2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Atheist was making an appeal to emotion based on horrible people being in prison, and SezMe correctly noted that horrible people not in prison can vote today. This has nothing to do with due process; it has to do with The Athest's fallacious argument.
 
Just to put the numbers out there, American has roughly 2.3 million people incarcirated and about 6.1 million felons.

That would make "Prison" the 36th largest state between Kansas and New Mexico. That's 5-6 Electoral Votes and 4-5 Representatives worth of "Political Power" that isn't being used, and that's just for the incarcerated. Just under 3 times that that for released felons.
 
My personal opinion is that we could quibble over whether or not it's fair/right/proper/whatever to take voting rights away from people while they actively serving their sentences. I'm against it personally, but it's fair argument to put on the table.

But there's no version of not letting felons who have completed their sentences vote that rings reasonable to me.
 
Ziggurat said:
Since misunderstanding seems almost mandatory here, what is unsubstantiated is not that Trump made the boast, but that he did what he boasted about.
Click to expand...

Do you hear yourself talk? Your defense is "Well maybe he's lying!"

So you see Trump boasting about sexual assault but not doing it as a reasonable possibility?
 
JoeMorgue said:
Do you hear yourself talk? Your defense is "Well maybe he's lying!"

So you see Trump boasting about sexual assault but not doing it as a reasonable possibility?
Click to expand...

To be fair, Trump lies about everything all the time.

So, yeah, it's not unreasonable.
 
Joe Biden enters the fray.

In Or At Least Exploring (By Current or Highest Office Held):

Vice Presidents:
Joe Biden

Governors:
Jay Inslee
John Hickenlooper

Senators:
Corey Booker
Kirsten Gillibrand
Mike Gravel
Kamala Harris
Amy Klobuchar
Bernie Sanders
Elizabeth Warren

US Representatives:
John Delaney
Tulsi Gabbard
Seth Moulton
Beto O'Rourke
Tim Ryan
Eric Swallwell

Cabinet Members:
Julian Castro

Mayors:
Pete Buttegieg
Wayne Messam

Unannounced But Considered Likely:

Senators:
Michael Bennet

Mayors:
Bill De Blasio
 
Brainster said:
Joe Biden enters the fray.

In Or At Least Exploring (By Current or Highest Office Held):

Vice Presidents:
Joe Biden

Governors:
Jay Inslee
John Hickenlooper

Senators:
Corey Booker
Kirsten Gillibrand
Mike Gravel
Kamala Harris
Amy Klobuchar
Bernie Sanders
Elizabeth Warren

US Representatives:
John Delaney
Tulsi Gabbard
Seth Moulton
Beto O'Rourke
Tim Ryan
Eric Swallwell

Cabinet Members:
Julian Castro

Mayors:
Pete Buttegieg
Wayne Messam

Unannounced But Considered Likely:

Senators:
Michael Bennet

Mayors:
Bill De Blasio
Click to expand...

The ones with long surnames are attempting to take unfair advantage by occupying a larger area on the dartboard. We can frustrate that attempt by reducing the font size to keep the total printed length the same for all.
 
Biden's Senate record, advocacy of 1994 crime bill will be used against him, ex-Sanders staffer says

Former Vice President Joe Biden will face scrutiny over his record in the U.S. Congress and particularly his strong advocacy for the 1994 crime bill, says Independent voter and former Bernie Sanders staffer Tezlyn Figaro.

“I grew up in the 1990s. And my entire adult generation, those around me, really suffered a major consequence with that bill,” Figaro said on “Fox and Friends” Thursday, just minutes after Biden announced his candidacy for president.

“First time nonviolent offenders who went to prison for 15, 16, 17 years. People are still in prison right now as a result of that crime bill,” she added, noting that while the former Veep somewhat apologized for his support of the bill, he hasn’t spoken about how that will be fixed...
Click to expand...
 
Besides uncle Biden's creep videos and his lethargic style, stuff like this on his Senate record will inevitably come out. Even worse, he risks splitting the vote to the disadvantage of the Democratic candidate with the best chance right now, Bernie Sanders.

