Brutus_buckeye

First, nobody loses the right to vote when they are not registered to vote. If they move to another state and have to re-register, they have not lost the right to vote, they still have that right. THey just need to follow the process to exercise the right however, that is not akin to losing the right to vote. I know it may be semantics to you, but the meaning is different. To clarify better, a convicted felon has lost their right to vote, a person who is not properly registered has not lost the right to vote, they just need to follow the process to qualify. There is a big difference and that matters. Again, this is a misnomer. No rights are arbitrarily lost, but there is a process that needs to be followed. What you are arguing is that the process is overly burdensome and its sole point is to keep or deter people from voting. Given the case law on the subject, I think the vast majority of courts both liberal and conservative would disagree with your views on the subject. Even practically, how do you conduct elections if you do not know where people live and have a valid address. Especially if you go down the lower economic latter, people move more. That is a reality. That does not make things unjust but it is a reality of the situation. Now, even federally, how do you conduct an election with a reasonable amount of integrity, as well as handle other logistical concerns and matters if you do not know where people live when they vote??? Think about it. How do you ensure that there are enough polling locations and that those are staffed adequately if you do not have districts with a certain amount of voters. Imagine if downtown Atlanta staffed to expect 50,000 voters in one of their precincts and out of the blue they get 200,000. Other precincts get 80% less than they expect because people can vote wherever they want. What about voting for president when someone who lives in Ohio decides to vote in Georgia because they feel the Georgia vote may count more in their mind. That skews the election and makes the vote less reliable. It also causes gamesmanship too (I know you are not a fan of the Electoral College, but as long as that is a system in place it also makes your idea not at all practical) Take that down to state issues. Most elections combine federal, state and local matters on the same ballot. If you can vote wherever, how can you vote on local issues that effect your own local interests? how do you prevent others from voting on those issues who have no reason to vote for them? Sure you can have extra elections, but those are very inefficient, very expensive, and you will have less people taking part in those elections and it would be bad for democracy in general. There are many practical reasons why these ideas are just not at all practical. Given the movement of people, it is just not practical to make registration permanent. The burden to register to vote is also minimal. It is easier to register to vote than it is to get a license. It is easier to register to vote than it is to get a cell phone or start an electric bill. All of these are basic functions that people do in their daily lives so to argue otherwise is absurd. Also, there is a basic level of civic engagement that must be used to exercise your basic rights. Registering is a very minimal step. Voting itself requires some modicum of effort. People do not show up at your house and mark your ballot for you, you have to do that yourself. Lets understand that if voting is important to people, they can make it happen. It almost seems like that other people voting for your preferred candidate is more important to you than it may be to them, which is not how the constitution should work.

Just because something is a RIGHT, does not mean it is removed from any affirmative action by citizens. Having a gun (right to bear arms) is a right too but people are not entitled to free guns, they need to take the affirmative step of buying them. A right to trial by jury is a guaranteed right, but to exercise that right the indicted must make an affirmative request for a jury trial. There are always affirmative steps people must take to actually use those rights. Also, let's examine that further. A RIGHT means that you are entitled to do it and it cannot be taken away. That does not mean that the right can be removed from all process and can be exercised however the individual desires. Go back to the right to bear arms. There are certain steps that those who choose to exercise such right must do in order to exercise their right. That does not remove the right, but it sets up a reasonable process in order to do so. Let's also contrast the right to vote comparing the prohibition of felons vs voter record purging. Without getting into the merits of the felon example, the prohibition of felons bars them from the right to vote completely. There is no process that they can follow in order to exercise their right to vote. Purging voter records of inactive voters does nothing of this sort. Those voters who are purged still have the right to vote, they can easily exercise that right, the only difference is that they need to follow the established process in order to exercise their right. Your argument about getting rid of voter rolls is akin to taking away the right to vote is flawed. It is a process matter and it is about voters following the process to exercise their rights. In order for such a program like voter record purging to survive a strict scrutiny interpretation by the SC, it would have to be shown to not be overly burdensome so as to not interfere with the person's right to vote and that the interest of the state in setting up the process to vote be the least restrictive means to achieve the state's best interest. A voter record purge would clearly pass that test since 1) it is in the state's vital interest to ensure that voter records are accurate and up to date. 2) Keeping accurate voter records is vital to a fair election and 3) the burden is not overly intrusive for a person who is mistakenly dropped from the registry to be able to re-register and vote. While I understand that this may seem to be a burden from the perspective of many progressives, I struggle to think that the minimal impact that such rules would have would be the hill that progressives would choose to die on.

