Mencken said, “democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” But this may be a case of the Republican Party thinking they know what they want, but ending up getting it good and hard! 😂
Basically correct by my read, save that the Democrats committed a 15-million count crime (that's the number they admit to) of illegally importing new aliens in addition to their criminal negligence in enforcement for aliens already in the borders, and all the race grifting and "ICE violence" and all the rest of the narrative is downstream of said massive crime and the criminal conspiracy currently operating to prevent enforcement of the law , even today, with funding from figures like Neville Roy Singham, an avowed Marxist.
Redistricting is one of the areas where states should play by the same rules. So is treatment of illegals and non-citizens. I think all redistricting should be done by computer algorithms which would require a physical address for all registered voters. Only eligible voters should be counted to evenly distribute political power.
Regarding your closing comment, rudeness and crudeness are considered superpowers by some readers - and not just on The Racket News.
Pass on the amendment... It seeks to permanently codify the VRA's racial bias - a primary tool of Democrat gerrymandering. "No you can't gerrymander by party, that would be absolutely unthinkable... But we can."
On a recent Bulwark podcast, one of the hosts mentioned that if Republicans wanted to set up fair districting, they could pass this tomorrow with a supermajority, so the ball is in their court.
As for voters now, at least in Illinois, a physical address is a requirement, even for unhoused citizens (they use the address of the shelter where they are staying or otherwise would receive mail). Are there places you have in mind who don't enforce this standard?
If the democrats wanted fair districting, they too could pass it quickly with a super majority. So far as I know, neither party has a super majority.
There's not much of a standard for voter roll verification. If the following is correct, who knows what happens to all of those mail-in absentee ballots requested by the junkies during the several election cycles required to purge the registration lists? Could be some dealers sitting around at the park or the bus station anxiously stating "that's me" when the mail arrives.
"Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
What Happens if You Don’t Respond to a Voter Verification Mail
Under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), if you are registered to vote but do not respond to a confirmation or verification mailing and also do not vote in subsequent elections, you are typically classified as an inactive voter legal-resources.uslegalforms.com.
Federal law does not allow states to remove you from the rolls solely for failing to vote, but it does permit removal if you fail to respond to an address confirmation and then do not vote for two federal general elections MIT Election Lab. In most states, this process begins with an address confirmation notice sent by your election office. If you don’t respond and don’t vote in the next two federal elections, your record may be moved to inactive status, and after a set period (often several years), you could be removed from the rolls Voter Reference Foundation+1.
Key points:
Inactive status means you are still registered but not considered “active” for certain purposes.
You can reactivate your status by updating your registration (e.g., address, party) or voting in an election Voter Reference Foundation.
Removal is not automatic for just one missed mailing — it usually requires a combination of no response and no voting in multiple elections.
State rules vary: some states send additional notifications before removal, while others have longer inactive periods legal-resources.uslegalforms.com.
Bottom line: Not responding to a verification mailing alone will not remove you from the voter rolls, but it can lead to inactive status, which may eventually result in removal if you don’t vote in the required number of elections. To avoid this, respond to the mailing or update your registration information."
I've updated inactive voters before - I believe that they have to present a recent proof of address if they want a regular ballot - they get a provisional ballot (and a requirement to prove address for that provisional to be counted).
And to be clear - in Illinois at least - you don't respond to those mailings as a voter. Instead, if the post office returns the undeliverable mailing to the election officials, then you are marked as inactive. If you've ever gotten a mailing with a "voter card" that lists your voting location, those are the mailings. (Lots of folks bring those in when voting and poll workers don't need them, because we have the electronic poll book.)
"If the democrats wanted fair districting, they too could pass it quickly with a super majority. So far as I know, neither party has a super majority."
Democrats do not control the House, Senate or Presidency. The GOP controls all three.
In speaking of a supermajority, what I'm saying is that if enough GOP members are concerned about districting fairness and consistency (11 in the Senate and a handful in the House), they could introduce any number of the proposals advanced over the past few years and a filibuster-proof number of Democrats would join them, and maybe even a veto-proof majority as well. Democrats have been beating this drum for decades, but will not unilaterally disarm.
