Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Lord Jim »

Ronald Reagan's biggest crimes were the bloody military actions to suppress social and political change in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala and Afghanistan,
LMAO !!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

How can anyone take seriously the opinions of a man capable of writing such brain dead, moronic, revisionist twaddle? The Stalinist Sandinista's were agents of "social and political change"? Well I suppose so, in the same sense that the Bolsheviks were....

And who were the agents of "social and political change" in Afghanistan? The Red Army?

Indeed, Mr. Reagans' successful efforts to begin rolling back the frontiers of the Soviet Empire in Central America and raise the costs of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan are amongst his proudest achievements, and helped to contribute to his central, crowning achievement; orchestrating the collapse of the Soviet Union. The people of Central America are far better off today than they would have been without his efforts; they owe him a debt of thanks. As for Afghanistan, it's hardly Mr. Reagan's fault that subsequent Administrations (Bush 41 and Clinton) ignored the country after the Russians were driven out....

Shame on the dough-assed ninnys who make up the Nobel Peace Prize Committee for failing to award the prize to the man who did more to remove the specter of global nuclear annihilation than any person in the whole of human history; that failure redounds to their eternal shame and disgrace....

Thanks for the heads up about Mr. Blum; now I'll know any time I see his name afixed to an article that what follows was penned by a complete ignoramus and it will save me the trouble of bothering to read it.

ETA:

BTW, I'm sure you must have noticed the huge amount of coverage given to that Iran-Contra trivia that you're so obsessed with during all the recent retrospective's on the Gipper's remarkable Presidency surrounding the recent 100th anniversary of his birth....

Yes sir, it was front and center of every single analysis.....The first thing anyone mentioned.....

:lol: :lol: :lol:

The fact that Mr. Reagan is accorded the respect and honor that is so much his just due just eats you up, doesn't it? You'd really prefer that everyone share your revisionist fantasies about him....

Sorry; ain't gonna happen. You might as well just suck it up and get over it.
Last edited by Lord Jim on Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17257
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Scooter »

(cough) This thread does have a topic.
"Hang on while I log in to the James Webb telescope to search the known universe for who the fuck asked you." -- James Fell

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Lord Jim »

(cough) This thread does have a topic.
Oh yeah...

Forgot about that.... :D

The first politician to really successfully exploit the college student angle in an election was the now junior Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders....

Sanders had spent a number of years as a gadfly on the fringes of Vermont politics, not really getting anywhere, running unsuccessfully for a number of offices.

Then he hit on the idea of registering and turning out to vote a huge number of students at the University of Vermont and pulled off an upset win to get elected Mayor of Burlington.
ImageImageImage

Andrew D
Posts: 3150
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:01 pm
Location: North California

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Andrew D »

I believe in one Reagan the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth. And in one Lord Reagan, the only-begotten Son of Reagan; begotten of his Father Reagan before all worlds, Reagan of Reagan, Pertinacity of Pertinacity, very Reagan of very Reagan; Begotten, not made; Being of one substance with the Reagan; By whom all things were made: Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, And was incarnate by the Holy Reagan of the Virgin Nancy: And ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Reagan; Whose kingdom shall have no end. And I believe in the Holy Reagan, the Lord, the Giver of Life, Who proceedeth from the Father Reagan and the Son Reagan; Who with the Father Reagan and the Son Reagan together is worshipped and glorified.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by rubato »

Nearly every good university attracts mostly liberal students and faculty to the area and thus changes the voting demographic. The orig. population of Santa Cruz (or the conservative fraction thereof) whined about this back in the 70s and there were scandals when the conservatives committed voter fraud to selectively disenfranchise students.

The conservatives who want an ocean view should move to San Onofre or Diablo Canyon.

yrs,
rubato

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

As I said before, until the stat/county/city/village give my daughter "LOCAL" tuition (which only occurs after three years of full time rental in the area) thne her vote counts in her home (aka my) state/district.

Big RR
Posts: 14897
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Big RR »

oldr--that may be your view, but I know of no state which ties the ability to get in-state tuition as a prerequisite to voting. Even if the whole family moved to Maryland she would not be eligible for instate tuition, nor would anyone else in your family; would you also argue that no one in your family could then vote? Voting is an important right guaranteed under the Constitution, in state tuition appears to be a privilege that is earned by extended residency.

dgs49
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:13 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by dgs49 »

Correction: That's not "oldr's view." It is the prevailing law in 99% of the country. If your only claim to being a legal resident is that's where you sleep when school is in session,then you are a resident of someplace else, which is where you should vote (if you care enough to do so, which most college students don't).

Grim Reaper
Posts: 944
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2010 1:21 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Grim Reaper »

(if you care enough to do so, which most college students don't).
If this is is true as you say it is, then why would it matter if they voted where they are going to school? If most of them aren't going to bother in the first place, then the few that do bother won't make much of a difference.

