Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

[Magibeg]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

The state of Ohio doesn't.



I told you: they need time to prepare for election day. By only allowing military to vote, they vastly decrease the volume on those days. It's a compromise that works.

Obama’s legal argument that the Ohio law unfairly creates two classes of voters, military and civilian, in violation of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourtee...s_Constitution

[FordGT90Concept]

The ruling could go either way and both ways have consequences:
a) They allow everyone to vote in the three days which increases the odds of problems occuring on election day (fewer people able to vote because precincts aren't ready).
b) They allow no one to vote on those three days which forces vets that would vote on those days to vote via absentee ballot.

b is the least risky choice.

[Magibeg]

Originally Posted by FordGT90Concept

The ruling could go either way and both ways have consequences:
a) They allow everyone to vote in the three days which increases the odds of problems occuring on election day (fewer people able to vote because precincts aren't ready).
b) They allow no one to vote on those three days which forces vets that would vote on those days to vote via absentee ballot.

b is the least risky choice.

Do you have any evidence to support your view that having roughly 94k people voting in the 3 days before hand would make things worse on the actual voting day or are you just trying to justify your point of view without evidence?

Does that make it OK that republicans are breaking the constitution? I thought you being a libertarian that the constitution would be the most important thing to you, yet here it is being broken and now it's OK.

[jmcslob]

Originally Posted by erocker

I have a hard time putting something together here. On an issue that one wouldn't think would be politically divided, why are two so called "liberals" seemingly supporting this suit while three "conservative" folks are against it. If there was a Republican in the White House would this thinking just be reversed? Taking the middle ground here, what would be so bad about letting the military vote between the time the Republican/Democrat primaries are over to Presidential election day?

Here in Ohio we are voting on giving the power of voting issues and redistricting to the people...

Both Dems and Republicans and Independents are sick and tired of National Politics changing the shape of the constituents that will be represented by who and when.

It's obscene how a few changes in our State Govt alone will fuck everything up..

The reason we have/had early voting is because of the Republicans changing voting districts on people without notice and then leaving people without a proper register to vote.

But a Republican gets in office again and reverses that decision on his own....Then you have a public outcry and then a Petition went out, Which 50% of Ohioans signed, to prop for a vote to take away the right of any Politician to change anything involving voting without a vote of the people...

The Prop has in a clause that makes all voters have the exact voting rights.

This issue will be resolved by the people in the end...Obama and the Dems jumped on the bandwagon to show that they support the people (swing state politics)...

But Yes Erocker, you are correct if the parties were reversed the Republicans would be doing exactly what the same thing.

[SK-1]

Regardless of the remedy they seek,they are suing to end an exemption for military voters.... It would not be the first time Democrats--who pretend, in their fight against voter ID, to want more ballot access--have tried to stop the military's votes from counting.
Remember this?
http://www.thenextright.com/soren-da...-military-vote
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/11/vir...entee-ballots/

Ultimately...Obama is afraid if the early vote shows him losing in a strategic swing state it will turn off the democrat voters who might think their vote wouldn't help him.

[Magibeg]

Originally Posted by SK-1

Regardless of the remedy they seek,they are suing to end an exemption for military voters.... It would not be the first time Democrats--who pretend, in their fight against voter ID, to want more ballot access--have tried to stop the military's votes from counting.
Remember this?
http://www.thenextright.com/soren-da...-military-vote
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/11/vir...entee-ballots/

Ultimately...Obama is afraid if the early vote shows him losing in a strategic swing state it will turn off the democrat voters who might think their vote wouldn't help him.

What you're saying makes absolutely no sense. They WANT the early vote. They want it for everyone. I don't understand what your point is. The republican party is the one who is narrowing down voting opportunity. You're just going to end up diluting the issue with your insane blog links. Obama or the democrats wasn't even responsible for what you're complaining about there in your unrelated topic. Stop bringing the crazy.

[SK-1]

Factcheck.org is insane... and Wiki is the go to source...right?

[Magibeg]

Originally Posted by SK-1

Factcheck.org is insane... and Wiki is the go to source...right?

Yes, but did you read what they said? It has nothing to do with Obama at all. Now look at the actual substance of what i wrote.

[FordGT90Concept]

Originally Posted by Magibeg

Do you have any evidence to support your view that having roughly 94k people voting in the 3 days before hand would make things worse on the actual voting day or are you just trying to justify your point of view without evidence?

Read the quotes representatives from the state said. When they constructed the law, that's why they put in that three day exemption for military.

Originally Posted by Magibeg

Does that make it OK that republicans are breaking the constitution? I thought you being a libertarian that the constitution would be the most important thing to you, yet here it is being broken and now it's OK.

That's completely up to interpretation and that's something that will have to be decided by the Supreme Court. As I said, I have no idea which way they would rule. Equal Protection clause may only apply to being able to vote on Election Day (which is November 6 this year). Ohio goes way beyond that, so I don't think there's any grounds to call it unequal. They aren't denying people the ability to vote; they are facilitating people that, due to their job, make it difficult for them to get to the polls.