2020 Presidential Race

#2,303
#2,303
lawgator1 said:
I would say felons, or for misdemeanants serving a sentence in jail. I haven't thought it through but my initial thought is that a misdemeanant serving a sentence in jail should not be allowed to vote. A misdemeanant not serving a sentence in jail, but maybe doing a little work release, I'm thinking should be allowed to vote.

Part of my thinking as well on this is practicality. Trying to distinguish between people who can, and cannot vote, in a jail or prison, is not practical and just adds to the difficulty of an already impossible job.
Click to expand...

I do think there is a pathway for reformed individuals to obtain that right again. However, there very well should be conditions on it. I'm not talking misdemeanors and the like, but rather your hardcore felons. Or most certainly those convicted of voter fraud and the likes should never have that ability again. Or those judged mentally incompetent.

The pathway back to regular "citizenship" should be earned, not automatically given depending on the severity of the crime. I mean, if a serial rapist was released after "serving their time", don't you think we, as a society, should make sure they are back on the straight and narrow prior to allowing that person to chart our political destiny? Furthermore, what happens if it was a "hate crime"?

And honestly, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If a person was convicted of a felony and later receives back their right to vote, shouldn't they also be allowed other rights to be restored like the Second Amendment? How can you say "well, you can have this, but you certainly cannot have everything." Either the person has served their debt to society and all is forgiven or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM and tennvols77
#2,304
#2,304
LouderVol said:
Right now a third party taking away electoral votes would be a win
Click to expand...

Lol for the Dems it would yes . Having a swamp rat like Mitt run as an third party to take away votes from Trump doesn’t have an impact on the two party system . It just give one party more votes . To break the two party system you’ll need multiple strong candidates at all levels to give people more than just two choices .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#2,307
#2,307
0nelilreb said:
Lol for the Dems it would yes . Having a swamp rat like Mitt run as an third party to take away votes from Trump doesn’t have an impact on the two party system . It just give one party more votes . To break the two party system you’ll need multiple strong candidates at all levels to give people more than just two choices .
Click to expand...
Taking away electoral votes, by winning them, would be a huge win. Even if it's just Nebraska or Maine that splits their votes. Having a third party make that much of a wave would shock the system back away from the fringes imo.

The only reason the socialists are valid at all is because they have an equally crazy counterpart. There is no moderate running.
 
#2,310
#2,310
0nelilreb said:
Like passing lynching laws in the year 2019 , saying they are for reparations and trying to get votes back to felons while they are still in jail ? That’s twice I’ve agree with you today .. I see a bromance blooming .
Click to expand...
Don't get carried away.
How are those appealing to the darker side of human nature?
I can see reparations as possibly being seen as appealing to greed.
 
#2,324
#2,324
1972 Grad said:
He is working on the Antifa vote as we speak. Today, he said that there was a group of neo-Nazis in Charlottesville "chanting the same anti-Semitic bile we heard in the 30's," and went on to say they were "confronted by a group of brave Americans" and a "violent clash ensued." He forgot to mention that "group of brave Americans" were Antifa members. F*** that pandering piece of sh!t, too.
Click to expand...

He kinda ignored the fact that the "Nazis" got a permit like law abiding people do, and Antifa just showed up to crash the party ... like the common trash that they are, but that's what libs do ... context and fact are irrelevant in libbyland. Free speech is important to libs if it's their message, and something to be suppressed if it's not the commie party line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennesseefan2019
#2,325
#2,325
lawgator1 said:
I have a simple line here. If you have served your sentence, including parole/probation, then your voting rights should be restored. Not before then.
Click to expand...
Why? You forfeited your rights when you committed a felony. That is the whole point of a felony. Jail is just part of the punishment. You continue to owe society a debt after release. Should a murderer be allowed to buy a gun? A rapist? Should a pedophile not be required to register as a sex offender for the rest of their lives? Losing constitutional rights because of your heinous crimes are a necessity, especially in this country where the left has created breeding grounds for criminals.

Non violent felons should be able to have their rights restored after jail time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, tumscalcium, nuclearjunky and 1 other person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top