Party unity. We're supposed to have party unity.
 
Venom said:
Besides uncle Biden's creep videos and his lethargic style, stuff like this on his Senate record will inevitably come out. Even worse, he risks splitting the vote to the disadvantage of the Democratic candidate with the best chance right now, Bernie Sanders.

Party unity. We're supposed to have party unity.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. This is the time to choose a candidate. Biden has as much right as any other candidate to throw his hat into the ring. Unity comes later. And frankly, I have my problems with both of them. They are both old. Both have political positions I don't agree with. Party unity comes later...much later.
 
Baylor said:
Absolutely. For some strange reason, dead people always vote Democrat.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

The good ole Nixon meme, eh? Where Chicago's dead people vote for Democrats. The flip side of that, of course, was that cows in more rural areas of the state vote Republican. Illinois, in general, has a bit of a history when it comes to voter fraud schemes on both sides, though, so that's not saying all that much that's generally applicable, however much the GOP has used its propaganda to ingrain that concept into the Republican consciousness.

With that said, funny how Republicans were actually caught using the names of dead people to try to get a win for themselves in the last cycle.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
No. He's just pointing out that there are lots of criminals voting. They just haven't been convicted as of yet.
Click to expand...
Which is why it's still okay for them to vote. Due process, remember?

Or are you arguing that it's not okay to allow "unconvicted criminals" to vote?

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?
Click to expand...

?

I have the right to vote when I choose. Convicted felons lose the right to choose (in some jurisdictions).

How other people exercise their right to choose has no bearing here.
 
theprestige said:
Which is why it's still okay for them to vote. Due process, remember?
Or are you arguing that it's not okay to allow "unconvicted criminals" to vote?
Click to expand...
You just run around the point. Don't you?

theprestige said:
I have the right to vote when I choose. Convicted felons lose the right to choose (in some jurisdictions).

How other people exercise their right to choose has no bearing here.
Click to expand...

That doesn't address my question. Which I'll ask again. What is the point or purpose in denying these people their vote?
 
acbytesla said:
Even if the law they broke was wrong
Click to expand...
Breaking a law you don't agree with seems like a clear case of setting yourself against society.

and or racially applied?
Click to expand...
This is a question of improper application, not improper consequences.

In the case of capital punishment, I believe it is the proper consequence for certain acts. However, I am increasingly doubtful that it can be properly applied. So even though I approve of the consequence, I am inclined to oppose it as a policy.

Maybe that's how you feel about disenfranchising felons: You agree with the consequence, but have problems with the application. Or maybe you don't agree with the consequence, and would oppose disenfranchising felons even if the policy were properly applied.
 
I don't want Biden or Sanders to win the primary but on the bright side their running might make the strongest candidates rise to the top.

BTW, Biden's age is often mentioned. Sanders is a year older.

76 and 77 this year.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
People who have set themselves against society should not have a say in the ordering of that society.
Click to expand...

There are always a way to word something in order to preemptively support an idea. Here you reword "broken the law" as "set themselves against society" in order to create a contradiction with "voting", reworded as "have a say in the ordering of society".
 
theprestige said:
Breaking a law you don't agree with seems like a clear case of setting yourself against society.


This is a question of improper application, not improper consequences.

In the case of capital punishment, I believe it is the proper consequence for certain acts. However, I am increasingly doubtful that it can be properly applied. So even though I approve of the consequence, I am inclined to oppose it as a policy.

Maybe that's how you feel about disenfranchising felons: You agree with the consequence, but have problems with the application. Or maybe you don't agree with the consequence, and would oppose disenfranchising felons even if the policy were properly applied.
Click to expand...

I'm explicitly against society. Should I not be allowed to vote?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I don't want Biden or Sanders to win the primary but on the bright side it might make the strongest candidates rise to the top.
Click to expand...

I'm having trouble parsing this. Obviously you don't mean that having Biden or Sanders win the primary will make strongest candidates rise to the top. But wouldn't the strongest candidates rise to the top even without Biden or Sanders in the race?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom