Fox News knew they were lying about election

[The Don]

You continue to insist that well publicized voter intimidation tactics such as these laws have "no effect" on elections, in the face of all logic, reason, and evidence. Oh, gee, the law was blocked, so absolutely no one could have thought it still applied, been worried about it anyway, or have been dissuaded from voting due to the laws? Give me a break.




By your own sources, these tactics have been in play long before the 2016 election and are still being implemented today. Is there some reason you're assuming this magical window where they had effects right up until Nov 2016, then stopped and waited until Dec of 2020 to start working again?

....and then there are the other voter suppression methods like making it as difficult as possible for folks in certain neighbourhoods to get to a polling station and instead forcing them to vote during working hours and/or spending hours standing in line to vote.

 

[wareyin]

....and then there are the other voter suppression methods like making it as difficult as possible for folks in certain neighbourhoods to get to a polling station and instead forcing them to vote during working hours and/or spending hours standing in line to vote.

Ah, but we're being told that those particular effects were suspended during the 2016 and 2020 elections.

 

[The Don]

Ah, but we're being told that those particular effects were suspended during the 2016 and 2020 elections.

I thought that conversation was about legislative changes such as voter ID.

I don't think legislation is required to ensure that a primarily Democrat-voting district has a comparative lack of polling stations and/or a shortage of poll workers ensuring that voters there have to queue for hours whilst GOP leaning districts have more polling stations and shorter (or even no) lines.

 

[wareyin]

I thought that conversation was about legislative changes such as voter ID.

I don't think legislation is required to ensure that a primarily Democrat-voting district has a comparative lack of polling stations and/or a shortage of poll workers ensuring that voters there have to queue for hours whilst GOP leaning districts have more polling stations and shorter (or even no) lines.

In the case of Georgia and Alabama, legislation was used to limit polling places/hours in primarily Democrat-voting districts, whether or not it was required to have been done through legislation.

But, again, I apparently didn't notice that for the 2016 and 2020 elections those particular changes didn't apply (despite the 2018 and 2019 newspaper articles complaining about them).

 

[Aridas]

I thought that conversation was about legislative changes such as voter ID.

I don't think legislation is required to ensure that a primarily Democrat-voting district has a comparative lack of polling stations and/or a shortage of poll workers ensuring that voters there have to queue for hours whilst GOP leaning districts have more polling stations and shorter (or even no) lines.

Legislation also isn't needed to... supply faultier voting machines to primarily Democrat-voting areas and be pointedly slow in fixing or replacing them, while rushing more good machines to Republican-voting areas that are getting even a little backed up with their lines, on top of those things. Oh, and spread conspiracy theories when the faulty machines have problems.

Regardless, "Free and Fair elections" is a phrase that is tossed about, and indeed, if one narrowly defines it as voting that's "free from coercion" or jumping immediately to massive fraud or altered vote/vote counts, specifically, there's a good case to be made, albeit an increasingly weaker one in some areas with armed vigilantes showily watching drop-off locations. Focusing solely upon that, though, is to focus on the letter and ignore the spirit, at best.

 

[Stacyhs]

You continue to insist that well publicized voter intimidation tactics such as these laws have "no effect" on elections, in the face of all logic, reason, and evidence.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I never said anything of the sort. In fact, I said just the opposite which you refer to just below!

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Yes, these tactics do work, but they did not work in the cases you specifically claimed because they were not in effect in GA for the 2016 or 2020 elections as I've proved.Now, will you please look at what I've actually written and not what you think I've written?

Can YOU provide any evidence that the laws you specifically stated and which I specifically addressed did, in fact, have any substantial impact on the 2016 and 2020 elections or even the 2022 election? Because, so far, all you've done is made claims and cited zero evidence.

Oh, gee, the law was blocked, so absolutely no one could have thought it still applied, been worried about it anyway, or have been dissuaded from voting due to the laws? Give me a break.

The above is a perfect example of "I can't admit I was wrong, so I'll resort to ridiculous strawmanning instead." When confronted with quoted and cited sources that disprove your claims, you resort to this kind of aggressive defensive nonsense. I never said any of the above. But I did say, in addition to my quote above:

Don't get me wrong; I know what Republicans are trying to do when it comes to their fearmongering "election fraud" nonsense reactive voting laws. But so far, at least, their efforts have been largely ineffective and have not impacted our elections being "free and fair" which was Gulliver Foyle's point. That is what I'm referring to when I said I disagreed.

In the light of the RECORD 2022 voter turnouts in GA and NC...the two states we specifically discussed... show me how the laws YOU claimed negatively affected voting actually did.

