Discussion
  • Read More
    Major Lazer Power BlazerAnna Merlan
    4/22/16 2:55pm

    this is great. felons losing voting rights is one of the most obvious examples of systematic racism in the US

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      The Noble RenardMajor Lazer Power Blazer
      4/22/16 3:00pm

      What’s great is that with the Virginia laws, their roots in racism are actually explicit. The New York Times had some great information on that:

      Virginia’s Constitution has prohibited felons from voting since the Civil War; the restrictions were expanded in 1902, as part of a package that included poll taxes and literacy tests.

      In researching the provisions, advisers to the governor turned up a 1906 report that quoted Carter Glass, a Virginia state senator, as saying they would “eliminate the darkey as a political factor in this State in less than five years, so that in no single county of the Commonwealth will there be the least concern felt for the complete supremacy of the white race in the affairs of government.”

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      reoneThe Noble Renard
      4/22/16 3:05pm

      Jesus. I say it so often, but people can be so EVIL.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Stig-a-saw-us wrecks loves nuclear power.Anna Merlan
    4/22/16 3:09pm

    I don’t have an issue with non-violent felons getting their voting rights back. But convicted murders, pederasts, kidnappers, wife beaters and rapists? Resounding no.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      benjaminalloverStig-a-saw-us wrecks loves nuclear power.
      4/22/16 3:16pm

      I think the influence of convicted murderers’ votes poses much less a threat than the danger of large swaths of citizens being disenfranchised via the prison industrial complex.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Never_NudeStig-a-saw-us wrecks loves nuclear power.
      4/22/16 3:19pm

      I am legitimately, honestly curious about your reasoning for this position. Not looking for a confrontation—I was hoping for more information.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    mazzieDAnna Merlan
    4/22/16 3:01pm

    I love how Republicans are like “this is all about votes!” as if continuing to bar felons, who will likely vote democrat, from voting isn’t all about votes.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Jess, Queen of the RaptorsmazzieD
      4/22/16 3:10pm

      The cognitive dissonance experienced by the entire GOP continues to baffle me.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      goddessoftransitorymazzieD
      4/22/16 3:36pm

      “IT’S DIFFERENT WHEN WE DO IT!”

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    My Dog Is A PirateAnna Merlan
    4/22/16 2:58pm

    Wait, what? Virginia? The one in the U.S.? The one in the south, under D.C., below the Mason-Dixon line?

    YOUR MOVE, EVERY OTHER STATE.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      TheSchratMy Dog Is A Pirate
      4/22/16 3:08pm

      Most states are already at this point. Only three states permanently disenfranchise felons (Florida is one of them, IIRC). Only two that I can think of allow all citizens to vote: Maine and Vermont. Correct me if I’ve forgotten others, though.

      {EDIT: Here’s a WaPo article with the information on the other states:

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nati...

      }

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BrandonMy Dog Is A Pirate
      4/22/16 3:18pm

      my home state (NY) is already there, once you complete your sentence/probation, you can re-register to vote immediately (however, it seems most felons are oblivious to this, and think it’s a lifetime ban, as it is in OTHER states.)

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    bagoflettersAnna Merlan
    4/22/16 3:03pm

    I love that the effort to restore voting rights to people is a "transparent effort to win votes!" like.... yeah? so? the whole point of restoring the votes is so that more people would be able to vote.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SourSghettibagofletters
      4/22/16 5:30pm

      The Republicans stand for minimizing the amount of people voting, and the Democrats stand for maximizing it. Now tell me who is more democratic.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    goddessoftransitoryAnna Merlan
    4/22/16 3:32pm

    ALL RIGHT, YOU ALL. If felons can get back their right to vote, NOBODY HAS AN EXCUSE. I’d better see every one of your shining faces at the ballot/mailbox on Election Day AND YOU’D BETTER FILL OUT THE WHOLE DAMN BALLOT. I don’t want any whining about how “hard” it is to keep up with issues/candidates, either. Read a damn newspaper. Read your voter’s guide that is available at every government building everywhere. No skipping local elections or school bonds or tax initiatives.

    Whew, okay, sorry, I get a little riled, sometimes. Here’s juice boxes and the Thin Mints I was saving specifically for voters. Let’s put on our pjs and I’ll make you jam sandwiches and we’ll read Little Bear stories until bedtime.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      April Ludgategoddessoftransitory
      4/22/16 4:44pm

      People are lazy and would rather be happy, ignorant, and uninformed. That's why I hate people. Oh, and they complain about something they could've prevented in the first place if they weren't lazy and stupid. Because they didn't vote.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      PersnicketyPantsgoddessoftransitory
      4/22/16 5:41pm

      Amen. Why does this only have 6 stars?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Metro-CarnieAnna Merlan
    4/22/16 3:03pm

    Message to Republicans:

    If you have enough felons that restoring or taking away their voting rights could materially sway an election, then the felons may not be the problem. You should take a harder look at the system that made them felons.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      sybannAnna Merlan
      4/22/16 3:04pm

      Wow. This is a wonderful step forward and out of the us vs them American mentality that’s been fostered to divide. And why did I think this was federal law?

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Biturbowagonsybann
        4/23/16 12:32am

        Felony disenfranchisement is implicitly permitted by the U.S. Constitution:

        Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, *except for participation in rebellion, or other crime* (emphasis mine), the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

        However, just because it is permitted, does not mean that it has to be done. There is no Constitutional requirement that convicted felons be disenfranchised.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        sybannBiturbowagon
        4/23/16 6:46am

        So to clarify - it’s federally supported but not required of the states. Thanks.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      noseriouslywhyAnna Merlan
      4/22/16 3:03pm

      The linked article (outdated discriminatory vestige) makes me angry. I say this as someone with no legal experience or knowledge, but the statement contained regarding the fact that murder victims can't be on juries but murderers can, and how murderers, rapists and pornographers will now be on juries and voting, makes my head want to explode. Murder victims can't be jurors because they're dead, dude. If a murder victim was also a rapist and pornographer but NOT DEAD, that person would be allowed on a jury. That comparison is irritating. But the second is just.....flat stupid. We already have rapists, murderers and pornographers on juries. Do you really think that every single 'criminal' in the country has been convicted of a crime? I submit that they have not. Do you really think that every person that has murder, rape or pornography waiting somewhere in them has already done it? Also probably not. The idea that you can serve your sentence and come off parole or probation and still not be able to vote is fucked up. If you think they're that abhorrent and inherently dangerous to the fabric of society, then why do we have a system that allows them to re-integrate? I mean Jesus. I can't even formulate a decent rant because this makes me so mad.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        goddessoftransitorynoseriouslywhy
        4/22/16 3:38pm

        Murder victims can’t be jurors because they’re dead, dude.

        Up until this sentence I was all wait, what?

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      TheSchratAnna Merlan
      4/22/16 2:55pm

      So rarely does my Commonwealth do so well, but today is one of those days. This is tremendous news.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        assmonkeysaysI'mBRITNEY, BITCH!TheSchrat
        4/22/16 3:13pm

        This.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        DL ThurstonTheSchrat
        4/22/16 3:26pm

        Nice to have a governor who isn’t a national embarrassment again. That was a rough few years.

        Reply
        <