They are necessary, they are a good thing. It is like pruning the trees and clearing the dead underbrush. You clear that out so the rest of the tree can flourish. When a voter wants to choose to flourish, he or she can choose to take action to do so. Nothing prevents you from voting if your record is purged. this is not a felon who is barred from voting for the rest of their life because of their crimes. The record purge just simply removes your name until you take an affirmative 3 minute step to place it back. Not overly burdensome. It is not something that cost Stacey Abrams the election.

Luke - it is a strawman argument because it does not disenfranchise people. It is about being a citizen and sometimes being a responsible citizen means that the individual actually has to take an affirmative step on their own.

And there is no evidence that having to update your voting records when you move, have a change of circumstances is overly burdensome either. This is the same BS that people were crying about 10 years ago when Voter ID became an issue and how that was going to be the end of democracy, blah blah blah, and how voters will be disenfranchised. The numbers never demonstrated that, and in fact they showed the inverse. Voter ID has become accepted by the majority of people in both parties now. How are reasonable voter purges of people WHO DO NOT ENGAGE AND VOTE, and cannot be tracked down through reasonable means anything overly burdensome. How does it take away the right to vote, especially when a person can re-register again very easily.

Moving to another state does not take away voting rights. It just means you have to re-register where your domicile is. Would not you think that is a reasonable thing to do? There are many practicalities on why you need to re-register after moving. 1) you are still registered at your old precinct so they are expecting you to vote there. Certain issues that apply to that precinct do not apply to your new location 2) If you do not register at your new address and voted there, you could theoretically vote twice because they are still expecting you at your old location. 3) some people live in multiple locations. College students could vote in a new state where their college is located if they register, some people have multiple homes and are snowbirds in Florida and return to Ohio. If you did not have to register and pick your location, these people could theoretically show up to any election depending on what town they are in and vote. Not really a good idea. Explain to me how registering to vote is overly burdensome to people and that this basic step is something that disenfranchises voters who really want to be engaged but cant be engaged because of this overly burdensome registration process? Explain to me how the benefits of voter registration are outweighed by the overly burdensome process of having to register to vote and update that registration periodically when you move or go dormant? Outside of crying that a voter purge of records of people who have not voted in over 6 election cycles is wrong, explain to me how disenfranchised they truly are when they can easily re-register in a 3 minute process, if they truly care enough.

that is a strawman argument. Do you have any evidence that terrorists are going to board airplanes today and crash them into the Capitol? Do you have any direct evidence there is going to be an earthquake in California today? Do you have direct evidence that you will get into a car accident on your drive to work today? You put systems and security in place to prevent this from happening. Just because there will not likely be a terrorist attack today, you still do vigilant screening of all travelers, there may not be a massive earthquake today but we still prepare out buildings to sustain one if it comes, just like you will not likely have a car accident today, you still wear your seat belt and take other precautions to keep you safe. You do not wait for evidence before reacting. You use best practices to ensure that the system is set up and safe and minimize the risk and preserve integrity. You do not wait for the fraud to actually happen before you take action, that would be stupid and would be far too late, because how do you fix it. If it is foreseeable, you at least can take action now. To go down the rabbit hole, imagine if Donald Trump was able to get 10 million illegal aliens to vote for him using false identification in order to win the election? what a mess that would be. Clearly, that would be evidence that the election was stolen but it would be far too late to do anything about it at that point. It would be utter chaos. That is why you build a better mousetrap from the start

I think you mis-interpreted his comment. He was asking @jonoh81 his take on if someone should move to another state, city or other part of town, if that person should be required to re-register to vote for moving or they should be continued to be allowed to vote in their prior locale.

