<p>Zoos, I happen to agree with you about exploitation of AA community; I think there is more than enough political manuevering by both parties. </p>
<p>I also watched what happened with the assault weapon ban, and how…poof, it just wasn’t renewed, even though a year before, people were talking about it (and saying, "oh, that’s <em>next</em> year) just as we are doing now about the Voting Act. </p>
<p>If I actually thought that it wouldn’t just expire, it would be less troublesome to me. Unfortunately, we have precedent.</p>
<p>Aries, no harm, no foul on copying my post. I enjoy yours too.</p>
<p>Boy, I keep thinking how weary I’ll be of this lingering “fury” over election losses after the next five or six republican victories.</p>
<p>Sometimes I wonder if its all worth it to steal them the way we do. Maybe we should put the word out to the “operatives” to let a few democrats win next time just to mute the rhetoric.</p>
<p>“Sometimes I wonder if its all worth it to steal them the way we do. Maybe we should put the word out to the “operatives” to let a few democrats win next time just to mute the rhetoric.”</p>
<p>You know, Dad, we just might be victims of our own success. They can’t win elections on their own, can’t field winnable candidates and don’t have any ideas, but darn if they can’t kvetch so loudly that we want to tear at our hair and yell “ok, take the Congress, but shut up already!”</p>
<p>We must aspire to patience and forebearance.</p>
<p>Yes. The allocation of voting machines to precincts, overseen by the Ohio Secretary of State’s office under the direction of Ken Blackwell, Bush’s state co-chair then and now current candidate for governor, left many minority-majority districts severely underserved. </p>
<p>You can claim “coincidence” all you want, but it’s damned funny how every “coincidence” or “bad break” happens to tilt Republican.</p>
<p>A statistics prof did an analysis of this and the results were pretty interesting; the story on this should be easily Googlable.</p>
<p>Thanks for the satire, Dadx and Zoozermom. That is a compliment, not venom.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, but predictably in our present political age, the greatest fears about federal power comes from the party or movement that doesn’t have it at the particular time. This is where I agree with folks who complain about “the political class,” i.e. people who advocate based on party affiliation but actually serve no master but their own objectives and biases. What I am waiting to see is the two major parties to honestly debate and proffer ideas to the electorate. I am tired of the gimmicktry that is used today to essentialy ensure elections; gerrymandering.</p>
<p>Years ago in the 1980s, Republican party (not congressional) leaders did the groundwork and used a lot of elbow grease to win voter support. Guys like Frank Ferenkopf of Nevada (former Nat’l Chairman) led this. In later years N. Gingrich commanded victories with ideas. Today it seems like incumbents are only reaching out to folks they think agree with them, by means of the gerrymander and these “no problem” districts, and questionable tactics on election day at the precinct booth.</p>
<p>I confess I don’t understand why you would inject this into what is, to me at least, an honest and interesting discussion with worthwile points to be made on each side. It really comes off as eye-rolling and sneering, and the puzzling this is I get the impression you meant it to! Am I misunderstanding your intent? </p>
<p>If I can get on my soapbox for a minute, I strongly encourage people to get involved if they want to know more about voting and voting rights. Many precincts could use you in the most neutral capacity imaginable–that is, working the polls, ensuring that all registered voters have a chance to vote. Some of them are absolutely starved for good workers! It’s very rewarding. </p>
<p>Of course there are other important ways to become involved, too, some of which are more about advocacy and some of which are perhaps a little more partisan. All are important, particularly when you consider how little enthusiasm there apparently is for voting & participatory governance.</p>
<p>“Thanks for the satire, Dadx and Zoozermom. That is a compliment, not venom.”</p>
<p>My pleasure to amuse you! I think ya gotta laugh sometimes.</p>
<p>“Unfortunately, but predictably in our present political age, the greatest fears about federal power comes from the party or movement that doesn’t have it at the particular time. This is where I agree with folks who complain about “the political class,” i.e. people who advocate based on party affiliation but actually serve no master but their own objectives and biases. What I am waiting to see is the two major parties to honestly debate and proffer ideas to the electorate. I am tired of the gimmicktry that is used today to essentialy ensure elections; gerrymandering.”</p>
<p>That is just so darn true. Politics for its own sake, rather than in service of higher ideals. On both sides.</p>
<p>I’m bringing this up again because I did some additional reading over the weekend. I’d be interested in opinions about how Section 2 provisions might be used to address anything that happens if Section 5 is not renewed. We’ve been discussing how the constitution protects voters, but the VRA itself has some special provisions that also protect voters, and would protect them even if the preclearance thing was dropped for certain states. Anyone want to ring in on this?</p>