How do we maintain our democracy when Repulbicans have given up on democracy and now want authoritarianism? (1 Viewer)

[coldseat]

It's hard to believe how far down the road we've gone towards authoritarianism. Republicans are not even trying to hide anymore. If they are able to recapture control of the House in 2022, I have serious concern about how much longer we'll be able to maintain our democracy. Just look at how far they're willing to go in the article below. How can we stop this speeding train towards authoritarianism and nationalism in the Republican party and get them to defend and support democracy once more?

Their polls found that after the election, a supermajority of Republicans backed Trump's efforts to overturn the results: 86% said his legal challenges were appropriate, 79% said they weren't confident in the national vote tally, and 68% said Trump really won. Another 54% said Trump should never concede, and a plurality said state legislatures should override the popular vote.
This set the stage for Trump, GOP lawmakers, and right-wing media outlets to continue pushing the lie that the election was "rigged," which Trump did yet again in a press release this week.


Additionally, only 34% of Trump voters said they would accept Biden as the legitimate president, according to the post-election polls. That pales in comparison to similar surveys conducted by Gallup after previous controversial elections -- 68% of Al Gore voters in 2000 accepted George W. Bush's legitimacy, and 76% of Hillary Clinton voters in 2016 accepted Trump's as president.
The organization was among the first to raise the alarm last summer about the potential for unprecedented political violence if the 2020 election was disputed -- warnings that became a reality with the January 6 attack on the US Capitol. They released the new polls as part of a series of reports about the manufactured "crisis of confidence" in US elections.

New polls show GOP willingness to subvert 2020 election

New polls released Thursday show just how far Republicans were willing to go to support then-President Donald Trump's unprecedented efforts to subvert the 2020 election.

www.cnn.com

An excellent podcast on how Hungary's democracy has fallen and the similarities between what Orban and his party have done and how Republicans are doing the same thing here in the US.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Look up the five big personality traits. In particular look at the traits of "open to experience" and "conscientiousness". Liberals (open to experience) have a personality that craves the new and the exotic. They embrace change, foreign cuisine, strange art, foreign nationals, body alteration, avant garde fashion, are more risk takers, impulsive, and less organized, etc. The conscientious types (conservatives) love the old ways, stability, organization, predictability, and naturally avoid the unknown such as foreign cuisine, foreigners, avant garde stuff, body art, etc. They prefer the old fashion ways.

Many people have a bit of both and that would be someone like me. Others are solidly on the extremes. What is really fascinating is that each extreme side thinks the other side is that way because they are dumb.

Did I forget tribalism?

Are these traits inherited? IMO, people's political beliefs are shaped more from their experiences and upbringing and not necessarily related to personality traits that apparently have prescribed categories of likes, dislikes, and behavior automatically associated with them. Seems way too formulaic.

I do consider people on both extremes to be 'dumb' (or at least, un-salvageable from reasoning). An example...




I don't want to devolve into a discussion of what-about-ism because I readily acknowledge there are people on the left who espouse equally insane nonsense. However, I do consider them past the point of reason, so it isn't a left/right thing, just a matter of people who for whatever reason have gone past the event horizon in the madness of their beliefs.

Closer to the extremes but eking ever-slowly there are those who constantly ingest a diet of right and left broadcasters and websites such that their talking points are predictable because you're aware of the source. What-about-ism rules the day.

The country would be better off with a Senate full of Joe Manchins but what we are ultimately headed for is a Senate full of extremists, or at least those willing to pander to extremists, in both R and D shades. Trump was merely ahead of the game in his full-tilt pandering.

 

[Paul]

Are these traits inherited? IMO, people's political beliefs are shaped more from their experiences and upbringing and not necessarily related to personality traits that apparently have prescribed categories of likes, dislikes, and behavior automatically associated with them. Seems way too formulaic.

I do consider people on both extremes to be 'dumb' (or at least, un-salvageable from reasoning). An example...




I don't want to devolve into a discussion of what-about-ism because I readily acknowledge there are people on the left who espouse equally insane nonsense. However, I do consider them past the point of reason, so it isn't a left/right thing, just a matter of people who for whatever reason have gone past the event horizon in the madness of their beliefs.

