Carl
New Member
Hopefully they landed on target. Wouldn’t anyone else to get hurt by my slings and arrows.
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
Carl
New Member
So magnanimous.
AnthonyI
Well-Known Member
You go ahead and flex those internet muscles.
............I guess there's a first for everything
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
While I don’t agree with this line of arguing being cowardly it do agree that it is invalid. The reason why things were written into the constitution is because the founder though it would make a healthy society. The question that needs to be answered if absolute 2nd amendment right actually do that.
Carl
New Member
Carl
New Member
I remember when I didn’t have a point to make.
Carl
New Member
Taking the exact wording of the second amendment and stating as fact that it was meant to be interpreted by the letter in perpetuity is a reactionary and fearful act. It ensures no debate on expansion of laws or regulations. The innate fear of the 2A cultists is, at its core, cowardice.
debianlinux
Well-Known Member
I think the big difference is the poop ray causes inconvenience where firearms cause death or other permanent issues. One might take that difference to say that anything you'd argue against the poop ray would apply moreso to the firearm but I maintain that it does not. Use of a firearm is a much different mindset than use of a poop ray. Almost every aspect of its use come in an entirely different framing. It's a false equivalency.
@RenegadeMonster I know that you had posted before about the voting laws that Republican states are passing. I figured you'd like to see this analysis:
What they found was an electorate that — not surprisingly — included lots of new voters. "One quarter (26%) of the voters in the 2020 general election in Florida, North Carolina and Arizona were low propensity voters—voters who had been eligible in 2016 (at least 22 years old in 2020) but did not vote in 2016." The biggest increase of new voters came from Latinos and younger people (those aged 22-29 years old). For example, 35 percent of Latino voters and 43 percent of 22-29 year old voters in Arizona, Florida and North Carolina turned out to vote in 2020 but didn't vote in 2016. Overall, "about half (53%) of Hispanic voters voted in both the 2020 and 2016 election, compared to seven in ten Black (70%) and White (72%) 2020 voters."
Conventional wisdom has long held that a surge in Latino and younger voters would disproportionately help Democrats. Yet, KFF concluded that "neither party had an advantage with low propensity voters." According to the KFF analysis, 23 percent of Democrats and 21 percent of Republicans in Florida, North Carolina and Arizona voted in 2020 but not in 2016.
Moreover, KFF found that "a slightly larger share of new 2020 voters said they voted absentee (through the mail) with seven in ten (72%) low propensity voters taking advantage of absentee voting" compared to 67 percent of 2016/2020 voters.
Those low-propensity voters are also the most likely to sit out an election if they find that the process is too complicated or restrictive. Business Insider's Grace Panetta, one of the most astute reporters covering election law this last cycle, told me that "[H]aving to jump through extra hoops to apply for a mail ballot or get to a drop box may be no big deal to the already highly-engaged, regular voters, but it has the potential to most adversely affect lower-propensity-turnout voters who benefit most from the voting process being easy and accessible to navigate when they do turn out. Especially if voters already know one particular system, like being able to sign up for a mail ballot for two years, a state cutting off that path can erect barriers that at best, don't actually improve election integrity and at worst, dissuade someone from casting a ballot at all."
Given that many of these new voters were GOP voters, culling permanent absentee voter rolls and/or making it more challenging for a voter to cast a ballot absentee could end up depriving Republicans of some of the new participants to the electorate. Instead of rolling out a welcome mat to infrequent voters, Republicans may have put up a barrier.
cookpolitical.com
tl;dr A careful analysis of three states FL, NC, and AZ found that people who aren't necessarily incited to vote (they call them low-propensity voters) aren't going to vote if more restrictions are put in place. What this analysis found was that there seemed to be more low-propensity voters that were also Republicans. This means that the laws they are passing to restrict voting could actually come back to bite them.
What they found was an electorate that — not surprisingly — included lots of new voters. "One quarter (26%) of the voters in the 2020 general election in Florida, North Carolina and Arizona were low propensity voters—voters who had been eligible in 2016 (at least 22 years old in 2020) but did not vote in 2016." The biggest increase of new voters came from Latinos and younger people (those aged 22-29 years old). For example, 35 percent of Latino voters and 43 percent of 22-29 year old voters in Arizona, Florida and North Carolina turned out to vote in 2020 but didn't vote in 2016. Overall, "about half (53%) of Hispanic voters voted in both the 2020 and 2016 election, compared to seven in ten Black (70%) and White (72%) 2020 voters."
Conventional wisdom has long held that a surge in Latino and younger voters would disproportionately help Democrats. Yet, KFF concluded that "neither party had an advantage with low propensity voters." According to the KFF analysis, 23 percent of Democrats and 21 percent of Republicans in Florida, North Carolina and Arizona voted in 2020 but not in 2016.
Moreover, KFF found that "a slightly larger share of new 2020 voters said they voted absentee (through the mail) with seven in ten (72%) low propensity voters taking advantage of absentee voting" compared to 67 percent of 2016/2020 voters.
Those low-propensity voters are also the most likely to sit out an election if they find that the process is too complicated or restrictive. Business Insider's Grace Panetta, one of the most astute reporters covering election law this last cycle, told me that "[H]aving to jump through extra hoops to apply for a mail ballot or get to a drop box may be no big deal to the already highly-engaged, regular voters, but it has the potential to most adversely affect lower-propensity-turnout voters who benefit most from the voting process being easy and accessible to navigate when they do turn out. Especially if voters already know one particular system, like being able to sign up for a mail ballot for two years, a state cutting off that path can erect barriers that at best, don't actually improve election integrity and at worst, dissuade someone from casting a ballot at all."
Given that many of these new voters were GOP voters, culling permanent absentee voter rolls and/or making it more challenging for a voter to cast a ballot absentee could end up depriving Republicans of some of the new participants to the electorate. Instead of rolling out a welcome mat to infrequent voters, Republicans may have put up a barrier.
Fighting the Last War, Losing the Current One?
In politics, as in life, it's dangerous to try and fight the last war. Spending too much time looking backward and solving for yesterday's problems can lead to unexpected (and uncomfortable) consequences in the future.
tl;dr A careful analysis of three states FL, NC, and AZ found that people who aren't necessarily incited to vote (they call them low-propensity voters) aren't going to vote if more restrictions are put in place. What this analysis found was that there seemed to be more low-propensity voters that were also Republicans. This means that the laws they are passing to restrict voting could actually come back to bite them.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Don’t jump to conclusions here. I mean has rigorous of peer review happened with this new technology?
Last edited:
Chucktshoes
Well-Known Member
Note to self: don’t ever drink root beer when meeting any of y’all.
Shit. This isn’t my notes, it’s the reply field.
bfly
Well-Known Member
bruh.
Carl
New Member
This is a safe space, you can go next.
Carl
New Member
Sup?
folsom_lives
pretty_lil_dirt_boi
I'll admit I "liked" a few of these posts a while back in a kind of hope that things would get "trolly".
I regret that now.
I regret that now.
