Quote:
You mean like the left got lawyers in order to deny the military vote in Florida back in 2000?
|
What Democrats did was try to have the law enforced. The Florida Secretary of State (and Bush campaign state co-chair - no agenda there!) agreed that if they didn't have the required postmarks, they couldn't be counted. Lieberman ultimately said they should be counted even if they were missing required information.
I agree that they absolutely were challenging those ballots for political reasons, but they were doing so within the bounds of the law. The right, on the other hand, has a decades-long history of trying to violate voting rights and make it more difficult for legitimate voters who are more likely to vote D to cast ballots, hence the need for preclearance in problematic districts.
We should revisit which areas need to get preclearance, though. It should probably be expanded, since areas in other states are somewhat notorious for sending lots of voting machines to the white Republican suburbs and sending only a few (and perhaps no working ones) to inner city precincts, creating enormous lines that discourage people from voting.
Quote:
And yes, we are trying to deny minorities the ability to vote - the illegal ones.
|
Then getting preclearance shouldn't be a problem. Of course, we all know this isn't about illegal immigrants casting ballots, it's about stopping the growing influence of legal minority voters who threaten the right's radical agenda.