Closer to the extremes but eking ever-slowly there are those who constantly ingest a diet of right and left broadcasters and websites such that their talking points are predictable because you're aware of the source. What-about-ism rules the day.

The country would be better off with a Senate full of Joe Manchins but what we are ultimately headed for is a Senate full of extremists, or at least those willing to pander to extremists, in both R and D shades. Trump was merely ahead of the game in his full-tilt pandering.

I agree with you. Like everything it is about genetics and the environment. My sister and I grew up in the same house. She was always rebellious and willing to try anything new. I was a bit more careful and much less rebellious. I can see relatives that have her or my personality, it is quite obvious. She is heavily into social justice whereas I am a moderate. I crossed all my Ts growing up and she was a bit erratic. While growing up we had a different set of friends and obviously we picked up different views. This may sound like an anecdote and some may say it proves nothing.

Then I had children of my own and saw how different they were according to whatever personality they inherited.

Identical twins that grew up apart in totally different households often have the same personality traits. There is a genetic component to personality.

 

[Sun Waves]

We had an election in Texas not that long ago. Most of the precincts in Houston were "combined" in one location. So, unlike the suburbs where you have your nice precinct in the local elementary school that is separate from all the other precincts (and you can just walk up and vote in 15 minutes at the most), you had people standing in line for 8 hours. 8 hours. In Houston. It gets hot here. People need water if they are standing outside for 8 hours.

So, imagine that you have been standing in line for 4 hours, and you aren't even half way to the voting booth. You are thirsty as hell, and maybe even feeling a little ill. Someone tells you it is going to be at least 4 hours before you go in. I can easily see you saying, "to heck with this," and leaving.

I would love to see the voter turnout for the typically Republican voter precincts if they had to go through what most African-Americans have had to go through in the past.

The reason the Republicans want to get rid of mail in ballots isn't for "election integrity." It is to make sure that the people they don't want to vote are standing in line for 8 hours with no water waiting to vote. If you can't see that then you either having been paying attention to voter suppression tactics of the past 150 years, or you just don't want to see it.

There should be more locations to vote to eliminate long waiting lines. Not being able to give water to people and requiring ID's aren't voter suppression.

 

[Sun Waves]

Prove it. Prove that it's vulnerable to fraud. You do know they already added fraud prevention measures to drop boxes and absentee ballots. Prove that they are insufficient. Prove how you would defeat the measures in place.

Your analogy is silly. We already have a lock on the door. This is akin to requiring trip alarms, and 24 hour monitoring service in a suburban neighborhood on a house that has never been robbed.

Comparing trip alarms to in-person voting... That's quite an exaggeration you got there.

Since you like to have proof before changing something, should you have to prove a police shooting was racially motivated before making changes to the police force?

 

[Sandman]

There should be more locations to vote to eliminate long waiting lines. Not being able to give water to people and requiring ID's aren't voter suppression.

If it isn’t suppressing the vote, then why do Republicans want to prohibit it? Too much stock in Brawndo?

 

[wardorican]

If we assume the Russians can control the election because they place adds on Face Book, then we also have to assume the voters are dumb.

A lot of voters are dumb.

But my point was that "a billion times more" was hyperbole.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

Comparing trip alarms to in-person voting... That's quite an exaggeration you got there.

Since you like to have proof before changing something, should you have to prove a police shooting was racially motivated before making changes to the police force?

Well, remember you and @Farb were the ones demanding proof of voter suppression, I was pointing out that you don't really want proof before making changes. I'm not the one demanding to make a change here, you are.

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

This study finds that strict voter ID laws don't stop people from voting.

Strict ID Laws Don’t Stop Voters: Evidence from a U.S. Nationwide Panel, 2008–2018​

U.S. states increasingly require identification to vote – an ostensive attempt to deter fraud that prompts complaints of selective disenfranchisement. Using a difference-in-differences design on a 1.6-billion-observations panel dataset, 2008–2018, we find that the laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation. These results hold through a large number of specifications. Our most demanding specification controls for state, year, and voter fixed effects, along with state and voter time-varying controls.
https://academic.oup.com/qje/advanc...3/qje/qjab019/6281042?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Also, the majority of the public supports requiring a photo ID to vote.

