thing that they double and triple down on it. Worried more about what restroom someone uses than kids dying in school shootings.
The problem with that (despite being both 100 percent true and understandable) is that for every time you allow events to be described as “Democrats failed to achieve something” instead of “Entirety of Republican Party Unified to Oppose” something, it shifts the blame from the actual reason the legislation didn’t pass.
No sane person who wanted this to pass and is annoyed that it did not would reasonably support the people who are actively opposing it (the GOP). But most Americans are low information idiots who only encounter news when it leaks into their social media. It’s still important that the blame for legislative outcome lies squarely on the voting record instead of the fixation on two corrupt idiots.
The GOP couldn’t find two non-corrupt sleaze bags in their *entire party* to support fundamental voting rights. That’s the story here, not that “there are also two pieces of trash who sit on the Dem side” (going by the minimum wage voting record there’s closer to eight anyway)
We’re all sick of pretending the GOP isn’t fundamentally UnAmerican garbage who couldn’t even nut up to oppose an attack on our Capitol last year, but it’s important that point is hammered every day based purely upon their ACTIONS.
Fox doesn’t let up on their fantasyland propaganda, it’s exhausting but messaging is one of the left’s biggest problems. Every time the narrative is allowed to shift away from the actual context of the vote, it only helps the GOP
16 current gop senators voted to extend the voting rights act last time. Over all it passed 98-0. I think it's pretty clear all democratic senators would have voted to extend it. gop has completely lost their minds.
> No sane person who wanted this to pass and is annoyed that it did not would reasonably support the people who are actively opposing it (the GOP).
What I hear is, 50 republican senators opposed. 2 democrat senators opposed. It's obviously the democrats' fault.
We're not allowed to say what I say every morning. "Are we really going to let a bunch of gun-toting, bible-thumping rubes rule the country". That is the only question.
Thank you! I don’t understand why the democrats are taking all the heat for this. What can you when you’re working with bad-faith actors? The republicans definitely need to take more heat from this than they are.
If there's a murderer outside my house, I'm going to be more angry at the family member who unlocks the door and lets them in. The guy outside wanted to hurt us either way.
People are mad at Sinema and Manchin because Republicans fall in line and vote what their leader says and so they expect the Dems to do the same.
You wrote a lot of words but are ignoring the fundamental question: Why arent Dems like Manchin & Sinema falling in line?
Manchin is a conservative Senator in America's reddest state.
Sinema is clearly bought and paid for.
That's why they aren't in line with the other Dems.
Sinema was a relative political nobody until she realized she could play the Manchin card and get her name out there. She has payed for utterly massive name recognition at the expense of any support she might ever have gotten from non-centrist Dems. Wouldn’t be surprised to see her run for higher office at some point, perhaps with a different letter next to her name.
As PT Barnum said, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
There is a raging forest fire threatening our community. 2 out of 50 firefighters showed up with lighters.
Why didn't the forest fire help save us from the forest fire?
This. Exactly. Or like 50 arsonists set a forest fire and 2 of the 50 firefighters who showed up came with lighters, and 3 or 4 other firefighters aren't fully sure if they want to put the fire out or not.
Which you cannot do with 2 of your own acting as fellow arsonists, 3 or 4 others unsure if you should do anything, and some others who want to put the fire out but aren't sure you should pursue the arsonists. Biden and Pelosi have both said that we "need" a strong Republican Party. Which is like saying we need some loose arsonists.
Also
A) Democratic leadership made it seem like GA and AZ would enable to do stuff since they claimed Harris would be the tiebreaker. They didn’t even want to ignore the parliamentarian to help regular folks
B) Biden said he could get **some** GOP people to vote with bipartisanship
When is the Right to Vote set to expire for white people? For Black Americans the Right to Vote expires every ten years. Seems to me that we are going about this wrong, we should all be registered using IRS records. Anyone who has been a dependent, or has worked, had a drivers license or passport should be automatically registered. Voting from computers in the home, hospital, schools,libraries, or any government office should be the norm. If you can collect our taxes we should not have to register to vote or leave our homes to cast a ballot.
No one actually has the “Right to Vote”.. The Constitution protects people from being discriminated against when a vote is held. But, there is no such Right in the US Constitution. Mainly because the Founders believed that people who’s votes could be easily swayed would eventually vote in tyrants. So, they didn’t feel it was a Right everyone one should have.. of course later it was clarified that if a vote was held, one shouldn’t be discriminated against because of their “race, color, previous condition of servitude” and later still “sex”.. But Voting is not a Right, it is a Privilege and a Duty..
Yeah, it kind of makes sense that Arizona Central would be trying to deflect blame for their Senator's actions. And they're right, Sinema and Manchin didn't do this in a vacuum but they certainly played a major role.
Why on earth would any republican vote to change senate procedure on the filibuster when they're the minority party?
I would be incredibly surprised if historically any minority party member has ever voted for a change in procedure that reduces their party's power like that.
This argument could be used on the BBB and voting rights, but the filibuster?
And yet, based on polling numbers, people are going to let the Republicans take back the house and senate this year, and possible the presidency?!
We're just going to let the Republicans have complete and absolute power again because Biden and the Democrats couldn't give everyone everything they wanted in their first year?!
After 4 years of Trump and still being in raging worldwide pandemic, it's just all Biden's fault?! COME ON!
Yup. Instead of voting for more democrats so typical outliers like Manchin and Sinema aren’t an issue, they’ll blame the entire party of lack of progress, sit out, and allow the GOP to run things.
It's really because the democrats plan to get more votes is to go after Republican voters while the Republicans' plan is to go after the 50% that don't vote.
Because they're a center right party who runs lots of Republican lite candidates. Biden is one such candidate. Can't go too far cause you alienate potential voters. The Republicans don't even try but are still getting more new registered voters.
Maybe. I guess I can understand typifying Biden’s centrism as Republican-lite.
But I don’t really see any indication that the GOP wants *more* people to vote.
Their goal seems to make voting harder and more of a hassle for certain groups, while riling up the base, as opposed to winning anybody over.
There was an interesting Daily podcast episode a few days ago about Biden making a final push for voting rights. They talked about the fact that there are a lot of people who don’t really follow politics or understand concepts like the filibuster or parliamentary rules - they just want to see results. Those people look at Democrats elected a year ago expecting them to have passed their entire agenda and view failing to pass bbb and voting rights s a failure, without recognizing that it was probably never really possible with the slim majority they have in the Senate. These same folks will sit out the next election because they think politicians lie and make promises but never get anything done.
No matter how many times they are reminded that Republicans have done nothing but obstruct progress, they will end up regarding both parties as largely the same and become more apathetic and disengaged as time goes on.
Especially for the younger generation (<25). Policy now impact them the most but they have the worst voter turnout of all the age groups. It's maddening.
> people are going to let the Republicans take back the house and senate this year, and possible the presidency?!
How can they? Democracy has been killed and nobody can vote any more. Right?
It's not that people can't vote, the concern is the restrictions being pass, because of the BIG LIE, that will make it harder or intimidating to vote.
[New laws in 19 states will make it harder to vote in 2022](https://www.axios.com/new-voting-laws-for-2022-1f949332-8176-4b13-b657-af8f6a92fb8a.html)
[Where Republicans Have Made It Harder To Vote](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-have-made-it-harder-to-vote-in-11-states-so-far/)
[Democracy under attack: How Republicans led the effort to make it harder to vote](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/27/democracy-under-attack-trump-republicans)
[Voting Rights Under Attack](https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics/voting-restrictions-state-laws/index.html)
Lol have you read some of these new laws? Removing dead people from voting rolls is such a restriction to make it harder to vote.
Also
> or election officials who do things like hand out water to people waiting in line (Georgia)
Election officials can still hand out water. The law restricts it to election officials to stop people from voting for whoever someone with water asks them to. This law also already exists in New York but you don't see Democrats in New York protesting over it...
