In April, two days after (Bachmann) dismissed a Republican effort to support a budget deal, frustration among her colleagues boiled over. At a private meeting of Republicans, New Jersey Rep. Jon Runyan, a former Philadelphia Eagles offensive tackle, issued a broad warning about how a showboat can divide a team — bringing up the notorious loudmouth wide receiver Terrell Owens.

Glad I voted for you twice last year

jerseyhoya wrote:The only explanation that makes sense to me is if they just didn't realize there was a GOP debate already scheduled for that night when they picked the time initially.

Odds of this being true: 0.000000000013 to the 27th power (and you know it)

I'm surprised you would find fault with a little well-before-things-get-serious, presidential-campaignwise fun. Look at it this admittedly loopy way: if you're Barry, don't you want to be sure people have extra reason to tune into the current Republican POTUS candidates' debate/clownfest? And then follow up the next night with your own spiel on US Issue #1?

I would. It's sure to be Contrast City, with the Reps hard-pressed to come off looking better.

But who, really, cares at this stage of things? You know the football game audience will swamp that for either of these political events.

Barry was all like "but if we schedule it for the same night, and then cancel when they ask, it'll prove what a righteous bridge builder i am, right dudes?"

Anyone who watches a Presidential debate 15 months before the election is nuts.

I have to watch one or two of them to decide how I feel about Perry

jerseyhoya wrote:I have to watch one or two of them to decide how I feel about Perry

Sure, but why not wait until February, when there's nothing left but basketball?

jerseyhoya wrote:I have to watch one or two of them to decide how I feel about Perry

he prayed for rain for TX, and predictably he missed well right of the mark

only because God hates people like Perry.

86 cases of convicted voter fraud from 2002-2007.
18% of young people and 25% of blacks do not have an id. 31 states are now pushing voter id laws to restrict voting.
Felons in iowa and florida have now lost the right to vote.
Students in maine will have to pay tax in order to vote, if the maine gop had its way.

Democracy, everybody.

Wouldn't that violate the 24th amendment?

Maybe. It might also violate the Voting Rights Act. It at least opens the state to VRA lawsuits, I'd think.

It's shocking to me how short sighted the Republicans are being with this stuff. If in fact young people are being systematically disenfranchised, it strikes me that while there may be a small short term gain for Republicans, long term it will simply alienate these citizens who will one day own houses and have ids from the Republican Party.

Young people (and immigrants) are unattached voters. They can be won over, and once you win them over, you pretty much have them for life. Reagan knew this, and appealed to youth in such a way that shifted political alignments in this country. The Democrats seemed to figure out about 6 years ago, and they've done a lot of interesting work to appeal to young voters. Today's Republicans by contrast have seemed to put all there chips on attracting shrinking group of cranky old white people. Hey kids get off my lawn isn't a winning slogan.

That's pretty much the textbook definition of a poll tax.

They really don't care for democracy and they're not ashamed to admit it.

The young voters the Republicans court will be unaffected by any poll tax or other restrictions. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many of those young, Republican voters actually favor voter restrictions among other young voters who are not, shall we say, within the same demographic.

Students in maine will have to pay tax in order to vote, if the maine gop had its way.

Am I the only one whose BS detector went off when reading this?

The chairman of the Maine Republican party is concerned that college students in Maine who otherwise live elsewhere are sometimes regestered to vote in two different places and could therefore commit voter fraud. He said something to the effect that if you pay taxes in one state then that's where you reside and you shouldn't be registered to vote somewhere else.

TenuredVulture wrote:Young people (and immigrants) are unattached voters. They can be won over, and once you win them over, you pretty much have them for life. Reagan knew this, and appealed to youth in such a way that shifted political alignments in this country. The Democrats seemed to figure out about 6 years ago, and they've done a lot of interesting work to appeal to young voters. Today's Republicans by contrast have seemed to put all there chips on attracting shrinking group of cranky old white people. Hey kids get off my lawn isn't a winning slogan.

This is a data question. How have young people voted? Your narrative seems true, but I have my suspicions that young people are not voting any differently over the last half century (ie. they always vote 5% more Democratic than voters age 40+).

ashton wrote:

Students in maine will have to pay tax in order to vote, if the maine gop had its way.

Am I the only one whose BS detector went off when reading this?

The chairman of the Maine Republican party is concerned that college students in Maine who otherwise live elsewhere are sometimes regestered to vote in two different places and could therefore commit voter fraud. He said something to the effect that if you pay taxes in one state then that's where you reside and you shouldn't be registered to vote somewhere else.

My bs detector goes off all the time reading this thread. That's why I like hyperlinks.

According to Maine’s Secretary of State’s Office, three things are required of registered voters: They must be a U.S. citizen, they must have established and maintained a residence in the municipality where the person intends to register to vote, and they must be at least 17 to register or 18 to vote.

Citizenship and age are easily addressed. Residence is trickier.

Students have the right to register in the municipality where they attend school as long as they have established residency. They are then subject to the same residency requirements but cannot be asked to meet additional requirements.

Determining established residency is left to municipal clerks and they can consider the following factors in determining established residency: a direct statement or oath, a motor vehicle registration, an income tax return, a piece of mail listing a current address or any other objective facts.

Despite Webster’s beliefs, though, none of these elements are required.

I fail to see what i said was wrong.

NO ONE VOTES IN TWO STATES. It's a completely useless comment by that guy just to raise the ire of his base against those damn illegally votin' students. That you work so hard to 'find bs' and only see bs in the way i said it says more about you than me and how much i lie.

pacino wrote:I fail to see what i said was wrong.

NO ONE VOTES IN TWO STATES

Students in maine will have to pay tax in order to vote, if the maine gop had its way.

1. That sounds like a poll tax. it's not.
2. The GOP controls the Maine legislature. They have their way, and no bills have and will be passed that will require this. It's unconstitutional, and anyone that suggests it could happen is not being straight.
3. The Chairman of the Maine Republican Party, Webster, while influential, is kind of alone on this (says my 5 minutes of googling).

jerseyhoya wrote:I have to watch one or two of them to decide how I feel about Perry

I feel remarkably astute that I can actually make this political call long before jersey.

The point of the post was about taking away the right to vote. Do you think this should be done? It was not about how i worded things. Nowhere did i suggest an on-site poll tax. But, as always, this devolves into how one said something rather than thier point. Guess i aint smrt nuff for this thread. Ill bow out.