Support for requiring a photo ID to vote stands at 62% among Democrats, 87% among independents, and 91% among Republicans.

Public Supports Both Early Voting And Requiring Photo ID to Vote | Monmouth University Polling Institute

One-third remain convinced of 2020 election fraud

www.monmouth.edu

Actually, I've read a few studies and articles that indicate most of these changes aren't going to have a major impact one way or the other (they won't reduce fraud or have a major impact on the ability to vote). Which is why I don't have a huge sense of panic over this. However, I can also think that a law to reduce access to voting is bad without thinking it's the end of the world.

 

[MT15]

And you can also recognize that the motivation of the Republicans for doing these changes isn’t to combat nonexistent voter fraud. Well said, Jim.

I get a little bit annoyed when someone tries to sell me on such a flimsy lie. It’s insulting.

 

[Paul]

And you can also recognize that the motivation of the Republicans for doing these changes isn’t to combat nonexistent voter fraud. Well said, Jim.

I get a little bit annoyed when someone tries to sell me on such a flimsy lie. It’s insulting.

This will backfire and will actually stimulate more Democrats to vote

 

[MT15]

I sure hope so, Paul. The Republican Party is just about indefensible at this point. They have no interest in actually governing, IMO. They just want to speed up the US on the path to an authoritarian oligarchy.

 

[Paul]

I sure hope so, Paul. The Republican Party is just about indefensible at this point. They have no interest in actually governing, IMO. They just want to speed up the US on the path to an authoritarian oligarchy.

The Republicans are following a strategy that they think will win elections. I am sorry to report that the Democrats are doing the same.

 

[Farb]

I've done it before and you ignored it, but what the hell I'll do it again.

Georgia SB202. That's the law that is actual voter suppression.

It suppresses the vote in the following ways:

1. Limiting drop box locations and times. Decreasing the number of available drop boxes and limiting their hours (last election they were 24/7 and had many locations per county in almost all of the most populous counties -- even populous red counties like mine) suppresses votes. Capping the number of available drop boxes to 1 per 100,000 voters whereas before there was no limit. In the four most populous counties in Georgia (that all went to Biden, of course) the number of drop box locations is going from 111 to 23 max. Those four counties represent 33% of Georgia's entire population. Drop boxes were monitored 24/7 and not one instance of suspected voter fraud was found.
   
   Having drop boxes available helped the rate of rejected absentee ballots plummet from previous years. In 2020, only 0.6% of absentee ballots were rejected -- most of those because they were late. In prior elections, the rate of rejected absentee ballots was 4% in 2018 and 3% in 2016. With drop boxes, far fewer of a percent of absentee ballots came in late -- 0.3% were rejected because they were late which is about 20% of prior years late rejection percentages (~1.45%).
   
   And of course for the first time in Georgia, most absentee ballots in 2020 went for the Democratic Party candidates (nearly 2/3 went for Biden for instance) instead of normally going overwhelmingly in favor of the Republican Party candidates.
2. Requiring Voter ID for absentee ballots. Previously signature match was good enough (when absentee ballots were overwhelmingly in favor of Republican candidates). Now Voter ID is required to *request* a ballot (not even to actually vote but just requesting an absentee ballot). An estimated 3% of Georgia's eligible voters do not have government issued photo ID. That suppresses votes.
   
   An audit of signature match absentee votes in Cobb County of 15,000 votes found zero fraudulent signatures.
3. Early voting hours change; for most Georgia voters, the number of days/hours is less. In the general, the number of hours for most Georgia voters is the same or less (adding a second Saturday requirement adds a day for many rural counties that mostly went for Trump; for the populous counties they already had two Saturdays and Sundays in most cases, so the time remains the same or is less based on what days/hours are chosen in the next election).
   
