One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Here is why the hypocritical democrats want to change the filibuster rule:
Page 1 of 6 next> last>>
Jan 12, 2022 09:47:42   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
They want to hijack, from the states, control of the voting process, to make it much easier to cheat. It's all right here:

https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/the-facts-about-hr-1-the-the-people-act-2019

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 10:11:56   #
Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
They want to hijack, from the states, control of the voting process, to make it much easier to cheat. It's all right here:

https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/the-facts-about-hr-1-the-the-people-act-2019


Heritage AKA Koch brothers propaganda Unit.
It is unconstitutional to allow onee we or two people to destroy the entire process obliterating the Will Of The People favoring a minority rule.
It’s anti American and un constitutional .
It has no bearing in the Constitution , it is not mentioned or written anywhere that a minority should have ascendency over the Majority.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 10:16:51   #
Strycker
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
They want to hijack, from the states, control of the voting process, to make it much easier to cheat. It's all right here:

https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/the-facts-about-hr-1-the-the-people-act-2019


They missed one of the biggies that the democrats originally had in the bill. Public funding of presidential and congressional elections. I don't know, but, if still in this bill, or slipped back into this bill, this funding will massively fill political election coffers with tax payer money by a 3 to 1 match on political donations. In 2020 14 billion was spent on the federal election. Under this bill the tax payers would add another 56 billion to the politicians coffers. Tax payers will be fleeced by 10's of billions in tax payers money which would be given to individual politicians to keep forever and use at will. It doesn't discourage campaign fund raising. It massively expands the incentive with matching funds.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2022 10:52:20   #
moldyoldy
 
Strycker wrote:
They missed one of the biggies that the democrats originally had in the bill. Public funding of presidential and congressional elections. I don't know, but, if still in this bill, or slipped back into this bill, this funding will massively fill political election coffers with tax payer money by a 3 to 1 match on political donations. In 2020 14 billion was spent on the federal election. Under this bill the tax payers would add another 56 billion to the politicians coffers. Tax payers will be fleeced by 10's of billions in tax payers money which would be given to individual politicians to keep forever and use at will. It doesn't discourage campaign fund raising. It massively expands the incentive with matching funds.
They missed one of the biggies that the democrats ... (show quote)



It would take politics out of the hands of corporate lobbyists. They could finally start working for the people.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 10:53:15   #
American Vet
 
moldyoldy wrote:
It would take politics out of the hands of corporate lobbyists. They could finally start working for the people.


And who gets to decide who gets the money and how much?

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 11:02:25   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
Milosia2 wrote:
Heritage AKA Koch brothers propaganda Unit.
It is unconstitutional to allow onee we or two people to destroy the entire process obliterating the Will Of The People favoring a minority rule.
It’s anti American and un constitutional .
It has no bearing in the Constitution , it is not mentioned or written anywhere that a minority should have ascendency over the Majority.


And that is exactly why we need to stop the democrats!!

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 11:05:04   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
moldyoldy wrote:
It would take politics out of the hands of corporate lobbyists. They could finally start working for the people.


See Stryker's comment earlier in this thread.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2022 11:13:54   #
Strycker
 
moldyoldy wrote:
It would take politics out of the hands of corporate lobbyists. They could finally start working for the people.


Totally and completely wrong. Corporate lobbyist will still contribute. Probably much much more since the tax payers will match contributions 3 to 1. It would only encourage more and larger contributions. Not less.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 11:26:15   #
moldyoldy
 
American Vet wrote:
And who gets to decide who gets the money and how much?



It would be equally distributed

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 11:49:52   #
Smedley_buzkill
 
Milosia2 wrote:
Heritage AKA Koch brothers propaganda Unit.
It is unconstitutional to allow onee we or two people to destroy the entire process obliterating the Will Of The People favoring a minority rule.
It’s anti American and un constitutional .
It has no bearing in the Constitution , it is not mentioned or written anywhere that a minority should have ascendency over the Majority.


The entire purpose of the Electoral College, and state control of voting is to prevent one or two populous states from dictating to the others. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper. A Republic, such as we have, is two wolves and a sheep with a gun voting on the same thing. The Electoral College and state control of elections are that gun. To say that all of a sudden, the same voting process we have had for all these years is suppressive is disingenuous in the extreme. Most of the supposedly disenfranchised people who have no ID receive some sort of government stipend for which ID suitable for voting is REQUIRED. To insist that you prove you are whom you say is not suppression; it is protection.
Colorado's mail in voting was instituted about twenty years ago when the state had a small population and fairly low voter turnout. easy to monitor and fix the bugs. 2020 was the highest turnout in out history with bandaids everywhere.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 11:51:23   #
Smedley_buzkill
 
moldyoldy wrote:
It would take politics out of the hands of corporate lobbyists. They could finally start working for the people.


The past two elections, firms associated with Wall Street and large corporations have donated more money to Democrats than Republicans. Maybe you think it's because they WANT to pay higher taxes.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2022 12:13:34   #
moldyoldy
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
The entire purpose of the Electoral College, and state control of voting is to prevent one or two populous states from dictating to the others. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper. A Republic, such as we have, is two wolves and a sheep with a gun voting on the same thing. The Electoral College and state control of elections are that gun. To say that all of a sudden, the same voting process we have had for all these years is suppressive is disingenuous in the extreme. Most of the supposedly disenfranchised people who have no ID receive some sort of government stipend for which ID suitable for voting is REQUIRED. To insist that you prove you are whom you say is not suppression; it is protection.
Colorado's mail in voting was instituted about twenty years ago when the state had a small population and fairly low voter turnout. easy to monitor and fix the bugs. 2020 was the highest turnout in out history with bandaids everywhere.
The entire purpose of the Electoral College, and s... (show quote)



The same process? The republicans are changing the process in every state possible. Why? Voter suppression, because they have no plans for governing, so they have to stop voters who have brains from voting.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 12:18:06   #
moldyoldy
 
Smedley_buzkill wrote:
The past two elections, firms associated with Wall Street and large corporations have donated more money to Democrats than Republicans. Maybe you think it's because they WANT to pay higher taxes.



Can you prove that claim? Citizens United, pushed by the Koch’s claims corporations are people.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 12:24:56   #
Strycker
 
moldyoldy wrote:
It would be equally distributed


Totally wrong again. It is a matching funds. The more you raise the more the tax payers give you in matching dollars.

Reply
Jan 12, 2022 12:31:50   #
American Vet
 
moldyoldy wrote:
It would be equally distributed


So I can declare myself a candidate for President, get someone to donate to my campaign, and the government will do a 3-1 contribution to my campaign?

LOL

Sounds like a good way to fleece the taxpayers!!!! No wonder leftoids like it.....

Reply
Page 1 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2022 IDF International Technologies, Inc.