2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

Status
Not open for further replies.
carlitos said:
I'm no DNC consultant, but a good answer to a question about prisoners voting would be to redirect things to non-violent drug offenders who could be paroled / commuted to vote outside of prison.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

By definition, prisoners are denied fundamental rights -- liberty, privacy, pursuit of happiness, speech, association, etc. Getting worked up over voting rights seems odd to me. But even if it makes sense in some way that I don't grasp, if one wants to actually be elected POTUS, one needs to keep it under wraps until after the election. Brownie points for honesty are far outweighed by the stupidity.

Those of us who recognize the existential threat posed by the Banana Republican should hope for a strategic, shrewd, calculating candidate, not an ideologue with diarrhea of the mouth who is hell bent on losing.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't even be bothered if inmates were allowed to vote somehow from inside prison/jail.

The punishment is that your freedom is taken away while you are incarcerated. So long as you're being bars, you're receiving this punishment. Don't see how voting rights even factor into this.
 
varwoche said:
Indeed.

By definition, prisoners are denied fundamental rights -- liberty, privacy, pursuit of happiness, speech, association, etc. Getting worked up over voting rights seems odd to me. But even if it makes sense in some way that I don't grasp, if one wants to actually be elected POTUS, one needs to keep it under wraps until after the election. Brownie points for honesty are far outweighed by the stupidity.
Click to expand...

I am not a Ron Paul fan, but I did vote in the 2012 Republican primary where he ran, so I watched the debates. When he talked about prison reform and drug offenders being released the other candidates looked like they wanted to crawl under their podiums. No one wanted to touch that subject with a ten foot pole.


varwoche said:
Those of us who recognize the existential threat posed by the Banana Republican should hope for a strategic, shrewd, calculating candidate, not an ideologue with diarrhea of the mouth who is hell bent on losing.
Click to expand...
Those offended by Trump's authoritarianism should definitely not read up on the Weimar Republic.
 
Belz... said:
Well, why not? They're very few in numbers, first, and that they are criminals doesn't mean their political decisions are any worse than mine.

On the other hand I have no issue with the idea that, while incarcerated, your right to vote is curtailed just as your right to movement is.
Click to expand...

Since you're Canadian, I thought I'd look up that country's policy:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that all Canadian citizens have the right to vote in federal and provincial elections.The Supreme Court of Canada has held that even if a Canadian citizen has committed a criminal offence and is incarcerated, they retain the constitutional right to vote.[9] In the 2015 federal election, more than 22,000 inmates in federal correctional institutes were eligible to vote.
Click to expand...

I also have no problem with not allowing felons to vote while actually incarcerated. I do have a problem with Florida Republicans trying to sneakily overturn a public vote allowing them rights after they get out.

Meanwhile, it appears Biden is officially in. He's too damn old. So am I.
 
SezMe said:
Yeah, hearing an actual audio recording is crappy evidence.
Click to expand...
A recording of a statement is crappy evidence that the statement is true.

On the other hand, video of an event is really good evidence that the event actually happened to.

What is it about Trump that makes you forget important stuff like this, and need to have it explained to you?
 
Biden is officially running.

I worry this is going to play out a lot like 2016 but with Biden and Sanders instead of Clinton and Sanders
 
SezMe said:
With that criterion, one could eliminate a lot more people than those who are currently incarcerated. For example, using that basis would Trump himself be allowed to vote? What actions would constitute setting oneself against society? Would being a drunk driver qualify? Someone behind on spousal support? Submitting a fraudulent loan application?



I think a congresscritter taking a campaign donation which then influences how he votes is more unAmerican that all those felonious crimes.
Click to expand...
We do have a process for applying these criteria, you know.
 
SezMe said:
David Duke can vote. So can every mob boss in New York. So can Alex Jones. So can Oliver North. Are their votes ok just because they don't reside in the Big House?
Click to expand...
Their votes are okay because they haven't cleared the rather high bar of due process that we've established.

You're basically trying get rid of due process, just to silence voices you don't like.

If you don't like the current process, say so. If you have a better process in mind, describe it. If you object to the entire idea, just say that.
 
theprestige said:
Their votes are okay because they haven't cleared the rather high bar of due process that we've established.

You're basically trying get rid of due process, just to silence voices you don't like.

If you don't like the current process, say so. If you have a better process in mind, describe it. If you object to the entire idea, just say that.
Click to expand...

Nobody is trying to get rid of due process. How about we concede that murderers and terrorists are permanently deprived of voting. This is like 1 percent of people convicted of felonies. The vast majority of which are drug or petty crimes.

The point of disenfranchising people convicted of crimes is simply to prevent some citizens from ever rejoining society. It's just one more example of political insanity. Or should I say inanity?

Voting isn't a right. It's a responsibility.
 
Last edited:
Safe-Keeper said:
I wouldn't even be bothered if inmates were allowed to vote somehow from inside prison/jail.

The punishment is that your freedom is taken away while you are incarcerated. So long as you're being bars, you're receiving this punishment. Don't see how voting rights even factor into this.
Click to expand...


It's a matter of the prisoners not being sufficiently punished. Just being locked up isn't enough. For example, the prisons that have prohibited board games and tabletop RPGs. We can't allow entertainment. They need to stare at the walls.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Nobody is trying to get rid of due process.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced. It certainly looks like SezMe has a problem with due process, in that it doesn't silence voices he wishes were silenced. It's still an open question whether he thinks Alex Jones should be subject to due process, or whether he thinks due process should be suspended in order to silence Alex Jones. You declaring the question closed doesn't actually close it. That's up to SezMe.
 
theprestige said:
I'm not convinced. It certainly looks like SezMe has a problem with due process, in that it doesn't silence voices he wishes were silenced. It's still an open question whether he thinks Alex Jones should be subject to due process, or whether he thinks due process should be suspended in order to silence Alex Jones. You declaring the question closed doesn't actually close it. That's up to SezMe.
Click to expand...

No. He's just pointing out that there are lots of criminals voting. They just haven't been convicted as of yet. I mean seriously what is ithe point of depriving convicts of a right that a high percentage of people don't avail themselves to anyway?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom