We’re told there’s a blue wave coming in November that may sweep a Democratic majority into the House of Representatives.

Dec 2016
3,158
1,553
Canada
#1
With all the hype about a "blue wave" of Democrats taking over the House and some claim-- even the Senate, it's a good idea to step back and do something that never seems to be done in the past: ask the candidates some tough questions this time!

At one of my favorite marginalized alt-media sources- Black Agenda Report, Bruce Dixon asks some tough questions even directed at Bernie and the other would-be reformers running for the Democratic Party across America, like 'Republicans have been gerrymandering districts since the 90's, but what have Democrats been doing and what do they propose to do about it this time:

Traditionally the maps from which congressional representatives were elected were only drawn once a decade based on census results, but beginning in the 1990s Republicans asserted and won the right to re-draw legislative maps pretty much whenever they feel the need. Their technique is to concentrate Democratic voters into a relatively small number of districts where Democrats reliably win by enormous margins, while spreading out the Republican vote to a greater number of districts in which Republicans reliably win with much smaller margins. This is how Republicans are able to elect dozens more congressional representatives with a million or two fewer votes than Democrats.​
Democrats could have fought this on the federal and the state level, in the courts, in the legislatures and the streets beginning when they still had the upper hand in the 1990s. But they did not. And so they, and we are where we are.​
Unlike the right to possess a gun, the right to vote is not guaranteed in the US Constitution. So any state or county city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision. The omission of this right from the Constitution, the absence of any mass movement demanding voting rights, and the laziness of Democratic party honchos has allowed a veritable briar patch of laws and regulations calculated to disenfranchise Democrat leaning voters, making it harder to register, more difficult to vote, and allowing their votes under some circumstances not to be counted.​
Throughout the 70s, 80s and into the 90s, Democrats had many, many chances to introduce laws, to campaign, to generate street heat in support of voting rights, even to campaign to amend the Constitution and make local interference with voting rights impossible. They didn’t, and so again they, and we are where we are.​
When Republican officials threw out tens of thousands of Detroit votes, more than the margin by which Trump won Michigan, Hillary Clinton refused to fight for her own vote, refused to raise a public objection. A similar thing happened in Wisconsin. It fell to Jill Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate to file lawsuits demanding recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to expose the fundamental level on which US elections are rigged and gamed. A Michigan judge eventually ruled that the public had no right to an audit of the vote.​
Late in the Obama era and continuing into the reign of Trump, there were selective and malicious criminal prosecution of organizations and their members conducting voter registration, early voting, and absentee ballot drives. From Mississippi to Michigan activists have been victimized by police raids and had spurious criminal cases manufactured against them for voter registration and GOTV activities which were never criminal matters before. There have also been also deliberate purges in multiple states of voter rolls designed to throw hundreds of thousands of likely Democratic voters off the rolls. In Georgia where I live, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, is a right wing extremist named Brian Kemp who’s also Georgia’s Secretary of State has been in court this year defending an attempt to purge some 50,000 voters from the state’s rolls.​
So once again we are where we are, and Democrats have a far steeper uphill climb than they ought to thanks to two generations of their own laziness and misleadership.
So what will we get when and if a 2018 blue wave sweeps a Democratic majority into Congress?
Let’s take a look at some of the organized forces fielding and assisting Democratic candidates this year.​
There are the CIA Democrats backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee...
The World Socialist Web Site, wsws.org, one of the web outlets which along with Black Agenda Report was deemed a tool of the Russians, and which like Black Agenda Report has been suppressed by Google ever since, published a 3 part article on March 8, 9 and 10 called The CIA Democrats. In it, Patrick Martin named more than 30 former CIA and State Department officials, military death squad and kidnapping – uhh maybe I mean “extraordinary rendition” operatives and their civilian bosses who were running in Democratic congressional primaries.​

Can voters expect the "CIA Democrats" to do anything other than voting to expand wars and military budgets if elected?

And there are the allegedly progressive Democrats
There are 3 national outfits providing techincal and fundraising assistance, expert personnel and endorsements to supposedly progressive Democrats. They are Justice Democrats , Brand New Congress , and Our Revolution . They had a big hand in the victory of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez in New York, and dozens of congressional, state level and local Democratic primary campaigns.​
31 congressional candidates endorsed by one or more of these progressive outfits survived the Democratic primary to face Republicans in November. Black Agenda Report took a quick look at the web sites of those 31 progressive candidates for congress. You can find the list with links to their web sites and issue positions at the end of the print version of this Black Agenda Radio commentary.​
All but one or two say they support Medicare For All, though it’s not clear whether they mean the straight no chaser version or the watered down one full of exceptions now pushed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Just about all say they’re refusing corporate bribes – damn I mean contributions. More than half say reforming the criminal justice to provide education and job training for inmates system is among their top priorities, and have something to say about net neutrality. Nearly all embrace more pro-active and sensible measures to address climate change, to uphold the rights of women and LBGTQ people, and immigrants, and more. Most have something to say about gun violence, but it’s a safe bet that none of them are educating anybody about the fact that the 2nd amendment of the US was enacted to facilitate slave patrolling, land stealing and the genocide of indigenous people.​
What stands out in the web sites of these progressive Democrats is that 21 out of 31 have absolutely NOTHING to say to voters about war or peace, about the military budget which consumes roughly a trillion dollars a year. And that’s not counting the two candidates whose sole mention of the world outside the United States was opining that we should fully fund the State Department in one case, or put more emphasis on diplomacy in another.................................................................​

Sometimes what you leave unsaid is more eloquent and damning than what you say. For 21 out of 31 so-called progressive Democratic candidates, the world outside the US, the American global empire, and the globally integrated capitalist economy either do not exist at all, or just don’t make their top ten or top twelve list of priority issues. How do we explain that?.......................edited for length​
.​
 
Sep 2015
12,332
4,712
Brown Township, Ohio
#2
With all the hype about a "blue wave" of Democrats taking over the House and some claim-- even the Senate, it's a good idea to step back and do something that never seems to be done in the past: ask the candidates some tough questions this time!

At one of my favorite marginalized alt-media sources- Black Agenda Report, Bruce Dixon asks some tough questions even directed at Bernie and the other would-be reformers running for the Democratic Party across America, like 'Republicans have been gerrymandering districts since the 90's, but what have Democrats been doing and what do they propose to do about it this time:

Traditionally the maps from which congressional representatives were elected were only drawn once a decade based on census results, but beginning in the 1990s Republicans asserted and won the right to re-draw legislative maps pretty much whenever they feel the need. Their technique is to concentrate Democratic voters into a relatively small number of districts where Democrats reliably win by enormous margins, while spreading out the Republican vote to a greater number of districts in which Republicans reliably win with much smaller margins. This is how Republicans are able to elect dozens more congressional representatives with a million or two fewer votes than Democrats.​
Democrats could have fought this on the federal and the state level, in the courts, in the legislatures and the streets beginning when they still had the upper hand in the 1990s. But they did not. And so they, and we are where we are.​
Unlike the right to possess a gun, the right to vote is not guaranteed in the US Constitution. So any state or county city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision. The omission of this right from the Constitution, the absence of any mass movement demanding voting rights, and the laziness of Democratic party honchos has allowed a veritable briar patch of laws and regulations calculated to disenfranchise Democrat leaning voters, making it harder to register, more difficult to vote, and allowing their votes under some circumstances not to be counted.​
Throughout the 70s, 80s and into the 90s, Democrats had many, many chances to introduce laws, to campaign, to generate street heat in support of voting rights, even to campaign to amend the Constitution and make local interference with voting rights impossible. They didn’t, and so again they, and we are where we are.​
When Republican officials threw out tens of thousands of Detroit votes, more than the margin by which Trump won Michigan, Hillary Clinton refused to fight for her own vote, refused to raise a public objection. A similar thing happened in Wisconsin. It fell to Jill Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate to file lawsuits demanding recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to expose the fundamental level on which US elections are rigged and gamed. A Michigan judge eventually ruled that the public had no right to an audit of the vote.​
Late in the Obama era and continuing into the reign of Trump, there were selective and malicious criminal prosecution of organizations and their members conducting voter registration, early voting, and absentee ballot drives. From Mississippi to Michigan activists have been victimized by police raids and had spurious criminal cases manufactured against them for voter registration and GOTV activities which were never criminal matters before. There have also been also deliberate purges in multiple states of voter rolls designed to throw hundreds of thousands of likely Democratic voters off the rolls. In Georgia where I live, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, is a right wing extremist named Brian Kemp who’s also Georgia’s Secretary of State has been in court this year defending an attempt to purge some 50,000 voters from the state’s rolls.​
So once again we are where we are, and Democrats have a far steeper uphill climb than they ought to thanks to two generations of their own laziness and misleadership.
So what will we get when and if a 2018 blue wave sweeps a Democratic majority into Congress?
Let’s take a look at some of the organized forces fielding and assisting Democratic candidates this year.​
There are the CIA Democrats backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee...
The World Socialist Web Site, wsws.org, one of the web outlets which along with Black Agenda Report was deemed a tool of the Russians, and which like Black Agenda Report has been suppressed by Google ever since, published a 3 part article on March 8, 9 and 10 called The CIA Democrats. In it, Patrick Martin named more than 30 former CIA and State Department officials, military death squad and kidnapping – uhh maybe I mean “extraordinary rendition” operatives and their civilian bosses who were running in Democratic congressional primaries.​

Can voters expect the "CIA Democrats" to do anything other than voting to expand wars and military budgets if elected?

And there are the allegedly progressive Democrats
There are 3 national outfits providing techincal and fundraising assistance, expert personnel and endorsements to supposedly progressive Democrats. They are Justice Democrats , Brand New Congress , and Our Revolution . They had a big hand in the victory of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez in New York, and dozens of congressional, state level and local Democratic primary campaigns.​
31 congressional candidates endorsed by one or more of these progressive outfits survived the Democratic primary to face Republicans in November. Black Agenda Report took a quick look at the web sites of those 31 progressive candidates for congress. You can find the list with links to their web sites and issue positions at the end of the print version of this Black Agenda Radio commentary.​
All but one or two say they support Medicare For All, though it’s not clear whether they mean the straight no chaser version or the watered down one full of exceptions now pushed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Just about all say they’re refusing corporate bribes – damn I mean contributions. More than half say reforming the criminal justice to provide education and job training for inmates system is among their top priorities, and have something to say about net neutrality. Nearly all embrace more pro-active and sensible measures to address climate change, to uphold the rights of women and LBGTQ people, and immigrants, and more. Most have something to say about gun violence, but it’s a safe bet that none of them are educating anybody about the fact that the 2nd amendment of the US was enacted to facilitate slave patrolling, land stealing and the genocide of indigenous people.​
What stands out in the web sites of these progressive Democrats is that 21 out of 31 have absolutely NOTHING to say to voters about war or peace, about the military budget which consumes roughly a trillion dollars a year. And that’s not counting the two candidates whose sole mention of the world outside the United States was opining that we should fully fund the State Department in one case, or put more emphasis on diplomacy in another.................................................................​

Sometimes what you leave unsaid is more eloquent and damning than what you say. For 21 out of 31 so-called progressive Democratic candidates, the world outside the US, the American global empire, and the globally integrated capitalist economy either do not exist at all, or just don’t make their top ten or top twelve list of priority issues. How do we explain that?.......................edited for length​
.​
Wnat should we do with Wisconsin? Wisconsin ripped me off for big bucks after compleating a project to their protocol and satisfaction, and gave them proprarity documents. I can't spell proparity and DTT banned spell check or spell check is ignorant of business terms. A proprietorship is owned by one person.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2015
12,039
10,977
Arizona
#3
Gerrymandering is political cheating. It seems the GOP can't win squat without cheating, lying and confirming a candidate who does the same.
Political cheating allows those who engage in it to amass far more power than they have a right to in a constitutional democracy. Its most sophisticated form isn’t ballot-box stuffing but the use of indirect means by those in authority to perpetuate themselves in office.
There are some stand-alone statements in your post, R. This one: "Unlike the right to possess a gun, the right to vote is not guaranteed in the US Constitution. So any state or county city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision."
I had to laugh at the "a state or county city official can block/obstruct your right to vote'. CAN? CAN? History tells us that officials HAVE ON many occasions blocked voters and as for Democrats' laziness? What a joke. It has nothing to do with LAZY and everything to do with not having a crystal ball.
Another stand-alone statement: There are the CIA Democrats backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee...and Justice Democrats , Brand New Congress , and Our Revolution .

Is this supposed to be news? I mean these folks have been labeled everything under the sun, but THEY'VE always been part and parcel of the party. As far as I'm concerned, it's a good thing.

Then this: ....Democrats is that 21 out of 31 have absolutely NOTHING to say to voters about war or peace, about the military budget which consumes roughly a trillion dollars a year.

Have you seen the voter's list of priorities? The military is barely in the top five so why should these new upstarts employ "WAR and PEACE" as one of their talking points. You can bet that ALL of them are opposed to upgrading our military or pouring more money into war, probably because 1) They are doves and 2) Once Trump is gone they're going to need two terms to rebuild the debris left behind.

I could go on, but as usual, you have submitted a NOVEL instead of a post.
 
Dec 2016
3,158
1,553
Canada
#4
Gerrymandering is political cheating. It seems the GOP can't win squat without cheating, lying and confirming a candidate who does the same.
Political cheating allows those who engage in it to amass far more power than they have a right to in a constitutional democracy. Its most sophisticated form isn’t ballot-box stuffing but the use of indirect means by those in authority to perpetuate themselves in office.
There are some stand-alone statements in your post, R. This one: "Unlike the right to possess a gun, the right to vote is not guaranteed in the US Constitution. So any state or county city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision."
I had to laugh at the "a state or county city official can block/obstruct your right to vote'. CAN? CAN? History tells us that officials HAVE ON many occasions blocked voters and as for Democrats' laziness? What a joke. It has nothing to do with LAZY and everything to do with not having a crystal ball.
Another stand-alone statement: There are the CIA Democrats backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee...and Justice Democrats , Brand New Congress , and Our Revolution .
I am adding a little food for thought on a subject I don't know as well as many people...like the author- Bruce Dixon, who are trying to stay on the voter rolls and help others remain registered and able to vote----- is he wrong? His claim about obviously - 2nd Amendment rights meaning an individual right to bear arms, is expressed because that's how the courts have been interpreting that right in modern times, and will continue to do so, as more and more Republican judges join the state and circuit courts...and get quick passage from a do-nothing Democratic leadership! The disenfranchisement that goes unchallenged by Democrats is Bruce Dixon's main grievance against the Democratic Party in what is his novel/not mine, if you want to call it that!
Is this supposed to be news? I mean these folks have been labeled everything under the sun, but THEY'VE always been part and parcel of the party. As far as I'm concerned, it's a good thing.
If, as evidence shows, a large number of former CIA and DHS officials are becoming Democratic (not Republican) candidates, that should be news and noteworthy! So, why is it left to fringe socialist media like WSWS to do the work of investigating the public records on these candidates and inform the public about them? And that's likely the primary reason why it's actually left (not right) media that is being suppressed, banned and throttled by the powers of corporate governance on the worldwide web today!

Then this: ....Democrats is that 21 out of 31 have absolutely NOTHING to say to voters about war or peace, about the military budget which consumes roughly a trillion dollars a year.

Have you seen the voter's list of priorities? The military is barely in the top five so why should these new upstarts employ "WAR and PEACE" as one of their talking points. You can bet that ALL of them are opposed to upgrading our military or pouring more money into war, probably because 1) They are doves and 2) Once Trump is gone they're going to need two terms to rebuild the debris left behind.
Look it up! I had to edit out a lot of the linked post because of the new 10,000 character limits, but regarding both 'CIA Democrats' and the statement that 21 self-proclaimed progressives won't talk about military and foreign policy issues should be troubling...especially for a few who are wondering if new, rising stars like Alexandria Ocasio Cortez have already been co-opted and bought off with a few undisclosed small concessions....which has been Bernie's trajectory since he endorsed Hillary at the Democratic Convention!

The lesson to everyone from center to left should be that you should be doing more than looking for saviours.....like a new FDR! Roosevelt wouldn't have enacted the New Deal and other Keynsian capitalist compromises during the 30's without having some real heat applied on him by large socialist and communist movements, unions and political parties during the 30's. If the escapist left today thinks all you have to do is find a saviour, you're in for another rough ride and big disappointments....just like after 08!
 
Nov 2012
9,705
7,851
nirvana
#5
With all the hype about a "blue wave" of Democrats taking over the House and some claim-- even the Senate, it's a good idea to step back and do something that never seems to be done in the past: ask the candidates some tough questions this time!