NC 2022: votes cast 3,790,202 51.14%
NC 2018: votes cast 3,755,778 52.98%


According to Georgia Secretary of State data, 3,957,598 voters cast ballots in the 2022 midterm election, up slightly from 3,949,905 in 2018 – a difference of 7,693 ballots.

By your own sources, these tactics have been in play long before the 2016 election and are still being implemented today.

I never said they weren't. But for some reason only you can explain, you just cannot seem to understand that.

Is there some reason you're assuming this magical window where they had effects right up until Nov 2016, then stopped and waited until Dec of 2020 to start working again?

Is there some reason you need to resort to such a silly comment?

I've presented the evidence to you but you refuse to accept it and continue to press your unsupported claims. Obviously facts don't matter when they contradict what you want to believe. I know when I'm beating my head against a brick wall so there's no reason to continue this conversation with you.

 

[Stacyhs]

Ah, but we're being told that those particular effects were suspended during the 2016 and 2020 elections.

I won't discuss this with you any more, but I will defend myself when accused of doing something I did not do. So...No, you weren't told that at all. I discussed ONLY the specific laws YOU brought up:

But as far as Republicans disenfranchising Democratic voters, I think that's a very valid claim. See: GA's cutbacks on voting times and locations in Democratic strongholds, plus their cracking down on giving food or water to those waiting in the long lines that those cutbacks caused. See also: NC's voting laws which were struck down by a Judge for targeting black voters with "surgical precision". See aso: FL governor DeSantis arresting people who his government told they could legally cast a vote in order to scare other legal voters away from voting.

 

[Stacyhs]

In the case of Georgia and Alabama, legislation was used to limit polling places/hours in primarily Democrat-voting districts, whether or not it was required to have been done through legislation.
But, again, I apparently didn't notice that for the 2016 and 2020 elections those particular changes didn't apply (despite the 2018 and 2019 newspaper articles complaining about them).[/HILITE]

1) I never mentioned AL.
2) I only discussed the specific laws or events YOU presented.
3) Since those specific laws or events were not in effect for the 2016 or 2020 elections or had not even been passed until 2021, articles "complaining" about them do not support your argument.

Stop misrepresenting things. It's dishonest and childish.

 

[Hercules56]

I'm starting to see a trend here.

 

[Stacyhs]

I'm starting to see a trend here.

So do I.

 

[wareyin]

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I never said anything of the sort. In fact, I said just the opposite which you refer to just below!



Can YOU provide any evidence that the laws you specifically stated and which I specifically addressed did, in fact, have any substantial impact on the 2016 and 2020 elections or even the 2022 election? Because, so far, all you've done is made claims and cited zero evidence.

Given that you say you won't respond any more, there may not be a point to this, but:
Which is it? Do you agree that the Republicans have been working to disenfranchise and depress Democratic voters/voter turnout since the 2013 law I specifically brought up (and before) or do you need yet more evidence? I brought up 3 different efforts in three different states that span almost a decade as evidence that Republicans do not want "free and fair" elections and have been working against them. So far, your only rebuttal has been that one of the laws was struck down during the 2016 election year so can't have had any effect on that election, and that the other 2 examples were implemented after 2020. This blinkered 'gee, unless you can prove that the examples you gave of a long term trend effected 2 and only 2 specific elections, then Republicans aren't working against "free and fair" elections' stance you're taking is making you look rather silly and out of touch.

In the light of the RECORD 2022 voter turnouts in GA and NC...the two states we specifically discussed... show me how the laws YOU claimed negatively affected voting actually did.

NC 2022: votes cast 3,790,202 51.14%
NC 2018: votes cast 3,755,778 52.98%


According to Georgia Secretary of State data, 3,957,598 voters cast ballots in the 2022 midterm election, up slightly from 3,949,905 in 2018 – a difference of 7,693 ballots.

Aridas and I have both pointed out that a backlash against hamfisted attempts at voter disenfranchisement doesn't mean the disenfranchisement didn't happen. You've already agreed to that. Is there some reason you continue to use the backlash to prove it didn't happen, after agreeing that this doesn't prove your point?

I've presented the evidence to you but you refuse to accept it and continue to press your unsupported claims. Obviously facts don't matter when they contradict what you want to believe. I know when I'm beating my head against a brick wall so there's no reason to continue this conversation with you.

Your refusal to accept that Republican efforts to disenfranchise voters have been going on for a long time is not evidence.

 

[wareyin]

1) I never mentioned AL.
2) I only discussed the specific laws or events YOU presented.
3) Since those specific laws or events were not in effect for the 2016 or 2020 elections or had not even been passed until 2021, articles "complaining" about them do not support your argument.