Periodic purges provide security and integrity to elections. If you have not voted in 20 years, how difficult would it be for a group of individuals to obtain fake documentation to claim impersonate a person. Probably not too difficult. Clear out the voters who have not voted in a long time and when they are ready to engage again, it is not overly burdensome to re-register. You guys make it sound like registering to vote is akin to getting a root canal. There is minimal effort involved and not overly burdensome.

But it is not. Now, I do not disagree with you that Trump has taken it up to a new level, but he has no shame. However, over the last 20+ years standards have been broken and what was once seen as a political red line has been crossed numerous times without consequence. The point is, that what was once unheard of, challenging an election, has become the norm for both parties who do not like the results. While behavior of certain past politicians may not have risen to the level of Trump, their bad behavior made it possible for Trump to exist. it all builds upon each other. The point is, this is not just a symptom of the Republican party, it is on both sides, but of course true to your character, you refuse to see it, or even acknowledge it.

I think they skipped more than one election cycle. I believe the standard for removal was 12 years of no voting. That would be 6 election cycles IN A ROW. If you skip 6 cycles in a row, it would not be unreasonable to have your registration purged. In fact, I would argue that it would be considered responsible to purge records where the voter does not vote for 6 cycles in a row. Also, remember, when you want to vote it is not too difficult to re-register when you want to do so.

Is the state taking away your right to vote? Hardly. You can still vote. If your record was purged, you just need to re-register. It is free, and it is easy, and it is the responsible thing to do. Nothing has been taken away from you. You just need to do your part and keep up your registration. How is it any different than say moving from Ohio to Georgia and then going down the street to a local polling place in Atlanta and expecting to be able to cast a ballot when you never actually updated your address nor took any other actions besides renting an apartment to show you now live in Georgia.

But don't you think it is the responsibility of the citizen to keep up with that basic task?? Many people move over the course of a decade, every time you move, you will need to update your voter registration so that you vote in the right precinct. If you go to the wrong precinct your vote does not count (or at least you need to cast a provisional ballot that may not count). It is the basic responsibility of the citizen to keep up with this task. If something is truly important to you, you will do what it takes to make sure you can do it. That is a misleading statement. Your registration does not expire, but it should be used. If, 10 or 20 years go by and it has never been used, then either something happened or it is not important for you to keep active. If it is purged because you did not take the responsibility to keep it active, then fine, when you are ready to take voting seriously again, you can re-register. Also, we need to quit the hyperbole that this voter purge is such an egregious thing. 1) If you get purged and you care about it, then you re-register. 2) Registration is free and cost no money, it can be done in less than 5 minutes, and there are people that will help you do it when you want to do it. This is not overly burdensome. Let's quit pretending it is. It is a lot easier and less burdensome to register to vote than it is to renew your passport. Your God given right to democracy, like every God given right, also involves action on your part. God gives you lots of things, but in order to receive them you have to take some action on your end. So based on your own logic, it is very American. again, a false premise. One of the reasons these timeframes exist is because people move, circumstances change, people die, etc. An expiration date will essentially purge invalid licenses or passports without further action. It is a security mechanism for TSA and the BMV. You do not have to worry about millions of dead people's licenses getting passed around. If you want to keep up your driver's license or passport, you must pay a fee. Last I heard, you do not have that with voting. You want to take things to the hyperbolic level. I think every citizen should vote, but if you vote you should at least be engaged enough to take the steps to exercise that right. Quit acting like registering to vote is akin to a root canal. Registering is easy. People just have to do it. People also need to take responsibility for this right. If they feel it is important enough to take a basic step to keep up their registration, then that is a sign of good citizenship. When they decide at some point they want to be active in the democratic process again, they can easily choose to re-register. The onus should be on the citizen to exercise as you say" their God given right" Those are your words as to how "American" a person is. Again, this is just hyperbole on your end. Your point about an activist not wanting to vote. That is perfectly fine, that is their right to vote or not to vote. That has nothing to do about their patriotism or even Americanness. When they want to vote though, there is an easy step they must first do in that process, and that is to register. Not a very had task (especially for someone who claims to be an activist and wants to actually reengaged with voting). You act like this is some huge burden and it is not. many people vote straight party line, they are not engaged. It is sad. We would be better off if people did a better job learning the issues, but fact is that they wont. That still does not change the fact that voting is already easy to do in our country. Registering to vote is not that difficult, and there is a certain responsibility that the individual is responsible for when it comes to societal functions like voting. Keeping up with their registration is that basic task. As JFK once said, "ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country" He spoke to citizens to engage themselves with making a better country, not just expect everything to be given to them. Anything important takes some modicum of effort.