   For the runoffs (if any), the hours shrink for everyone. in 2020, there were 3 weeks of early voting in the runoff. SB202 limits that to one. Additionally, runoffs have to occur 4 weeks after the initial election, leaving less time to prepare for the new election (printing ballots, lining up poll workers, testing equipment and procedures, and organizing for each side in the runoff). That suppresses votes.
4. It's illegal to hand out water or food in voting lines (basically). Election officials can have self-serve water locations if they so choose, but no outside groups can. In years past, the local churches and non-partisan groups (like Pizza to the Polls) were most of those groups who handed out water.
   
   In Georgia, almost every precinct that had lines of an hour or longer were in minority neighborhoods. The number of voters per precinct has grown in the metro Atlanta counties by 30-50% over just the past 2 elections. Long lines suppress votes. Long lines with less available refreshments suppress votes even more.
5. Earlier absentee vote deadlines, and later opening day for requesting absentee votes. That shortens the absentee voting period from 180 days to 78 days. That suppresses votes.
6. Voting Buses are no longer allowed. Fulton County used voting buses to have a mobile voting location, announced beforehand to be in certain places on certain days. SB202 banned the bus. 112,000+ voters utilized the voting buses last election. That suppresses votes. And it shouldn't be lost on anyone that Fulton county has the largest number of minority voters in the state.
7. Provisional ballots in an incorrect precinct will not be counted (unless after 5pm). If a voter goes to the wrong precinct for any reason (old precinct closed/merged, long lines at their main precinct, main precinct too far from job location, etc) then the whole ballot will be discarded. More than 3,300 ballots were cast provisionally at incorrect precincts in 2020. That suppresses votes.
8. Local governments cannot mail out ballots or absentee ballot request forms unless they are requested specifically by a voter. Some counties sent out absentee ballot requests forms to all active registered voters. This law bans that. Many groups sent out absentee ballot request forms to all kinds of people. Many people received numerous such forms from different groups, even after they had requested an absentee ballot. SB202 changes that (assuming an active court case doesn't overturn this portion of the law) so that organizations get fined if they send out a form to someone who has already requested an absentee ballot. That suppresses votes.
9. Any voter can challenge as many other voters' eligibility in the same county as they wish. That means one person could challenge every other voter's eligibility in their own county if they so desired. That suppresses votes (and wastes the time of election officials who have to investigate, and of any challenged voter who may have to prove their eligibility in a timely manner or have their vote discarded).
10. (These final two aren't in the law -- but *were* in the original bill that was introduced by the house and should be considered to judge the motivation for the law.)
    
    Original proposal tried to ban Sunday early voting. There was no reason given, but Sunday voting called "Souls to the Polls" were a very popular type of early voting by black churches in Georgia. This would obviously have suppressed votes and very specifically black votes. It was taken out after incredible pushback.
11. Original proposal tried to remove "no excuse" absentee ballots. Oddly, it was Republicans who championed and passed no-excuse absentee ballots (over the objections of some Democrats!) in 2005; they had never once been called into question until their candidate lost in 2020. This would have also suppressed votes, but was taken out after objections from all across the political spectrum.

So there you have it. You can never say that nobody has shown proof of a law that suppresses votes ever again; the only thing you can say is you disagree with the obvious suppression attempt and think it isn't suppression (although by definition, every one of the things listed presents obstacles to people being able to vote and thus suppress the vote).

Everyone feels so victimized here, sorry my guy, I don't recall seeing you posted this before.

Most of those 'changes' were just undoing the 'changes' that allowed everyone to vote as easily as possible during the pandemic. Remember, we are all in this together!

I would hardly call lines, and physically wanting the citizen in person to vote as suppression. But then again, I think voting should be restricted by basic intelligence and civic knowledge (I know, very authoritarian/Orwellian of me!)

Voting, absentee or not should be done as close to election day as possible. A lot of new information and stories come out the week before the election. An informed voter will wait until all the information is available to make a decision. Remember the laptop story that was suppressed the week before? It happens.

I also think that a person, yes, even a minority, can figure out how to get out and vote...You have 4 years to plan after all.

I won't even discuss voter ID because the DNC has already surrendered that idiot hill. (vaccine passport required but not ID?)