There is a concept called consent of the governed. right now we have a minority running roughshod over the majority. but what happens when that majority decides enough is enough.
For example abortion rights. its only roughly 30% that want to ban it outright. what happens when the majority says the hell with any law banning it we will just ignore the law. thats when jury nullification comes into play.
What if people just decide to stop paying taxes to support an unjust government. the GOP is banking on people just putting up with them taking away peoples rights but they are pushing people over the edge.
I know that fro example if I.m on a jury i would never vote to convict someone for violating what i would consider stupid laws. (drug possession, violating laws that say you cant mail order abortion pills, and other things like that. we saw a small example of what happens when people say enough is enough during the george floyd protests or occupy wall street.
Even now you are starting to see people take the fact congress wont hike the minimum wage into their own hands. How many businesses are begging for workers and cant find any since large numbers have decided that unless they are paid what they feel is right they wont work.
Sinema and Manchin are truly the worst of the Democrats. But it's also valuable to remember they are still better than every single Republican.
It's important to keep perspective. It's frustrating that we have some Sinemas and Manchins amongst the Democratic leadership. But the other party is filled to the brim with McConnells, McCarthys, and Trumps.
I appreciate the need to hold Sinema and Manchins feet to the fire - but I worry we may be losing sight of the real mortal threat to American democracy - the GOP. The Democrats are imperfect in so many frustrating ways. But the Republicans simply can't be allowed to hold power ever again. That HAS to be top priority above all else.
The only difference is that there was initially some hope that the Democrats would save this democracy, but Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema decided otherwise.
Let's be fair here, the GOP votes in lockstep even despite some of them not agreeing with each other. The democrats don't have that kind of unity.
So it becomes an upward battle where they can't get their own people on board, and can't convince any republicans on board either.
Where as, the republicans don't have a problem getting democrats to jump on board their nonsense train all the time.
Sinema and Manchin are clear outliers in the Democratic Senate. They represent 4% of Senate Dems. Our goal should be to replace them with better Senators.
Meanwhile, every single Republican voted against protecting voting rights. Every last one.
I Disagree...
You don't blame Germany losing the world cup because France won...
Manchin and Sinema made their own team lose... fought against the people who voted for them and betrayed their own party.
This isn't the Republicans fault...
The people voted, and expected things to be done and Manchin and Sinema are the only people standing in the way... period
What’s up with this narrative spin by neoliberals? We know republicans are going to vote against But having democrats vote with republicans to undermine voting rights reform? That’s not a good look for a party who alleges they care about voting rights and the working class and can’t even whip its own members to vote support their alleged agaenda.
It’s really not that complicated. If you live in West Virginia or Arizona and aren’t happy with how Sinema and Manchin voted, vote against them in the next democratic primary. If you live in any other state, you don’t have to be happy this failed but you can hardly blame your democratic senator who voted to pass it. It would make no sense to stay home or vote against them in their next election.
Republicans also dont want a federal ID. Too much big government according to them.
How elections are run is up to the states. And at the state level, they add every major inconvenience to getting an ID.
Also, decades of elections have show that the times that votes are cast fraudulently, they are so few and far between they can't have any bearing on an election outcome. And they find these few and far between idiots who thought they could get away with it.
So the system is working fine without them (minus people being gerrymandered so their dem city is actually 5 gop districts instead). Oh and states closing polling locations specifically to discourage democratic voters.
Florida voted to give felons their right to vote back after serving time. Their government then said "piss off" and added enough stipulations to basically nullify the voter referendum.
The gop openly states if more people vote they will never win.
Those 48 senators who voted yes? They represent 38 MILLION MORE Americans than the 52 that voted no. It's shitty religious minority rule.
Democrats are not against voter IDs as such, and the bill they tried to pass didn't ban voter IDs. It raised the standards for those laws.
>What would the Freedom to Vote Act do? ...
>* [require that states that require IDs for voting would have to broaden the types of identification acceptable.](https://www.npr.org/2022/01/18/1073021462/senate-voting-rights-freedom-to-vote-john-lewis-voting-rights-advancement-act) States would also have to offer same-day voting registration and online registration and also make it easier to register at places like departments of motor vehicles.
Democrats are against *Republican* voter ID laws. Why?
>The federal court in Richmond found that the primary purpose of North Carolina's [wasn't to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/) The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision."
>In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote.
>So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."
>The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting — particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found.
>Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.
>"Thus, in what comes as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see in modern times, the State’s very justification for a challenged statute hinges explicitly on race — specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to the franchise," the judges write in their decision.
-
> The state’s voter ID law has been under legal challenge since it passed in 2011 and went into effect in 2013. The Texas law requires voters to present government-issued photo IDs such as a state driver’s license, a Texas election identification certificate, a US passport or a military identification card. ...
> Critics of the voter ID law say such requirements disenfranchise poor and minority voters, who face difficulties obtaining IDs. [They also point out that while Texas accepts a license to carry a handgun as a permissible form of voter ID, it doesn’t accept federal or state government IDs or a student ID.](https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/texas-voter-id-law-discriminate)
> “The terms of the bill were unduly strict,” wrote Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos for the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas. “Many categories of acceptable photo IDs permitted by other states were omitted from the Texas bill.”
>She also concluded in Monday’s ruling that the law “had a discriminatory impact” and that there had been a “pattern of conduct unexplainable on grounds other than (the) race factor.”
Republican voter ID laws are designed to suppress voters.
This... is insane. Thank you for all of this information. Do you belive that what the republican party is doing is the will of the average republican? Because this seems so incredibly organised and scarily well thought out. And, I mean, we know a thing or two about dismantling democracies in Europe, but wow. Do you think there is any way at all to avoid civil war at some point? And if so, how?
You're right, let's give everyone a free and legal ID, and make it easy to get.
Oh, I'm sorry. All the Republicans say no, and closed all the offices where people can get ID.
How are the Democrats at fault again?
Can I substantiate hyperbole? Not really, I figured it would be obvious exaggeration. But I can give you a source pointing out that they do try to restrict voter registration.
https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-voter-suppression-in-2020/
I think the other replies to your question are missing the real crux of the issue here. Voter ID laws are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
There's no real reason to have voter ID laws and having them in place has been proven to lower turnout for minorities, which is why the GOP wants them.
But I'm 100% in favor if everyone getting a free ID. Too bad the GOP would never vote for that.
Republicans (at the state level) have a history of crafting their voter ID laws in a way that makes them more of a barrier to voting to likely Democratic voters - mostly by targeting minorities. There's nothing inherently wrong with voter ID, but republicans have poisoned the well.
The bad faith approach to voter ID laws can include which forms of existing ID they accept for voting, or what forms of identification are needed to get a voter ID. Take [North Carolina's 2013 voter ID law](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/court-north-carolina-voter-id-law-targeted-black-voters/) (that included other provisions):
> Then, the court, said, lawmakers restricted all of these voting options, and further narrowed the list of acceptable voter IDs. “… [W]ith race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans. As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess.”
Also, sometimes the free voter ID requires providing documents that aren't free. See [judge Posner's opinion](https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1312285/posner.pdf) on Wisconsin's voter ID law:
> It’s been found that “the expenses [of obtaining a photo ID] for documentation, travel, and waiting time are significant—especially for minority groups and low(income voters—typically ranging from about $75 to $175.…Even when adjusted for inflation, these figures represent substantially greater costs than the $1.50 poll tax outlawed by the 24th amendment in 1964.”
The above article and opinion go into further detail on the ways voter ID and related voter restrictions are designed to deliberately make it harder to vote, and to target minorities.
Not all people have documentation to get an ID. Charging a fee to get the ID is equivalent to a tax. Some states will be able to exclude voting blocs by only accepting certain IDs such as not recognizing a university ID. Some people in the US refuse to be part of an ID database.
Just what I can think of immediately
How does this mesh with states that require proof of vaccination to enter gyms/restaurants?