At one of my favorite marginalized alt-media sources- Black Agenda Report, Bruce Dixon asks some tough questions even directed at Bernie and the other would-be reformers running for the Democratic Party across America, like 'Republicans have been gerrymandering districts since the 90's, but what have Democrats been doing and what do they propose to do about it this time:

Traditionally the maps from which congressional representatives were elected were only drawn once a decade based on census results, but beginning in the 1990s Republicans asserted and won the right to re-draw legislative maps pretty much whenever they feel the need. Their technique is to concentrate Democratic voters into a relatively small number of districts where Democrats reliably win by enormous margins, while spreading out the Republican vote to a greater number of districts in which Republicans reliably win with much smaller margins. This is how Republicans are able to elect dozens more congressional representatives with a million or two fewer votes than Democrats.​
Democrats could have fought this on the federal and the state level, in the courts, in the legislatures and the streets beginning when they still had the upper hand in the 1990s. But they did not. And so they, and we are where we are.​
Unlike the right to possess a gun, the right to vote is not guaranteed in the US Constitution. So any state or county city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision. The omission of this right from the Constitution, the absence of any mass movement demanding voting rights, and the laziness of Democratic party honchos has allowed a veritable briar patch of laws and regulations calculated to disenfranchise Democrat leaning voters, making it harder to register, more difficult to vote, and allowing their votes under some circumstances not to be counted.​
Throughout the 70s, 80s and into the 90s, Democrats had many, many chances to introduce laws, to campaign, to generate street heat in support of voting rights, even to campaign to amend the Constitution and make local interference with voting rights impossible. They didn’t, and so again they, and we are where we are.​
When Republican officials threw out tens of thousands of Detroit votes, more than the margin by which Trump won Michigan, Hillary Clinton refused to fight for her own vote, refused to raise a public objection. A similar thing happened in Wisconsin. It fell to Jill Stein, the Green Party’s presidential candidate to file lawsuits demanding recounts in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania to expose the fundamental level on which US elections are rigged and gamed. A Michigan judge eventually ruled that the public had no right to an audit of the vote.​
Late in the Obama era and continuing into the reign of Trump, there were selective and malicious criminal prosecution of organizations and their members conducting voter registration, early voting, and absentee ballot drives. From Mississippi to Michigan activists have been victimized by police raids and had spurious criminal cases manufactured against them for voter registration and GOTV activities which were never criminal matters before. There have also been also deliberate purges in multiple states of voter rolls designed to throw hundreds of thousands of likely Democratic voters off the rolls. In Georgia where I live, the Republican gubernatorial candidate, is a right wing extremist named Brian Kemp who’s also Georgia’s Secretary of State has been in court this year defending an attempt to purge some 50,000 voters from the state’s rolls.​
So once again we are where we are, and Democrats have a far steeper uphill climb than they ought to thanks to two generations of their own laziness and misleadership.
So what will we get when and if a 2018 blue wave sweeps a Democratic majority into Congress?
Let’s take a look at some of the organized forces fielding and assisting Democratic candidates this year.​
There are the CIA Democrats backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee...
The World Socialist Web Site, wsws.org, one of the web outlets which along with Black Agenda Report was deemed a tool of the Russians, and which like Black Agenda Report has been suppressed by Google ever since, published a 3 part article on March 8, 9 and 10 called The CIA Democrats. In it, Patrick Martin named more than 30 former CIA and State Department officials, military death squad and kidnapping – uhh maybe I mean “extraordinary rendition” operatives and their civilian bosses who were running in Democratic congressional primaries.​

Can voters expect the "CIA Democrats" to do anything other than voting to expand wars and military budgets if elected?