Ah no it is not a privileged perspective. It is called basic civics. Being a citizen takes effort. You cannot expect things to be handed to you. You have to do your part. Voting should be easy, but it should also require a modicum of effort. You want to have an engaged electorate that understands issues and know what they are voting for. Basic functions like figuring out how to register to vote, keeping up with changing your mailing address and re-registering if you move are minor hassles but the things responsible citizens do. We should encourage responsible citizenship. Freedom is not free, it takes some effort..

Does your passport have an expiration date?? Yes, every 10 years. But hey, why even have passports, people should be free to travel anytime and anywhere and with no cost. Do you have to renew your driver's license?? Yes, every 3-5 years depending on the state. But why have licenses. Everyone should be able to drive, let's make it a birthright. Limitation on travel is limitation on economic mobility. Cars should be for everyone. See how silly your arguments are? Why, because every so often we need to check to see that these licenses that we give out are still active and not being misused or that they do not fall into the wrong hands, etc. There are a number of reasons for this. Same with voting. There should be some affirmative action on the individual every so often to make sure they are active and still engaged as citizens to vote. This does not mean you need to vote in every election, but if you have not voted in an election for 10 years, then you should likely need to re-register to get your data current and up to date. Let's be honest here. For all those who cry voter suppression, is it really THAT difficult to register to vote? It takes like 5 minutes. It can be done online, it can be done at any DMV, it can be done at various churches, non profits and BOE's. It can be done with minimal documentation and can be done for the most part until a few weeks before an election. Does this really disenfranchise anyone who truly wants to vote??? Highly doubtful. Being a citizen should entail some basic responsibility to take action on your behalf. Registering to vote is easy, if people cant' take the basic steps to ensure their registration is current and up to date, then how serious are they about voting anyway?? Probably not very.

So if I understand you correctly, you put the bling on the inside by renovating the inside, you renovate the outside on the front facing side only so that it has curb appeal on 5th and Elm, but the rear of the building along 6th where the loading docks are located does not need to be touched?

Again, there is individual responsibility here. If you are not actively voting in statewide elections, then you should be responsible for keeping up your voter registration. I really do not have much sympathy for those who were inadvertently removed because 1) They could have regularly voted to prevent this. 2) if they moved, they could have registered to vote at a new location 3) if they wanted to vote, they could have easily re-registered up to about 6 weeks before the election (if not sooner in GA). 4) as every election nears, there are voter registration campaigns all over the place, there is ample time to register, check your registration if you are interested in voting, re-register, change your address, etc. At some point, there has to be a modicum of individual responsibility on the voter to show up and do their civic duty. if they do not care to take a basic step then why is that Brian Kemp's fault? The article is trying to make it say that the mere purging of voting records for inactivity is wrong. I strongly disagree with that assertion. If voting is important to a person, they will take the steps necessary to do so. There should be some basic steps to vote, otherwise these individuals are no more than party proxies.

Sorry, I do not waste my time going through Stacey Abrams twitter thread from 5 years ago. Nor do I waste my time giving Kari Lake any time of day. After Stacey lost to Kemp for the 2nd time, the sheen on her star dimmed quite a bit so nobody pays attention to her anymore. Sort of like Gillum in Florida who almost won governor and then was indicted on Federal charges a year or so later.