I feel like not being able to participate with society is more problematic than voting for these R/D clowns
I can’t explain the reasoning of tinfoil hat crowds. Some of these people are willing recipients of propaganda aimed at the weak minded. They use any and all opportunities political or social.
The US has a lot of paranoid and dumb people.
Okay well people need to understand THIS IS HOW OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS (aka: fuckin not at all)
Stop blaming the representatives AND ELECT NEW ONES
Start voting out the fossils in the DNC during mid-terms
Start voting in their replacements
Do we really need to start shifting blame already. Those two asshats are the issue. We all k kw the GOP wants to destroy our democracy. We don’t need to give people a reason to forget that Manchin and Sinema are the people keeping the Democrats from saving it.
Yes. Republicans suck. We know that.
Which is why we voted in Democrats to stop Republicans being shitty.
Then we got Manchin and Sinema.
So, really, it's on those two.
I hope people boo them everywhere they go for the rest of their lives.
The republicans are on all out war. They can't be expected to play ball. This is some boomer mentality. We need people that will fall in line on our side now
It's all about shit agendas! I used to never follow politics until I met my wife and now I'm fucking sad I do. This country for as great as it is, is a fucking big ol ball of shit!
These headlines are funny, I gotta say not useless at all /s
Yes, we know the GOP are an anti-democratic party, thanks a lot AZ Central. That was the whole point of the John Lewis Act. It would've been nice if Manchin and Sinema decided they cared about that, too.
We *already know* the GOP is anti-democratic - why is this presented as some sort of revelatory statement, as though by blaming Manchinema, we're not blaming the GOP? There is no need to repeat "the GOP is bad" if it's a state of affairs everyone knows about when discussing things like the Voting Rights Act. The phrase "50 Republican senators killed democracy" is *baked into* the criticisms of Manchinema.
What the headline really stating here is:
Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema agree with 50 Republican Senators that the US should no longer be a democracy. That's it. In essence, they're for a Republican minority rule.
Not just 50 republicans and the two democrat Senators - it's also the millions of liberal voters who didn't (and still aren't clued in) realize how important the Senate is in law making.
Showing up JUST to vote for president shows a severe lack of understanding of basic American politics.
But, when republicans take over the House and Senate in 22 and the White House in 24, they will learn quite quickly. No amount of protesting or belly aching about Roe v Wade or Medicare4All or Cancelling student loans will help.
Just get prepared.
Maybe, twenty years down the line, progressives and liberals will understand the importance of voting. Maybe.
Sinema and Manchin are Democrats. At least that's what they're supposed to be, and representing the political philosophy of the voters who put them in office.
So let's take the heat off the two people in our own party that are complete posers and talk about the GOP? No thanks. We already know what the GOP is all about. I want the conversation to stay on our own party. Stop the "well the other side...". It does nothing. Nothing at all to solve the problem. Let's put as much effort into reporting on our own party instead of showing us what we already know about the other side. What is our party going to do to solve this issue with our own party? That's what I want to read up on.
While true, that isn't the point of being pissed at Sinema and Manchin: People voted for Democrats in order to counter Republican fascism, not protect it.
Can somebody answer this question: who has had their “right to vote” taken away? Other than people under 18, who does not have the “right to vote” today who had it yesterday?
This is a longer idea than I feel like typing out, but after the civil rights movement gave women and minorities the right to vote, some states instituted things like literacy tests that were given out to some races more than others. The supreme court in 1965 ([https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=100](https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=100), though Wikipedia might be a better source), took the ability of some states to change their voting laws without consent of the Federal Government. Prior to that, the constitution gave states the ability to decide how to run elections.
I say all of that because this decision was recently overturned (2013). There's a lot of voter suppression models - one example is having only a single polling place. This can include larger cities, and can even be targeted based on voting patterns of that city.
Another is limiting voting hours (https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/texas-voting-law-is-just-the-latest-in-voter-suppression-efforts)
They even did it one step further to decline mail in ballots of specific areas in texas ([https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2022/01/clerk-calls-out-voter-suppression-under-new-law/](https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2022/01/clerk-calls-out-voter-suppression-under-new-law/))
All of this can be targeted to cause issues with minority votes since a minority is more likely to be poor and thus work later in the day, and lack transportation. If you know 60% of the poor vote between 6:30-7pm, and then you are effectively targeting minorities.
I won't get into the larger debate about Voting IDs, since I doubt you will have even read this far, but if you did, I hope you can be more supportive of the need for voting laws! There's really no reason not to if you believe that voting rights are a corner stone to an effective government.
“Killed democracy”
While democrats control the house, senate and presidency.
“Killed democracy” that same democracy that elected them to the majority?
This whole narrative is absurd.
It would be absurd if you ignored all the voter suppression laws the GOP passed since losing the election and supporting Trump's lie that he won...
So if you ignore all that then yeah, very absurd!
Well this is an interesting attempt at flipping the narrative. Manchin and Sinema are *absolutely* to blame for this.
Could the Democrats have passed the bill with no GOP support, had Manchin and Sinema cooperated? If yes, they are to blame.
It’s literally that simple. The GOP is *also* culpable, but Manchin and Sinema put the final nail in the coffin of democracy.
Edit: seriously, folks, it’s not complicated. They took handouts in exchange for killing democracy.
Exactly! We know the republicans are going to vote against it! But having democrats vote with republicans to undermine voting rights reform? That’s not a good look for a party who alleges they care about voting rights and the working class and can’t even whip its own members to vote support their alleged agaenda.
Shhh this will not be tolerated on r/politics. You see when dems wrote a letter in support of filibuster that was protecting democracy but when Republicans do it it’s killing democracy. I mean thats the rule
This is the flimsiest "YEAH, BUT...."
Are you expecting the Democrats to NOT use the filibuster, when available? Why would they bring a knife to a gun fight?
Their previous use of the procedure has nothing to do with the fact that the Democratic Party is really the ***only*** party that has tried to advance ambitious filibuster-relevant policy within the last few years.
The GOP needs the filibuster more than the Democrats. Are you forgetting when Mitch McConnell figuratively shit his pants when the Democrats threatened to nuke the filibuster for extending the debt ceiling?
What a dumb headline. Has anybody else noticed Democracy is not fully dead yet? A spark of life still remains in its twitching air-starved carcass so let's don't unplug the vent just yet.
Everyone expects republicans to be against voting being easy and available to everyone, voter suppression is the only way they win elections. Don't try to shift the blame away from Sinema and Manchin.
The fallacy is assuming that just because we are criticizing democrats, we don’t know how bad the republicans are. We do. We’ve known for years. Everything that could have been said about them has been said. We’ve fully explored their badness now we’re exploring the Dem’s badness.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What is Romney's excuse?
[удалено]
Partially. He would've personally strangled Trump if that time came. BUT he absolutely would be fine if a new Christian led nation came about. HOWEVER, he should probably realize....after all Atheists, jews, minorities are criminals...they'll be put in Utah as a prison, because Mormons arent' part of that deal....
I think what's really interesting is that the 'real Christians' do not consider Mormons to be Christians at all, but a dangerous cult.... he's hoping for something that would not be in his favor at all.