Interesting. How many election cycles would that take? What constitutes proof of residence? A selfie taken at the bus station bench next to the pay toilets showing the derelict holding a cup for potty change? Or maybe Illinois doesn't have pay toilets. It's just one of the things I remember from when I had to rely on Trailways and Greyhound to visit my parents 90 miles away. And if homelessness does not affect one's right to vote, why can't the street dwellers re-register? And how does any of that affect absentee ballots being sent to the soup kitchens and flop houses?
I do not believe democrats have been a very loud voice for fair redistricting. Instead, they relied for years on the federal law prohibiting red state redistricting without court approval while blue states could redistrict any way they chose.
Sure, either party in control of the Senate could change the filibuster rule (which I'm sure will happen if the democrats get control while Trump is in office). Or they could join with like-minded Senators from the other party and pass whatever they please, but it will not happen at the expense of making the opposite party appear successful.
I'm not talking about doing anything with the filibuster - merely that a critical mass of Democrats are fans of fair and consistent districting rules that you wouldn't need to mess with the filibuster at all.
As for residency documentation for the unhoused, they enjoy as much of a right to vote as you and I. Home ownership or physical tenancy is NOT a requirement to vote. In our case, we accept mail that has the name and address of the person in question[1]. Note that this doesn't give someone the right to vote in more than one area, which is pretty easily enforced at the state level. That gets trickier between states, but the fraud we've seen is more prevalent among people with second or more homes registering to vote in multiple states[2] than the unhoused attempting to do that.
The party that likes to claim the mantle of "Common Sense" has remarkably little of that.
Mencken said, “democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” But this may be a case of the Republican Party thinking they know what they want, but ending up getting it good and hard! 😂
You can use "Fool" for the first F if you like.
That’s better than what I had, but farts is probably funnier.
Farts are always funnier.
Plus Dubya has priority on the word "fool" after the "Fool me once..." pseudo-quote.
It's definitely a better "good word" to replace, but agreed.
What does this have to do with my comment?
Grazie. Moved it.
What goes around comes around…
Karma….
And the like. Gonna fire up the popcorn for November.
Gerrymandering started way before Texas and will continue long after 2026: https://apnews.com/article/redistricting-virginia-congress-democrats-republicans-12a31037f3c9a94d3cb9fbcaaf84d94f
Basically correct by my read, save that the Democrats committed a 15-million count crime (that's the number they admit to) of illegally importing new aliens in addition to their criminal negligence in enforcement for aliens already in the borders, and all the race grifting and "ICE violence" and all the rest of the narrative is downstream of said massive crime and the criminal conspiracy currently operating to prevent enforcement of the law , even today, with funding from figures like Neville Roy Singham, an avowed Marxist.
Redistricting is one of the areas where states should play by the same rules. So is treatment of illegals and non-citizens. I think all redistricting should be done by computer algorithms which would require a physical address for all registered voters. Only eligible voters should be counted to evenly distribute political power.
Regarding your closing comment, rudeness and crudeness are considered superpowers by some readers - and not just on The Racket News.
Here's a proposed Constitutional amendment for what you want:
https://www.congress.gov/amendment/119th-congress/senate-amendment/4779/text
As well as regular legislation (which has been reintroduced this term):
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7910/text
Pass on the amendment... It seeks to permanently codify the VRA's racial bias - a primary tool of Democrat gerrymandering. "No you can't gerrymander by party, that would be absolutely unthinkable... But we can."
On a recent Bulwark podcast, one of the hosts mentioned that if Republicans wanted to set up fair districting, they could pass this tomorrow with a supermajority, so the ball is in their court.
As for voters now, at least in Illinois, a physical address is a requirement, even for unhoused citizens (they use the address of the shelter where they are staying or otherwise would receive mail). Are there places you have in mind who don't enforce this standard?
If the democrats wanted fair districting, they too could pass it quickly with a super majority. So far as I know, neither party has a super majority.
There's not much of a standard for voter roll verification. If the following is correct, who knows what happens to all of those mail-in absentee ballots requested by the junkies during the several election cycles required to purge the registration lists? Could be some dealers sitting around at the park or the bus station anxiously stating "that's me" when the mail arrives.