Bring your own water and food if you need to. Being an adult and planning ahead is hard, I know. I am not a bright man, but I have never come close to dying while waiting in line to vote. Not even close.

Being a part of a society is hard, you are required to do certain things to function in that society. States also have the right to control their own elections and the federal government has no place in how the states preform their duties (this is going to the SCOTUS so we shall soon see).

The bigotry of low expectations are alive and well in the DNC. If the number of voters have grown in the last 2 elections by as much as 30% to 50% how is that proof of voter of suppression in the metro area? Sounds like the folks wanted to get out a vote and they did and have been.

 

[V Chip]

Most of those 'changes' were just undoing the 'changes' that allowed everyone to vote as easily as possible during the pandemic.

Only one was — Dropbox limitations. All the rest existed before 2020.

I would hardly call lines, and physically wanting the citizen in person to vote as suppression.

Waiting in long lines is absolutely voter suppression. Let’s exaggerate and say you had to wait 12 hours to vote — do you honestly think the same amount of people would vote under those circumstances? C’mon.

Voting, absentee or not should be done as close to election day as possible. A lot of new information and stories come out the week before the election. An informed voter will wait until all the information is available to make a decision. Remember the laptop story that was suppressed the week before? It happens.

You mean the completely fabricated hunter Biden laptop Story that had absolutely nothing to do with the election?

I also think that a person, yes, even a minority, can figure out how to get out and vote...You have 4 years to plan after all.

Not when a requirement is passed weeks or months before a vote as they often are.

I have never come close to dying while waiting in line to vote. Not even close.

Glad to know death is the only outcome of waiting in line in the Georgia heat for hours just to vote.

If the number of voters have grown in the last 2 elections by as much as 30% to 50% how is that proof of voter of suppression in the metro area?

Read that again. The number of people *per precinct* has grown 30-50%. That’s because so many precincts have been shut down or merged — most of them in minority voting areas (surprise surprise). Add to that the new requirement to report the total votes cast by 10pm the night of the election and if lines get as historically long as some have been, people can still be in line to vote at that cutoff time. That’s more suppression.

And for almost every one of the things listed, there’s no real reason for the changes. Drop boxes worked flawlessly in Georgia and every other state— why the change? Why less time for absentee voting when it was always as long as it was in 2020 (and when Republicans didn’t care one bit about the “election integrity” then when they were the beneficiaries of the majority of the votes)? Why was the no Sunday voting even put into the bill in the first place? We all know why, but some people seem to not care about the motivations.

 

[MT15]

The Republicans are following a strategy that they think will win elections. I am sorry to report that the Democrats are doing the same.

They are following a strategy that includes failing to concede a clearly lost election and manufacturing lies about voter fraud. I am sorry to report that you cannot seriously “both sides” what the two parties are doing in this case.

Well, I guess you can because you just did. But it shouldn’t be taken as a serious point.

 

[SFIDC3]

They are following a strategy that includes failing to concede a clearly lost election and manufacturing lies about voter fraud. I am sorry to report that you cannot seriously “both sides” what the two parties are doing in this case.

Well, I guess you can because you just did. But it shouldn’t be taken as a serious point.

Well said, I'm tired of hearing this old tired both sides BS.....The current GOP is an absolute disgrace minus the few remaining real conservatives who are actually interested in governing...

 

[Paul]

They are following a strategy that includes failing to concede a clearly lost election and manufacturing lies about voter fraud. I am sorry to report that you cannot seriously “both sides” what the two parties are doing in this case.

Well, I guess you can because you just did. But it shouldn’t be taken as a serious point.

The Dems also play the game. They do! They rehearse and say what they think the minorities want to hear, I am a so called minority so I know.

 

[MT15]

Okay, but don’t you think that is not on the same level as trying to tear apart our voting system entirely?

There has never been a loser of a presidential election who failed to concede (until now). And the invasion of the Capitol with the intent to stop the counting of electoral votes (which were all properly certified by every state) has never happened before.

Don’t normalize the crazy. The Republican Party could have put a stop to it. But instead they are embracing it.