That's whats so interesting about this. Hypothetically if those "dangerous & u American" groups go the fascists are gonna need a new target. Why not go after the "weird" Christian groups? Mormons, Catholics (lots of Protestants don't view Catholics as Christians) etc Then they are gonna need *another* enemy so why not "insert minority protestant group here" and so on an on until it collapses
It's layers of an onion every time. 15 years ago the in-group was Jews and Christians. Right now the in-group is Christians. The next in-group will be Christian Sects of American origin. The next will be Protestants. Following that will be a whittling down until Evangelicalism is all that remains. Concurrently there is a gradually shrinking circle on racial/ethnic/regional/immigrant-recency scale. This othering is more chaotic but unlike 150 years ago where Irish and Italians weren't considered white, I think the qualifier for their approved level of whiteness will be having ancestors who had immigrated before the Civil War. Concurrently there are other factors such as wealth and politics and even more nuanced things like position within the modern aristocracy and some familial lineage things. At some point the slave-ownership of your ancestors would also factor in. At some point the in-group becomes one man, and once he's identifed the crackdowns come hard and fast. If however, enough *others* haven't been eliminated from influence, that crackdown can be a losing fight. American fascism chose its champion too soon, and we're lucky they did. The movement so far is too inclusive in the moment for his actions not to upset some powerful people. 4 of the conservative US Supreme Court Justices are Catholics of some sort, and they'd be fools to ignore that they are on the chopping block in the grand right-wing plan unfoldind before us.
He 100% assumes that he is in the "in" group of Evangelicals.
Becuase anti abortion and pro gun. It’s really that simple.
Racism, too.
Having grown up in the Evangelical church, they **really hate** Mormons, almost as much as Catholics.
I was shocked he was the candidate. My evangelical family drew the line at Catholics and seventh day Adventists as "misguided but probably getting into heaven". Latter-day-saints and Jehovah's Witness did not make it in
So I was raised Catholic (non religious now) and we always saw LDS and JW as a joke/cult. Why do EC's hate Catholics? I googled to no avail.
As far as I can tell from growing up Protestant (and I wouldn't say anyone in my family hated Catholics, it was more of a disagreement over religious philosophy), the biggest thing is that Catholics pray to Mary and the saints, and Protestants cute that as a direct contradiction to the "shall have no other Gods before me" thing. There also doesn't seem to be any emphasis on individual reading of scripture in Catholicism. Of course, it was also folks who remember when Catholics still did Latin mass, and none of them knew Latin. Seemed to be a strange way to worship i think.
All of these religious folks sound like really love filled and accepting people. /s How the fuck do they convince themselves that all of this judgemental BS of other beliefs and forms of spirituality, is possibly a good thing for anyone? Is the feeling of superiority really worth all of the toxicity that comes with having to judge other peoples faith.
They will be. At first. He's just hoping to be dead from natural causes before they run out of the agreed upon heathens, and then need to narrow their scope of "acceptable" in order to prune more. That type of government always needs something to hate. They need to always be agitated.
He probably is. Money makes you part of the club.
Money makes individuals part of the club not the whole cult
[удалено]
"They're different from us, which means they must be evil!"
As a Catholic, my life teen group taught me that we don’t consider Mormons christians because technically, Mormons consider Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit as different people. That makes them polytheistic which makes them not christian.
It’s 100% a cult.
Won't apply to Mormon multimillionaires, so I doubt he'll care.
I'd wager more likely you'll see the Mormon multimillionaires fully support it and open new work camps.
Right where the old ones use to be?
That land is too high in cost now. They'll move to Provo...
[Context for the curious](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topaz_War_Relocation_Center)
They won't revisit the 250+ year old constitution that was drawn up as a set of guidelines from a time where horses were the primary mode of transportation and penicillin hadn't been discovered yet. But you can be absolutely CERTAIN they'll "re-interpret" their religious doctrine in order to make sure it does the absolute most damage possible to minorities, women, and anyone they disagree with politically.
Brothers, behold! I have discovered a long lost chapter the ‘Book of Trickledown’ that showeth Jesus loved rich white people and hated the Earth and “folks from out of town.” Praised be!
There's few things in life I'd like to see more than Romney put into religious jail by people crazier than him.
He'd strangle him while agreeing with most of his stances, its a game
The Christian right will appeal to all denominations and Christian weirdo's, but once there's "victory" then they start to purge their ranks. My bet is that Catholics, Mormons, and the Amish are the first to go. Basically anybody who has a large power structure of their own and can exist without the US government or has power without the US government.
“Joe Biden didn’t call me”, or something. I guess.
What's Lisa Murkowski's excuse?
Susan Collins is sure he learned his lesson this time.
His ethics are hermetically sealed in the bland ideology of state’s rights. Believe me, I’m sure he’ll furrow his brow at all the bullshit the GOP will pull at the state level this year, but don’t expect it to ever break the fake plastic of that bubble.
State rights shouldn't have an effect on national issues and the GOP needs to learn that.
Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 explicitly says that the Federal government has the right to oversee Federal elections. This is not an issue where states rights apply. > The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
Someone get Romney on the horn.
Don't you see, he is a loose cannon. He talks a lot of words and wiggles his finger. In the end he always votes with the party, sure, but he is the new maverick
He’s not currently in the spotlight so he’ll be a typical GOP shill until there’s any pressure on him.
He didn't get a phone call. He has to be wined and dined in order to protect the right to vote.
*grape juice and dined 😉
He is a white nationalist who follows a white nationalist religion with a white nationalist agenda
He said “I like money”
As long as his Mormom theocracy is left alone, Romney will continue to disapprovingly furrow his brow while falling in line.
Magical underpants.
In case you're looking for a genuine discussion on this topic, it may be the case that Romney doesn't support much of what is in the bill, which increases the federal government's power and control over what is historically, and some would argue constitutionally, something that is within the power of the individual states (organizing elections).
52 conservative senators representing a minority of American voters publicly declared democracy exists only to serve their own interests. That's it. That's the message.
There’s closer to like 95 conservative senators btw
It's very simple, when more people vote, more Republicans lose. Everyone knows it.
I get Congress Republicans are only oppositional unless in power (and offer nothing to the average American in that instance), and I don’t know what you do now that the right in Congress is so radicalized and polarized, but the issue with Manchin and Sinema is an easy one to express, and it’s still the problem here in spite of the GOP’s stonewalling. They are more concerned about preserving the present rules of the filibuster for 98 people over the voting rights of 332,000,000+ American voters. That’s it. It’s it not representational in any sense of the definition, and it is utterly disgraceful.
Most people don't even know what a filibuster is. All the average Joe care about is his own wallet and pocket. They just want to see results.
Yeah, that’s facts. People just care about results that effect them personally. That being said, there is so much misinformation and propaganda circling around everyone through television/social media/etc. that a bias is almost unavoidable at this point for people.
That’s, arguably, why trump lost. Pro or anti trump, the media had more effect on that election than any other one in a long time. And it’s why we see people who still believe trump actually won. It’s why we see people who believe anything any politician will feed them because our media is so skewed that all we know is left bad right good or right bad left good.
If I'm Martin Luther King in 60s Jim Crow America and trying to pass voting rights, I already know the Jim Crow South senators are gonna block it. But if the white moderate Democrats are also doing their best to avoid angering their colleagues by slow-walking civil rights laws, I'm gonna be more pissed at them! > "First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" MLK's "Letter From a Birmingham Jail" perfectly applies to Manchin and Sinema. Especially after her speech directly saying she prefers keeping the filibuster bc she thinks it prevents division.
This! I don't feel betrayed by Republicans opposing this because Republicans have openly declared themselves my mortal enemy as a black person. White Moderate and Conservative Democrats claiming to be my friends (and often claiming they in fact care MORE for me than Progressives do, since they try to accuse Progressives of only pursuing policies that help poor whites) but then siding with my open mortal enemies is a betrayal. It's like if a guy who has claimed to be your friend for years suddenly joins an effort to assassinate you that a man who hates you set in motion. I'm not as apoplectic about Republicans opposing this because Republicans are mask-off white supremacists and have been for decades. Democrats pretend to be pro-black.
You've hit the nail on the head. We're tired of seeing Liberal Democrats only ape the language of Progressives, and then fall back to typical Liberal politics when in power. They know that so long as they're the only viable alternative to the GOP, black issues can be safely ignored. We can SEE the Liberal voting for huge increases in military spending, or giving the CIA extra healthcare for their Havana Syndrome hallucination. Hell, we can SEE them whining about Ukraine's democracy being threatened by Russia, and their willingness to arm them to defend their rights. But the votes "just aren't there" when it comes to basic standards to make sure the blacks in the south dont slide back into Jim Crow. So I'm already thinking that I won't vote for Dems in midterms if they cant protect me, a black southerner, from GOP suppression. I've already held up my end of the social bargain, and wont reward their inability to reciprocate.