"Copilot Search Branding
Like
Dislike
What Happens if You Don’t Respond to a Voter Verification Mail
Under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), if you are registered to vote but do not respond to a confirmation or verification mailing and also do not vote in subsequent elections, you are typically classified as an inactive voter legal-resources.uslegalforms.com.
Federal law does not allow states to remove you from the rolls solely for failing to vote, but it does permit removal if you fail to respond to an address confirmation and then do not vote for two federal general elections MIT Election Lab. In most states, this process begins with an address confirmation notice sent by your election office. If you don’t respond and don’t vote in the next two federal elections, your record may be moved to inactive status, and after a set period (often several years), you could be removed from the rolls Voter Reference Foundation+1.
Key points:
Inactive status means you are still registered but not considered “active” for certain purposes.
You can reactivate your status by updating your registration (e.g., address, party) or voting in an election Voter Reference Foundation.
Removal is not automatic for just one missed mailing — it usually requires a combination of no response and no voting in multiple elections.
State rules vary: some states send additional notifications before removal, while others have longer inactive periods legal-resources.uslegalforms.com.
Bottom line: Not responding to a verification mailing alone will not remove you from the voter rolls, but it can lead to inactive status, which may eventually result in removal if you don’t vote in the required number of elections. To avoid this, respond to the mailing or update your registration information."
I've updated inactive voters before - I believe that they have to present a recent proof of address if they want a regular ballot - they get a provisional ballot (and a requirement to prove address for that provisional to be counted).
And to be clear - in Illinois at least - you don't respond to those mailings as a voter. Instead, if the post office returns the undeliverable mailing to the election officials, then you are marked as inactive. If you've ever gotten a mailing with a "voter card" that lists your voting location, those are the mailings. (Lots of folks bring those in when voting and poll workers don't need them, because we have the electronic poll book.)
"If the democrats wanted fair districting, they too could pass it quickly with a super majority. So far as I know, neither party has a super majority."
Democrats do not control the House, Senate or Presidency. The GOP controls all three.
In speaking of a supermajority, what I'm saying is that if enough GOP members are concerned about districting fairness and consistency (11 in the Senate and a handful in the House), they could introduce any number of the proposals advanced over the past few years and a filibuster-proof number of Democrats would join them, and maybe even a veto-proof majority as well. Democrats have been beating this drum for decades, but will not unilaterally disarm.
Interesting. How many election cycles would that take? What constitutes proof of residence? A selfie taken at the bus station bench next to the pay toilets showing the derelict holding a cup for potty change? Or maybe Illinois doesn't have pay toilets. It's just one of the things I remember from when I had to rely on Trailways and Greyhound to visit my parents 90 miles away. And if homelessness does not affect one's right to vote, why can't the street dwellers re-register? And how does any of that affect absentee ballots being sent to the soup kitchens and flop houses?
I do not believe democrats have been a very loud voice for fair redistricting. Instead, they relied for years on the federal law prohibiting red state redistricting without court approval while blue states could redistrict any way they chose.
Sure, either party in control of the Senate could change the filibuster rule (which I'm sure will happen if the democrats get control while Trump is in office). Or they could join with like-minded Senators from the other party and pass whatever they please, but it will not happen at the expense of making the opposite party appear successful.
I'm not talking about doing anything with the filibuster - merely that a critical mass of Democrats are fans of fair and consistent districting rules that you wouldn't need to mess with the filibuster at all.
As for residency documentation for the unhoused, they enjoy as much of a right to vote as you and I. Home ownership or physical tenancy is NOT a requirement to vote. In our case, we accept mail that has the name and address of the person in question[1]. Note that this doesn't give someone the right to vote in more than one area, which is pretty easily enforced at the state level. That gets trickier between states, but the fraud we've seen is more prevalent among people with second or more homes registering to vote in multiple states[2] than the unhoused attempting to do that.
[1] https://vote.gov/guide-to-voting/unhoused
[2] https://6abc.com/post/pa-man-convicted-voter-fraud/18679610/