Stop misrepresenting things. It's dishonest and childish.

I mentioned AL. Unlike you, I do not have my head in the sand with regard to Republican efforts against free and fair elections, and used it as a 4th example to show a long term trend.

And yes, the AL polling places being removed happened in 2018 which, if my math is correct, means that it was in effect for the 2020 election. 2018 happening to be before 2020 is just the way numbers and time work, you know. But if you wish to continue to disagree that Republicans have been working to disenfranchise Democratic voters (limited to 2016 and 2020 for some pedantic reason) here's yet another example: 2016 Wisconsin Voter ID laws. Or how about efforts in 2020 in PA and MI. Here's another article, but be warned, it's from 2018 but brings up GA suppression efforts that you want to limit to only after the 2020 election.

 

[Hercules56]

So do I.

Some folks just want to be at war with everyone.

 

[wareyin]

Some folks just want to be at war with everyone.

Meh, sometimes Stacy gets stuck on a pedantic point so badly that she misses the whole point of the conversation, but I don't think she wants to be at war with everyone.

 

[Hercules56]

Meh, sometimes Stacy gets stuck on a pedantic point so badly that she misses the whole point of the conversation, but I don't think she wants to be at war with everyone.

Funny, as I was not talking about her.

Wink wink.

 

[Stacyhs]

Meh, sometimes Stacy gets stuck on a pedantic point so badly that she misses the whole point of the conversation, but I don't think she wants to be at war with everyone.

Trying to keep a discussion on the actual point and calling out a member's attempts to misrepresent what is being said is not being 'pedantic'.

No, I don't want to be 'at war' with anyone, but I will not allow anyone dishonestly misrepresenting what I've said to go unchallenged.

 

[Stacyhs]

Given that you say you won't respond any more, there may not be a point to this, but:
Which is it? Do you agree that the Republicans have been working to disenfranchise and depress Democratic voters/voter turnout since the 2013 law I specifically brought up (and before) or do you need yet more evidence? I brought up 3 different efforts in three different states that span almost a decade as evidence that Republicans do not want "free and fair" elections and have been working against them. So far, your only rebuttal has been that one of the laws was struck down during the 2016 election year so can't have had any effect on that election, and that the other 2 examples were implemented after 2020. This blinkered 'gee, unless you can prove that the examples you gave of a long term trend effected 2 and only 2 specific elections, then Republicans aren't working against "free and fair" elections' stance you're taking is making you look rather silly and out of touch.




Aridas and I have both pointed out that a backlash against hamfisted attempts at voter disenfranchisement doesn't mean the disenfranchisement didn't happen. You've already agreed to that. Is there some reason you continue to use the backlash to prove it didn't happen, after agreeing that this doesn't prove your point?



Your refusal to accept that Republican efforts to disenfranchise voters have been going on for a long time is not evidence.

Not read.

 

[Stacyhs]

I mentioned AL. Unlike you, I do not have my head in the sand with regard to Republican efforts against free and fair elections, and used it as a 4th example to show a long term trend.

And yes, the AL polling places being removed happened in 2018 which, if my math is correct, means that it was in effect for the 2020 election. 2018 happening to be before 2020 is just the way numbers and time work, you know. But if you wish to continue to disagree that Republicans have been working to disenfranchise Democratic voters (limited to 2016 and 2020 for some pedantic reason) here's yet another example: 2016 Wisconsin Voter ID laws. Or how about efforts in 2020 in PA and MI. Here's another article, but be warned, it's from 2018 but brings up GA suppression efforts that you want to limit to only after the 2020 election.

Not read.

 

[wareyin]

Trying to keep a discussion on the actual point and calling out a member's attempts to misrepresent what is being said is not being 'pedantic'.

No, I don't want to be 'at war' with anyone, but I will not allow anyone dishonestly misrepresenting what I've said to go unchallenged.

The "actual point" was the Republican disenfranchisement efforts. I gave three examples from 3 states spanning almost a decade. You decided they didn't count because we're only allowed to focus on 2016 and 2020, and are for some reason assuming that Republicans took a break from said disenfranchisement efforts during only those 2 elections.

 

[Hercules56]

Trying to keep a discussion on the actual point and calling out a member's attempts to misrepresent what is being said is not being 'pedantic'.

No, I don't want to be 'at war' with anyone, but I will not allow anyone dishonestly misrepresenting what I've said to go unchallenged.

And you shouldn't. It's unintelligent and unfair for people to misrepresent other people's views, to make them look like a bigot or an extremist. Such activity should not be allowed here but unfortunately it is. That said those who engage in such ridiculous behavior need to be exposed, but also ignored.

And FYI, I wasn't talking about you.