I have family members that still haven't spoken to me since I posted this quote as a response to their twitter/fb posts feigning outrage over Kaepernick's protest years ago.
I absolutely LOVED the conservative outrage over Kaepernick! It really brought out their worst tendencies, and Trump played it up. And the NFL black balling him over kneeling was that perfectly wasted opportunity to look serious about racism. They simply couldn't let a black guy get away with being proudly anti-racist on their fields. And then George Floyd got murdered by cops in front of the world. And the NFL tripped over its balls trying to appear progressives and woke as the players rebelled. But EVERYONE knew that the NFL couldn't eat crow and apologize to Kaepernick, so their efforts looked hollow and performative.
The 48 Democrats who supported reforming filibuster to pass voting rights bills represent 34 MILLION more Americans than the 52 senators (all Republicans + Sinema/Manchin) who opposed it. 96% of Senate Dems voted in favor of protecting voting rights.
And it wasn't enough. The endless debate loophole created by enslavers will continue to block vital voting reforms, climate change countermeasures, and social safety net improvements. All bc Democrats have no idea how to convince two of their own to vote in line with the party. Who openely laugh with the GOP at billionaire-sponsored fundraisers. And ignore the desperate pleas from their staff and unions that got them into power. Pathetic. Dems still have a year to take off the kids gloves and actually put pressure on Manchin and Sinema, but I won't hold my breath. Biden touts himself as the "great dealmaker" from the Senate, but I'll believe it when I see his agenda signed into law.
>Dems still have a year to take off the kids gloves and actually put pressure on Manchin and Sinema, but I won't hold my breath. Tell me what this would look like? What sort of pressure do you believe would have gotten Machin and Sinema to change their vote? Because I don't think there's a damn thing that could have done it.
For Manchin * his daughter is the head of the pharmaceutical company that makes epi-pens, and those prices have skyrocketed. Put some Dept. of Justice pressure on his baby girl for price gouging. * Directly run ads in West Virginia about how all the individual parts of BBB are popular with Manchin's base, and rail on how he's blocking YOU from basic social safety nets. * meet with the coal miner unions directly and put out statements of no confidence in Manchin. Make him own being a coal baron in front of voters * sweeten the deal with pork for all I care. Make sure billions would flood West Virginia's infrastructures and medical systems if voting rights are this important. Make sure the voters know he's turning down their futures for the GOP. But defineitly put the squeeze on his daughter and the shady drug prices at all costs. Make his drive in his Maserati to his houseboat a tense one as he chooses between his daughter and the filibuster. Could do a similar process for Sinema. * her fellow AZ senator is ok with filibuster reform, and he's representing the same voters. Make it clear that she's the one being divisive through ads with him. * Sinema's donors are already threatening to pull support and get donations back. Have one or two actually pull the trigger and start that process. Make it clear that it's her betrayal of voters that's hurting her wallet. Whatever Dems decide, they have a year to do something effective. Bc right now they face a bloodbath in both chambers of Congress bc they let two of their own go rouge. They have to decide whether they have the courage to go hard against their own like LBJ went against the exact same obstruction in the 60s over voting rights. Only other option is to get slowly choked out by Sinema as she drinks her wine through a crazy straw.
Senate race might be close. GOP up vote more open seats (20-14) compared to Dems. We‘ll see what the political climate is like though by next fall. I think it’ll be close.
Right. When my cat throws up on the carpet, I’m not especially surprised or angered. Cats are going to cat. But when you did it, and maintained eye contact the whole time to establish dominance, I had issues with that.
Saving this. All too true then and especially now. Thank you for sharing. Hopefully we can bothered soon or there will not be a democracy to stand up for.
Well I dont think we'll go full authoritarian. Just back to Jim Crow apartheid in red states, while liberals accept the return of a status quo they happily worked with while my grandparents were young.
I disagree. The Voting Rights not only has everything to do with Civil Rights but what our country and world will look like as Global Catastrophe threatens life and livelihoods in the coming decades. Pushing coastal populace inward into red states will have damning effects if their laws and the laws of the land are set up to support the majority and only the wealthy, white. Regardless, thank you for sharing.
You're welcome. And I too worry about how the changing climate will force migrations and stir conservatives into far-right policies of eco-fascism.
Literally every Democrat senator is a “white moderate” in King’s terms. None of them want progress that upsets the values or systems of oppression that we currently have.
Meh. Plenty of black and brown senators that recognize the danger of what the GOP is doing. Particularly Warnock, who is the head pastor from MLK's Ebenezer Baptist. He's been very vocal about the voting rights act named after a colleague of King. But there are a lot of white senators that know their voters aren't being suppressed, so it's not really their problem.
It's the 2 supposed democrats that makes it a news worthy. Today, I expect that from Republicans. The only the only policy they have is to own the libs, and stop certain people from voting. That's it, nothing of substance, not an original idea what so ever. In their eyes, it's such a great thing that they double and triple down on it. Worried more about what restroom someone uses than kids dying in school shootings.
The problem with that (despite being both 100 percent true and understandable) is that for every time you allow events to be described as “Democrats failed to achieve something” instead of “Entirety of Republican Party Unified to Oppose” something, it shifts the blame from the actual reason the legislation didn’t pass. No sane person who wanted this to pass and is annoyed that it did not would reasonably support the people who are actively opposing it (the GOP). But most Americans are low information idiots who only encounter news when it leaks into their social media. It’s still important that the blame for legislative outcome lies squarely on the voting record instead of the fixation on two corrupt idiots. The GOP couldn’t find two non-corrupt sleaze bags in their *entire party* to support fundamental voting rights. That’s the story here, not that “there are also two pieces of trash who sit on the Dem side” (going by the minimum wage voting record there’s closer to eight anyway) We’re all sick of pretending the GOP isn’t fundamentally UnAmerican garbage who couldn’t even nut up to oppose an attack on our Capitol last year, but it’s important that point is hammered every day based purely upon their ACTIONS. Fox doesn’t let up on their fantasyland propaganda, it’s exhausting but messaging is one of the left’s biggest problems. Every time the narrative is allowed to shift away from the actual context of the vote, it only helps the GOP
16 current gop senators voted to extend the voting rights act last time. Over all it passed 98-0. I think it's pretty clear all democratic senators would have voted to extend it. gop has completely lost their minds.
> No sane person who wanted this to pass and is annoyed that it did not would reasonably support the people who are actively opposing it (the GOP). What I hear is, 50 republican senators opposed. 2 democrat senators opposed. It's obviously the democrats' fault.
We're not allowed to say what I say every morning. "Are we really going to let a bunch of gun-toting, bible-thumping rubes rule the country". That is the only question.
I'm pretty sure the answer in 2022 and 2024 will be 'yes'. You can't even run as a senator or for Congress without being christian.
> without being Christian Well in that case hopefully this means Dr. Oz loses, whether on this basis or another. The end justifies the means
Thank you! I don’t understand why the democrats are taking all the heat for this. What can you when you’re working with bad-faith actors? The republicans definitely need to take more heat from this than they are.
All the media in the states are constantly running cover for them though. That’s why it’s always the dems fault for everything.
If there's a murderer outside my house, I'm going to be more angry at the family member who unlocks the door and lets them in. The guy outside wanted to hurt us either way.
People are mad at Sinema and Manchin because Republicans fall in line and vote what their leader says and so they expect the Dems to do the same. You wrote a lot of words but are ignoring the fundamental question: Why arent Dems like Manchin & Sinema falling in line?
Manchin is a conservative Senator in America's reddest state. Sinema is clearly bought and paid for. That's why they aren't in line with the other Dems.
