More Election Fallout: New York Rejects “Expansion” Of Voting

This has made the Progressives and cheaters at the UK Guardian very upset

New Yorkers reject expanded voting access in stunning result

Amid an array of discouraging election results for Democrats last week, there was one under-the-radar outcome that was especially perplexing. In New York, one of the country’s most progressive states, voters overwhelmingly rejected initiatives that would have expanded voting access in future elections.

The vote, which came in a year when Republican-led states have passed dozens of laws to restrict voting access, left voting rights advocates stunned.

Yes, it’s a bad thing to restrict voting to U.S. citizens, to people who are eligible to vote in that area, to stop people from voting multiple times, to make sure there aren’t dead people and imaginary people voting, and to require people to prove who they are to vote.

One of the proposals would have paved the way for lawmakers to get rid of a longstanding states policy that requires voters to give an excuse if they want to vote by mail (34 states and the District of Columbia allow anyone to vote by mail for any reason). Another would have allowed people to register to vote on election day, a reform advocates believe significantly increases political participation.

It’s called cheat by mail for a reason, and really, it should only be used as little as possible. It, for one thing, means people are voting way before the election is over, and anything can happen near the end. Imagine if it, and early voting, was not used in Virginia: Youngkin could have utterly obliterated MaCauliffe. People registering on election day shows people who are not serious, who probably know nothing about the issues, and could lead to serious fraud. By the time the fraud is caught, it’s too late to change the outcome.

None of the measures came anywhere close to passing. Republicans waged a well-funded and aggressive campaign to oppose the amendments, a move that caught supporters of the proposal off guard. The reforms were also hampered by low turnout and confusing wording on the ballot, which may have prompted some voters to choose to skip voting on the measures altogether. (snip)

Voters also may have simply not understood the lengthy and complex descriptions of the proposals, printed on the back of ballots. Up to 13% of voters left each of the three questions blank. “They had so many candidates on the front side and then they flipped it over to the backside and they had a dissertation to read,” Wilson said.

Oh, see, the measures failed because voters are stupid. The typical Democrat answer. And, let’s be honest, some of them are. They take no time to understand the politicians or measures.

Nineteen states passed 33 laws between January and the end of September that made it harder to vote, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, and are widely seen as an effort to make it harder for minority voters to cast a ballot. Democrats have aggressively challenged the new policies in states like Georgia and Florida, both of which allow for no-excuse absentee voting, the same policy New York voters rejected on Tuesday.

Funny how Democrats always think “minorities” are too dumb to be able to do what whites do. It’s that kinda, you know, racist?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “More Election Fallout: New York Rejects “Expansion” Of Voting”

  1. Hairy says:

    Teach wants only “serious”votersto be able to vote and he wants himself to be the arbiter of whom he considers serious”
    If a citizen isn’t determined by him to be “serious” than they should not be allowed to vote
    Flakes? Nope sorry no voting for you

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Go take another bong hit, Johnnie
      Or maybe a little Buddhist meditation.
      Your reading comprehension and 8nterpretation is hovering at Rimjob/Z levels.

      Bwaha! Lolgf

    • Jl says:

      Does Johnny only want “serious” people, in other words people who know and understand guns, to be able to own one? We’re talking about rights here, correct?
      Don’t worry, I’m sure this went right over your head…

  2. Professor Hale says:

    “Funny how Democrats always think “minorities” are too dumb to be able to do what whites do.”

    Just like democrats think minorities are too violent to keep and bear arms.

    Is it racist if they are also right? After all, they probably know their own people better than outsiders do.

Pirate's Cove