They were both sore losers. Both refused to concede, both claimed they were the person who got more votes. Both claim they would be governor if it were not for those pesky kids who ruined their plan (a little Scooby Doo reference). As for kemp purging voters without merit from rolls, that is BS. There was a process for purging voters and if you did not care enough to take the basic steps to keep your status active, it was subject to being purged. Just because it was purged did not prevent you from registering again if it was done by a mistake of some sort. There is a certain level of personal responsibility here and if we want to have an educated electorate, we need to at least hold people responsible for following a basic process to ensure they have a right to vote. At the end of the day, Kemp got more votes, he became governor and Stacey Abrams refused to publicly acknowledge it. As for Kari Lake, she is nothing more than a demagogue and self promoter who is trying to capitalize on the Trump electorate to garner personal fame. I think she is very insincere and just a publicity hog. Hopefully, she never ascends to any significant office.

That is short sighted. At this time in history, the electoral college favors Republicans. At other times it has favored Democrats. Getting rid of the EC because it would help the opposition party is not the right reason to do it because the pendulum always swings back.

I agree. Personally, I think they need to focus on the area South of 5th where the hotel will be and then east East of the convention center. Activate the area to the South first. by the time that takes off, they may be ready for the next upgrade and then they can focus on the area North of 6th.

Outside of Trump's histrionics??? What is not comparable?? You know I am not a Trump fan, but lets call a spade a spade here. This has been going on by both sides since the Al Gore years and it has only been getting more and more amped up as time has passed. Trump being Trump, of course he acts like he did and continues to be a sore loser. Like everything with Trump, he will go where nobody else would ever dare. He has no shame. That does not change the fact that this is not just a GOP thing, but a deeper issue with the electorate. Heck even in 2021, Terry McCauliiffe would not admit that Trump legitimately won in 2016 and still holds on to the debunked Russian Collusion myth. How is Stacey Abrams different than Kari Lake?? Please tell me how it is not comparable. Please do not look at this as a defense of Trump. He is a horrible person and the fact that people are still so enthralled by the guy is beyond me, but he, like Kari Lake, Like Stacey Abrams are more symptoms of other issues brewing with society.

It is not a GOP problem. This is an issue with the Dems too. There are still a significant number of Dems who think Al Gore still won the election in 2000 even though the facts show the Bush did in fact win Florida even after counting the ballots. Stacey Abrams still claims she did not lose the election in Georgia in 2018 (and I assume 2022 too). There are countless of other Dem candidates or supporters who still support much of this line of thinking. It really is not much different than those who feel Kari Lake is the legitimate governor of Arizona or Trump had the election stolen from him. It is not just a GOP disease but it is something with politics on the whole. Even down at the state and local levels, people are taking their political ideologies to a level of zealotry where they refuse to accept the peaceful transfer of power and refuse to cooperate with a D or R depending ontheir leanings, even if it is for the common good of all

I never understood that place. It is so inconvenient to things and nothing is nearby. Indy has a good center because it is walkable to downtown. Columbus has always been meh in my opinion but the development of the Arena district over the last 20 years has really helped improve that area. Nashville has a good center and convenient to downtown. Orlando and Vegas are semi similar in that they are not downtown, not overly walkable but in a resort town that overrides these concerns. People will go there no matter what the center looks like. I liked what St. louis did many years ago when they integrated it with the Dome, but that obviously did not work out great with the football team. The one downside to both Indy and St. louis is that they create a wall on the edge of the city and discourage development on key blocks around the center outside of the front entrance block. Cincinnati has this same issue, but at least 75 blocks out one of those blocks already. The 6th street block wil be the hardest to activate though as it does not seem like much activity is North of the center

Conventions are about sizzle and pizzazz. You have to sell the venue, just as the trade group needs to sell the venue to their associates to attend. Yes, ultimately, a big warehouse room for events is pretty low tech, but you still need to do signficant upgrades to the facility to keep it relevant. Installing the latest LED videoboards, adding terraces for meetings are all important. New skin makes the building attractive too. Also, windows are important. In the past maybe not so much. However, if people are spending a day inside the facility, it would be helpful to catch a glimpse of outside on occasion. This is why you always need to upgrade. Curb appeal is just as important as everything else.