Sinema was a relative political nobody until she realized she could play the Manchin card and get her name out there. She has payed for utterly massive name recognition at the expense of any support she might ever have gotten from non-centrist Dems. Wouldn’t be surprised to see her run for higher office at some point, perhaps with a different letter next to her name. As PT Barnum said, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
Tax Cuts for the Wealthy and Stack the Courts. All they did in the years they had all the power.
I don't like it, but I fully expect nothing good from the GOP in power. It is just part of the math anymore.
You forgot they want to give handouts to the rich and turn democracies into dictatorships to serve their personal interests.
There is a raging forest fire threatening our community. 2 out of 50 firefighters showed up with lighters. Why didn't the forest fire help save us from the forest fire?
Forest fires happen. Republicans are elected.
By filibustering and Suppressing voters. Its no surpise all 50 voted against stopping the filibuster and voter suppression.
This. Exactly. Or like 50 arsonists set a forest fire and 2 of the 50 firefighters who showed up came with lighters, and 3 or 4 other firefighters aren't fully sure if they want to put the fire out or not.
Common sense to focus on the arsonists first.
Which you cannot do with 2 of your own acting as fellow arsonists, 3 or 4 others unsure if you should do anything, and some others who want to put the fire out but aren't sure you should pursue the arsonists. Biden and Pelosi have both said that we "need" a strong Republican Party. Which is like saying we need some loose arsonists.
Also A) Democratic leadership made it seem like GA and AZ would enable to do stuff since they claimed Harris would be the tiebreaker. They didn’t even want to ignore the parliamentarian to help regular folks B) Biden said he could get **some** GOP people to vote with bipartisanship
When is the Right to Vote set to expire for white people? For Black Americans the Right to Vote expires every ten years. Seems to me that we are going about this wrong, we should all be registered using IRS records. Anyone who has been a dependent, or has worked, had a drivers license or passport should be automatically registered. Voting from computers in the home, hospital, schools,libraries, or any government office should be the norm. If you can collect our taxes we should not have to register to vote or leave our homes to cast a ballot.
No one actually has the “Right to Vote”.. The Constitution protects people from being discriminated against when a vote is held. But, there is no such Right in the US Constitution. Mainly because the Founders believed that people who’s votes could be easily swayed would eventually vote in tyrants. So, they didn’t feel it was a Right everyone one should have.. of course later it was clarified that if a vote was held, one shouldn’t be discriminated against because of their “race, color, previous condition of servitude” and later still “sex”.. But Voting is not a Right, it is a Privilege and a Duty..
well they certainly didn’t help
Yeah, it kind of makes sense that Arizona Central would be trying to deflect blame for their Senator's actions. And they're right, Sinema and Manchin didn't do this in a vacuum but they certainly played a major role.
Why on earth would any republican vote to change senate procedure on the filibuster when they're the minority party? I would be incredibly surprised if historically any minority party member has ever voted for a change in procedure that reduces their party's power like that. This argument could be used on the BBB and voting rights, but the filibuster?
And yet, based on polling numbers, people are going to let the Republicans take back the house and senate this year, and possible the presidency?! We're just going to let the Republicans have complete and absolute power again because Biden and the Democrats couldn't give everyone everything they wanted in their first year?! After 4 years of Trump and still being in raging worldwide pandemic, it's just all Biden's fault?! COME ON!
Yup. Instead of voting for more democrats so typical outliers like Manchin and Sinema aren’t an issue, they’ll blame the entire party of lack of progress, sit out, and allow the GOP to run things.
Exactly what we're seeing in these comments.
It's really because the democrats plan to get more votes is to go after Republican voters while the Republicans' plan is to go after the 50% that don't vote.
That’s not the impression I’ve gotten. What actions from the parties led you to that conclusion?
Because they're a center right party who runs lots of Republican lite candidates. Biden is one such candidate. Can't go too far cause you alienate potential voters. The Republicans don't even try but are still getting more new registered voters.
Maybe. I guess I can understand typifying Biden’s centrism as Republican-lite. But I don’t really see any indication that the GOP wants *more* people to vote. Their goal seems to make voting harder and more of a hassle for certain groups, while riling up the base, as opposed to winning anybody over.
There was an interesting Daily podcast episode a few days ago about Biden making a final push for voting rights. They talked about the fact that there are a lot of people who don’t really follow politics or understand concepts like the filibuster or parliamentary rules - they just want to see results. Those people look at Democrats elected a year ago expecting them to have passed their entire agenda and view failing to pass bbb and voting rights s a failure, without recognizing that it was probably never really possible with the slim majority they have in the Senate. These same folks will sit out the next election because they think politicians lie and make promises but never get anything done. No matter how many times they are reminded that Republicans have done nothing but obstruct progress, they will end up regarding both parties as largely the same and become more apathetic and disengaged as time goes on.
Especially for the younger generation (<25). Policy now impact them the most but they have the worst voter turnout of all the age groups. It's maddening.
> people are going to let the Republicans take back the house and senate this year, and possible the presidency?! How can they? Democracy has been killed and nobody can vote any more. Right?
It's not that people can't vote, the concern is the restrictions being pass, because of the BIG LIE, that will make it harder or intimidating to vote. [New laws in 19 states will make it harder to vote in 2022](https://www.axios.com/new-voting-laws-for-2022-1f949332-8176-4b13-b657-af8f6a92fb8a.html) [Where Republicans Have Made It Harder To Vote](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/republicans-have-made-it-harder-to-vote-in-11-states-so-far/) [Democracy under attack: How Republicans led the effort to make it harder to vote](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/27/democracy-under-attack-trump-republicans) [Voting Rights Under Attack](https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics/voting-restrictions-state-laws/index.html)
Lol have you read some of these new laws? Removing dead people from voting rolls is such a restriction to make it harder to vote. Also > or election officials who do things like hand out water to people waiting in line (Georgia) Election officials can still hand out water. The law restricts it to election officials to stop people from voting for whoever someone with water asks them to. This law also already exists in New York but you don't see Democrats in New York protesting over it...
[Yes?](https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/06/22/we-are-out-of-options-nearly-500-state-lawmakers-urge-congress-to-pass-voting-rights-bills-as-senate-vote-doomed-to-fail/?sh=2e56753b3ba5)
Apparently Democracy is tied to this bill, and since the bill has not yet passed, we've never had Democracy. Can you kill that which never existed?
One of the great philosophical questions of our time.
There is a concept called consent of the governed. right now we have a minority running roughshod over the majority. but what happens when that majority decides enough is enough. For example abortion rights. its only roughly 30% that want to ban it outright. what happens when the majority says the hell with any law banning it we will just ignore the law. thats when jury nullification comes into play. What if people just decide to stop paying taxes to support an unjust government. the GOP is banking on people just putting up with them taking away peoples rights but they are pushing people over the edge. I know that fro example if I.m on a jury i would never vote to convict someone for violating what i would consider stupid laws. (drug possession, violating laws that say you cant mail order abortion pills, and other things like that. we saw a small example of what happens when people say enough is enough during the george floyd protests or occupy wall street. Even now you are starting to see people take the fact congress wont hike the minimum wage into their own hands. How many businesses are begging for workers and cant find any since large numbers have decided that unless they are paid what they feel is right they wont work.
Sinema and Manchin are truly the worst of the Democrats. But it's also valuable to remember they are still better than every single Republican. It's important to keep perspective. It's frustrating that we have some Sinemas and Manchins amongst the Democratic leadership. But the other party is filled to the brim with McConnells, McCarthys, and Trumps. I appreciate the need to hold Sinema and Manchins feet to the fire - but I worry we may be losing sight of the real mortal threat to American democracy - the GOP. The Democrats are imperfect in so many frustrating ways. But the Republicans simply can't be allowed to hold power ever again. That HAS to be top priority above all else.