And there are the allegedly progressive Democrats
There are 3 national outfits providing techincal and fundraising assistance, expert personnel and endorsements to supposedly progressive Democrats. They are Justice Democrats , Brand New Congress , and Our Revolution . They had a big hand in the victory of Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez in New York, and dozens of congressional, state level and local Democratic primary campaigns.​
31 congressional candidates endorsed by one or more of these progressive outfits survived the Democratic primary to face Republicans in November. Black Agenda Report took a quick look at the web sites of those 31 progressive candidates for congress. You can find the list with links to their web sites and issue positions at the end of the print version of this Black Agenda Radio commentary.​
All but one or two say they support Medicare For All, though it’s not clear whether they mean the straight no chaser version or the watered down one full of exceptions now pushed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Just about all say they’re refusing corporate bribes – damn I mean contributions. More than half say reforming the criminal justice to provide education and job training for inmates system is among their top priorities, and have something to say about net neutrality. Nearly all embrace more pro-active and sensible measures to address climate change, to uphold the rights of women and LBGTQ people, and immigrants, and more. Most have something to say about gun violence, but it’s a safe bet that none of them are educating anybody about the fact that the 2nd amendment of the US was enacted to facilitate slave patrolling, land stealing and the genocide of indigenous people.​
What stands out in the web sites of these progressive Democrats is that 21 out of 31 have absolutely NOTHING to say to voters about war or peace, about the military budget which consumes roughly a trillion dollars a year. And that’s not counting the two candidates whose sole mention of the world outside the United States was opining that we should fully fund the State Department in one case, or put more emphasis on diplomacy in another.................................................................​

Sometimes what you leave unsaid is more eloquent and damning than what you say. For 21 out of 31 so-called progressive Democratic candidates, the world outside the US, the American global empire, and the globally integrated capitalist economy either do not exist at all, or just don’t make their top ten or top twelve list of priority issues. How do we explain that?.......................edited for length​
.​
It’s turning around. The righties over played their hand one to may times. On one to many issues.

There are 44 open seats this cycle because of retiring Republicans. There are more women running on a Progressive agenda this cycle, all of which have popular support.

When Republicans went after education and health care again, after being warned not to, that was a mistake they will regret dearly.
 
Likes: Clara007
Dec 2016
3,158
1,553
Canada
#6
It’s turning around. The righties over played their hand one to may times. On one to many issues.

There are 44 open seats this cycle because of retiring Republicans. There are more women running on a Progressive agenda this cycle, all of which have popular support.

When Republicans went after education and health care again, after being warned not to, that was a mistake they will regret dearly.
Yes, but what are they doing or even saying about voter disenfranchisement and the foreign policy issues? A bloated military and security budget means little if any money left from for healthcare and other domestic priorities, and....I can't say if he's right, but Bruce Dixon's impression seems to be that the Democratic Party has allowed Republican Gerrymandering to continue because, although it gives Republicans an overall advantage (they win more seats without having a majority of votes), it makes longterm Democrat-held seats even safer, and explains why the Democratic strongholds are being held by 80 year olds today.

So, you guys have been through this before back in 08, where a Democratic wave brings in a Democratic president and a Democrat-majority Congress....and how long did that last? By 2010, Obama was triangulating to the right and trying to look for a Grand Bargain with the GOP...just like Bill did back in 94.
Will a Democrat takeover of Congress( if it happens) change that pattern, or will it be a repeat cycle of what happened 10 years ago?
 
Apr 2013
32,831
22,214
Left coast
#7
Be careful predicting this blue wave. There is a danger of this causing complacency on the part of the electorate.

Do you remember how even about 10 days ago, Dotard was talking about a red wave? Two reporters I follow have noted that he has quit and both of them are speculating that his advisors have convinced him of this danger for the GOP so he is back to talking about the disasters that will befall the country if Dems take the house.
 
Jun 2012
39,384
14,104
Barsoom
#8
Unlike the right to possess a gun, the right to vote is not guaranteed in the US Constitution. So any state or county city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision.
How can there be an acknowledgement of no right to vote and in the next sentence say the right to vote is being taken away?

What is not understood is federalism, states' retained powers/rights, and that the US is not a unitary government.
 
Dec 2015
12,039
10,977
Arizona
#9
How can there be an acknowledgement of no right to vote and in the next sentence say the right to vote is being taken away?

What is not understood is federalism, states' retained powers/rights, and that the US is not a unitary government.

Honestly Jimmy. You are the dumbest smart guy I know.
The statement was: The right to vote is not guaranteed IN THE CONSTITUTION--the federal constitution. FEDERAL. They do not have a federally protected right to vote enshrined in the Constitution. So (as the statement says) any *state or county* city official can block or obstruct or take away your right to vote, with a new law or with an administrative decision---which the states HAVE DONE. Hint: Voter suppression.
 
Jun 2012
39,384
14,104
Barsoom
#10
How can there be an acknowledgement of no right to vote and in the next sentence say the right to vote is being taken away?

What is not understood is federalism, states' retained powers/rights, and that the US is not a unitary government.