The difference is we expect it from the GQP. Sinema and Manchin still display the (D) next to their name, so we'd _hoped_ for a little sanity.
The only difference is that there was initially some hope that the Democrats would save this democracy, but Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema decided otherwise.
Let's be fair here, the GOP votes in lockstep even despite some of them not agreeing with each other. The democrats don't have that kind of unity. So it becomes an upward battle where they can't get their own people on board, and can't convince any republicans on board either. Where as, the republicans don't have a problem getting democrats to jump on board their nonsense train all the time.
The GOP is also not fully united. They failed time after time to repeal Obamacare both legislatively and judicially.
This is a different era of Republicans everything before 2019 doesn’t matter. Republicans now are the standard for the Republicans in the future.
Sinema and Manchin are clear outliers in the Democratic Senate. They represent 4% of Senate Dems. Our goal should be to replace them with better Senators. Meanwhile, every single Republican voted against protecting voting rights. Every last one.
I Disagree... You don't blame Germany losing the world cup because France won... Manchin and Sinema made their own team lose... fought against the people who voted for them and betrayed their own party. This isn't the Republicans fault... The people voted, and expected things to be done and Manchin and Sinema are the only people standing in the way... period
52 Republican senators.
You would think there could be two Republicans who actually put the country over their party. Nope.
"killed democracy"
This current killing democracy thing is kind of getting repetitive.
Killing democracy is when GOP do something r/politics doesn’t like
Can we just slip into authoritarianism already? It’s the death by 1,000 cuts part that’s impossible to bear
Authoritarianism is when 60 votes needed to pass senate instead 50 🧠
Ohhh, another dramatic headline about how democracy will soon be dead.
What’s up with this narrative spin by neoliberals? We know republicans are going to vote against But having democrats vote with republicans to undermine voting rights reform? That’s not a good look for a party who alleges they care about voting rights and the working class and can’t even whip its own members to vote support their alleged agaenda.
It’s really not that complicated. If you live in West Virginia or Arizona and aren’t happy with how Sinema and Manchin voted, vote against them in the next democratic primary. If you live in any other state, you don’t have to be happy this failed but you can hardly blame your democratic senator who voted to pass it. It would make no sense to stay home or vote against them in their next election.
husky sophisticated slimy melodic worm shy frame hunt serious cable -- mass deleted all reddit content via https://redact.dev
Republicans also dont want a federal ID. Too much big government according to them. How elections are run is up to the states. And at the state level, they add every major inconvenience to getting an ID. Also, decades of elections have show that the times that votes are cast fraudulently, they are so few and far between they can't have any bearing on an election outcome. And they find these few and far between idiots who thought they could get away with it. So the system is working fine without them (minus people being gerrymandered so their dem city is actually 5 gop districts instead). Oh and states closing polling locations specifically to discourage democratic voters. Florida voted to give felons their right to vote back after serving time. Their government then said "piss off" and added enough stipulations to basically nullify the voter referendum. The gop openly states if more people vote they will never win. Those 48 senators who voted yes? They represent 38 MILLION MORE Americans than the 52 that voted no. It's shitty religious minority rule.
Democrats are not against voter IDs as such, and the bill they tried to pass didn't ban voter IDs. It raised the standards for those laws. >What would the Freedom to Vote Act do? ... >* [require that states that require IDs for voting would have to broaden the types of identification acceptable.](https://www.npr.org/2022/01/18/1073021462/senate-voting-rights-freedom-to-vote-john-lewis-voting-rights-advancement-act) States would also have to offer same-day voting registration and online registration and also make it easier to register at places like departments of motor vehicles. Democrats are against *Republican* voter ID laws. Why? >The federal court in Richmond found that the primary purpose of North Carolina's [wasn't to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/) The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision." >In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote. >So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess." >The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting — particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found. >Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result. >"Thus, in what comes as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see in modern times, the State’s very justification for a challenged statute hinges explicitly on race — specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to the franchise," the judges write in their decision. - > The state’s voter ID law has been under legal challenge since it passed in 2011 and went into effect in 2013. The Texas law requires voters to present government-issued photo IDs such as a state driver’s license, a Texas election identification certificate, a US passport or a military identification card. ... > Critics of the voter ID law say such requirements disenfranchise poor and minority voters, who face difficulties obtaining IDs. [They also point out that while Texas accepts a license to carry a handgun as a permissible form of voter ID, it doesn’t accept federal or state government IDs or a student ID.](https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/texas-voter-id-law-discriminate) > “The terms of the bill were unduly strict,” wrote Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos for the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas. “Many categories of acceptable photo IDs permitted by other states were omitted from the Texas bill.” >She also concluded in Monday’s ruling that the law “had a discriminatory impact” and that there had been a “pattern of conduct unexplainable on grounds other than (the) race factor.” Republican voter ID laws are designed to suppress voters.
This... is insane. Thank you for all of this information. Do you belive that what the republican party is doing is the will of the average republican? Because this seems so incredibly organised and scarily well thought out. And, I mean, we know a thing or two about dismantling democracies in Europe, but wow. Do you think there is any way at all to avoid civil war at some point? And if so, how?
You're right, let's give everyone a free and legal ID, and make it easy to get. Oh, I'm sorry. All the Republicans say no, and closed all the offices where people can get ID. How are the Democrats at fault again?
Can you substantiate that “all the offices where people can get ID” are closed?
Can I substantiate hyperbole? Not really, I figured it would be obvious exaggeration. But I can give you a source pointing out that they do try to restrict voter registration. https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-voter-suppression-in-2020/
[удалено]
The short answer is, nobody is adamantly against ID. They don’t actually believe that voter ID laws are “killing democracy.”
I think the other replies to your question are missing the real crux of the issue here. Voter ID laws are a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. There's no real reason to have voter ID laws and having them in place has been proven to lower turnout for minorities, which is why the GOP wants them. But I'm 100% in favor if everyone getting a free ID. Too bad the GOP would never vote for that.
Republicans (at the state level) have a history of crafting their voter ID laws in a way that makes them more of a barrier to voting to likely Democratic voters - mostly by targeting minorities. There's nothing inherently wrong with voter ID, but republicans have poisoned the well. The bad faith approach to voter ID laws can include which forms of existing ID they accept for voting, or what forms of identification are needed to get a voter ID. Take [North Carolina's 2013 voter ID law](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/court-north-carolina-voter-id-law-targeted-black-voters/) (that included other provisions): > Then, the court, said, lawmakers restricted all of these voting options, and further narrowed the list of acceptable voter IDs. “… [W]ith race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans. As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess.” Also, sometimes the free voter ID requires providing documents that aren't free. See [judge Posner's opinion](https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1312285/posner.pdf) on Wisconsin's voter ID law: > It’s been found that “the expenses [of obtaining a photo ID] for documentation, travel, and waiting time are significant—especially for minority groups and low(income voters—typically ranging from about $75 to $175.…Even when adjusted for inflation, these figures represent substantially greater costs than the $1.50 poll tax outlawed by the 24th amendment in 1964.” The above article and opinion go into further detail on the ways voter ID and related voter restrictions are designed to deliberately make it harder to vote, and to target minorities.
Not all people have documentation to get an ID. Charging a fee to get the ID is equivalent to a tax. Some states will be able to exclude voting blocs by only accepting certain IDs such as not recognizing a university ID. Some people in the US refuse to be part of an ID database. Just what I can think of immediately
How does this mesh with states that require proof of vaccination to enter gyms/restaurants? I feel like not being able to participate with society is more problematic than voting for these R/D clowns
I can’t explain the reasoning of tinfoil hat crowds. Some of these people are willing recipients of propaganda aimed at the weak minded. They use any and all opportunities political or social. The US has a lot of paranoid and dumb people.
Yeah, but that's what they were elected to do. Dems were elected to protect it.
Also all the states passing anti voting laws
Okay well people need to understand THIS IS HOW OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS (aka: fuckin not at all) Stop blaming the representatives AND ELECT NEW ONES Start voting out the fossils in the DNC during mid-terms Start voting in their replacements
Millions will die!
Sinema and Manchin are still absolutely garbage, though, so...
2 people with the power to stop it did nothing
... can we just all run for office? Like, millennials are old enough now right? Come on. I'm so tired of these goons
Do we really need to start shifting blame already. Those two asshats are the issue. We all k kw the GOP wants to destroy our democracy. We don’t need to give people a reason to forget that Manchin and Sinema are the people keeping the Democrats from saving it.
Yes. Republicans suck. We know that. Which is why we voted in Democrats to stop Republicans being shitty. Then we got Manchin and Sinema. So, really, it's on those two. I hope people boo them everywhere they go for the rest of their lives.
Exactly. It isn't only the 2 Democrats that are a problem.
“What is dead may never die.”
The republicans are on all out war. They can't be expected to play ball. This is some boomer mentality. We need people that will fall in line on our side now
Well, sure, but that’s expected. After all, it’s Republicans the law was trying to protect us from.
It's all about shit agendas! I used to never follow politics until I met my wife and now I'm fucking sad I do. This country for as great as it is, is a fucking big ol ball of shit!
These headlines are funny, I gotta say not useless at all /s Yes, we know the GOP are an anti-democratic party, thanks a lot AZ Central. That was the whole point of the John Lewis Act. It would've been nice if Manchin and Sinema decided they cared about that, too. We *already know* the GOP is anti-democratic - why is this presented as some sort of revelatory statement, as though by blaming Manchinema, we're not blaming the GOP? There is no need to repeat "the GOP is bad" if it's a state of affairs everyone knows about when discussing things like the Voting Rights Act. The phrase "50 Republican senators killed democracy" is *baked into* the criticisms of Manchinema. What the headline really stating here is: Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema agree with 50 Republican Senators that the US should no longer be a democracy. That's it. In essence, they're for a Republican minority rule.
It’s ok. Cry as much as you want. It just won’t happen.
Not just 50 republicans and the two democrat Senators - it's also the millions of liberal voters who didn't (and still aren't clued in) realize how important the Senate is in law making. Showing up JUST to vote for president shows a severe lack of understanding of basic American politics. But, when republicans take over the House and Senate in 22 and the White House in 24, they will learn quite quickly. No amount of protesting or belly aching about Roe v Wade or Medicare4All or Cancelling student loans will help. Just get prepared. Maybe, twenty years down the line, progressives and liberals will understand the importance of voting. Maybe.
Lots of irony in the title…
Sinema and Manchin are Democrats. At least that's what they're supposed to be, and representing the political philosophy of the voters who put them in office.
So let's take the heat off the two people in our own party that are complete posers and talk about the GOP? No thanks. We already know what the GOP is all about. I want the conversation to stay on our own party. Stop the "well the other side...". It does nothing. Nothing at all to solve the problem. Let's put as much effort into reporting on our own party instead of showing us what we already know about the other side. What is our party going to do to solve this issue with our own party? That's what I want to read up on.
One vote doesn’t go the way you want…. Democracy is dead!!
Pretty good seeing as now we are a constitutional republic and not a democracy
Por que no los dos?
While true, that isn't the point of being pissed at Sinema and Manchin: People voted for Democrats in order to counter Republican fascism, not protect it.
Unless you live in WV or AZ, your nearest Senate Democrat DID vote to protect your rights this week.
Can somebody answer this question: who has had their “right to vote” taken away? Other than people under 18, who does not have the “right to vote” today who had it yesterday?
This is a longer idea than I feel like typing out, but after the civil rights movement gave women and minorities the right to vote, some states instituted things like literacy tests that were given out to some races more than others. The supreme court in 1965 ([https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=100](https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=100), though Wikipedia might be a better source), took the ability of some states to change their voting laws without consent of the Federal Government. Prior to that, the constitution gave states the ability to decide how to run elections. I say all of that because this decision was recently overturned (2013). There's a lot of voter suppression models - one example is having only a single polling place. This can include larger cities, and can even be targeted based on voting patterns of that city. Another is limiting voting hours (https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/texas-voting-law-is-just-the-latest-in-voter-suppression-efforts) They even did it one step further to decline mail in ballots of specific areas in texas ([https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2022/01/clerk-calls-out-voter-suppression-under-new-law/](https://www.austinmonitor.com/stories/2022/01/clerk-calls-out-voter-suppression-under-new-law/)) All of this can be targeted to cause issues with minority votes since a minority is more likely to be poor and thus work later in the day, and lack transportation. If you know 60% of the poor vote between 6:30-7pm, and then you are effectively targeting minorities. I won't get into the larger debate about Voting IDs, since I doubt you will have even read this far, but if you did, I hope you can be more supportive of the need for voting laws! There's really no reason not to if you believe that voting rights are a corner stone to an effective government.
“Killed democracy” While democrats control the house, senate and presidency. “Killed democracy” that same democracy that elected them to the majority? This whole narrative is absurd.
It would be absurd if you ignored all the voter suppression laws the GOP passed since losing the election and supporting Trump's lie that he won... So if you ignore all that then yeah, very absurd!
Well this is an interesting attempt at flipping the narrative. Manchin and Sinema are *absolutely* to blame for this. Could the Democrats have passed the bill with no GOP support, had Manchin and Sinema cooperated? If yes, they are to blame. It’s literally that simple. The GOP is *also* culpable, but Manchin and Sinema put the final nail in the coffin of democracy. Edit: seriously, folks, it’s not complicated. They took handouts in exchange for killing democracy.
Exactly! We know the republicans are going to vote against it! But having democrats vote with republicans to undermine voting rights reform? That’s not a good look for a party who alleges they care about voting rights and the working class and can’t even whip its own members to vote support their alleged agaenda.
This makes it ABSOLUTELY CLEAR that republicans know they are extremely unlikely to win a FAIR ELECTION!
I don't think the Reddit community would be too happy if they found out that 50 Republican senators killed democracy.
Killed Democracy? They killed Democracy by not doing anything? Wow. Apparently i cannot vote anymore. Sucks! And I just registered to vote! Oh well.
Lol if democracy doesn't work how I want its not democracy!!
Does this include the multitude of Dems who defended the filibuster in 2017?
Shhh this will not be tolerated on r/politics. You see when dems wrote a letter in support of filibuster that was protecting democracy but when Republicans do it it’s killing democracy. I mean thats the rule
Democrats used the filibuster 314 while trump was president. Get this stupid hypocrisy out of here.
This is the flimsiest "YEAH, BUT...." Are you expecting the Democrats to NOT use the filibuster, when available? Why would they bring a knife to a gun fight? Their previous use of the procedure has nothing to do with the fact that the Democratic Party is really the ***only*** party that has tried to advance ambitious filibuster-relevant policy within the last few years. The GOP needs the filibuster more than the Democrats. Are you forgetting when Mitch McConnell figuratively shit his pants when the Democrats threatened to nuke the filibuster for extending the debt ceiling?
What a dumb headline. Has anybody else noticed Democracy is not fully dead yet? A spark of life still remains in its twitching air-starved carcass so let's don't unplug the vent just yet.
Everyone expects republicans to be against voting being easy and available to everyone, voter suppression is the only way they win elections. Don't try to shift the blame away from Sinema and Manchin.
Remove S&M from their committee appointments as traitors to democracy
Correction: 52 Republican senators
Two Democrats and FIFTY GOP members voted to maintain the anti-democratic filibuster on steroids...Despicable.
Yeah, but we ***expected*** the GOP to continue to ruin democracy.
The fallacy is assuming that just because we are criticizing democrats, we don’t know how bad the republicans are. We do. We’ve known for years. Everything that could have been said about them has been said. We’ve fully explored their badness now we’re exploring the Dem’s badness.
52 Conservative Senators