Big RR
Posts: 14897
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Big RR »

dgs--please point out those statutes that are the prevailing law in "99% of the country" that say what you claim they do; just a few, not all of them.

eta--and FWIW, you agree with oldr that you cannot vote in a given state until you are eligible for in-state tuition? I know of no state's voting statute that says that, but if you are aware of any, please point them out. Indeed, most of the voting statutes I am aware of (generally eastern US) only require that one reside in the jurisdiction for a given number of days (generally 60-90) to acquire the right to vote there.

further added:

Here is a list of the voting requirements re residence from Info Please:

State Residency requirement
Alabama No durational residency requirement. 10-day registration requirement. In-person registration by 5 P.M., eleven days before election date.
Alaska 30-day registration requirement.
Arizona 29-day registration requirement.
Arkansas No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
California 15-day registration requirement.
Colorado 30-day residency requirement. 29-day registration requirement.
Connecticut No durational residency requirement. Registration deadline 14th day before election by mail, 7 days in person; registration and party enrollment deadline by 12 noon the day before primary in person, 5 days by mail.
Delaware No durational residency requirement. 20-day registration requirement.
District of Columbia No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Florida No durational residency requirement. 29-day registration requirement before national election; 29-day registration requirement before first and second state primary.
Georgia No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Hawaii No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Idaho 30-day residency requirement. May register 25 days prior to any election with County Clerk. Individual may also register on election day at polling place.
Illinois 30-day residency requirement. 27-day registration requirement.
Indiana 30-day residency requirement. 29-day registration requirement.
Iowa No durational residency requirement.10-day registration requirement. In-person registration by 5 P.M., 11 days before election date, 10 days for statewide primary and general elections.
Kansas 15-day registration requirement.
Kentucky 28-day residency requirement.
Louisiana No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Maine No durational residency requirement.
Maryland No durational residency requirement.
Massachusetts No durational residency requirement. 20-day registration requirement.
Michigan 30-day residency requirement.
Minnesota Permits registration and voting on election day with approved ID; 20-day residency requirement.
Mississippi 30-day residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Missouri No durational residency requirement. Must be registered by the fourth Wednesday prior to election.
Montana 30-day residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Nebraska No durational residency requirement. Registration deadline is third Friday prior to election.
Nevada 30-day residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
New Hampshire No durational residency requirement. 10-day registration requirement. Individual may also register on election day at polling place.
New Jersey 30-day residency requirement. 29-day registration requirement.
New Mexico No durational residency requirement. 28-day registration requirement.
New York 30-day residency requirement.
North Carolina 30-day residency requirement. 25-day registration requirement.
North Dakota No voter registration. 30-day residency requirement to vote in election.
Ohio 30-day residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Oklahoma No durational residency requirement. 25-day registration requirement.
Oregon Must register by close of business day of registering agencies (which varies), 21st day before the election.
Pennsylvania 30-day residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Rhode Island No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
South Carolina No durational residency requirement. Registration certificate not valid for 30 days, but if you move within the state you can vote in old precinct during the 30 days.
South Dakota No durational residency requirement. 15-day registration requirement.
Tennessee No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Texas No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement.
Utah 30-day residency requirement. 15th and 18th day before election registration in person. Postmarked 30 days before election if registering by mail.
Vermont Administrative cut-off date for processing registration applications is second Saturday before the election, by 12 noon.
Virginia No durational residency requirement. 29-day registration requirement.
Washington 30-day residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement. Individual may also register in person no later than 15 days before election.
West Virginia No durational residency requirement. 21-day registration requirement.
Wisconsin 10-day residency requirement. Individual may also register on election day at polling place.
Wyoming No durational residency requirement. 30-day registration requirement. Individual may also register on election day at polling place.


Read more: Residency Requirements for Voting — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781452. ... z1GnGpwokx

None make the distinction for students you claim 99% of jurisdictions do so far as I can see.

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6722
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Long Run »

I read the 99% to refer to the residency requirement for in-state tuition, as opposed to voting qualification. In one sense, it would be nice to have the same rule of residency for various purposes, e.g., voting, college, social services, etc. On the other hand, since each of these has a different purpose, it makes sense that there be different residency rules. As for the list of residency requirement by state, BigRR, it begs the question as to what "residency" means.

For federal congressional representation, the Census counted students as resident where they go to college, so it probably makes most sense that they vote where they go to college (even though that means they vote on local as well as national topics). While this may be a nuisance to a college heavy, low population state like New Hampshire, it is unlikely that the students can consistently be motivated to vote and continue to vote opposite of what long term residents generally do. And states like New Hampshire get the benefit of having those students count toward their federal allocations of welfare, medicaid and other population based allocations (as well as improving their chances of having another congress critter as a result of the student population).

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by rubato »

oldr_n_wsr wrote:As I said before, until the stat/county/city/village give my daughter "LOCAL" tuition (which only occurs after three years of full time rental in the area) thne her vote counts in her home (aka my) state/district.

So if you moved to another state you should never be allowed to vote in that state for 3 years? What address will you use when you register to vote in your prior state of residence? A PO box? Or do you just give up the right to vote for three years?

Or is this just a dumb idea which reflects the fact that you don't think college students really have the 'rights' the law says that they do?


yrs,
rubato

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

For federal congressional representation, the Census counted students as resident where they go to college
Actually, the census asked if we had college students "elswhere" and ended being counted on my household's number.
rubato wrote:
oldr_n_wsr wrote:As I said before, until the stat/county/city/village give my daughter "LOCAL" tuition (which only occurs after three years of full time rental in the area) thne her vote counts in her home (aka my) state/district.

So if you moved to another state you should never be allowed to vote in that state for 3 years? What address will you use when you register to vote in your prior state of residence? A PO box? Or do you just give up the right to vote for three years?

Or is this just a dumb idea which reflects the fact that you don't think college students really have the 'rights' the law says that they do?

yrs,
rubato
You misunderstand. Either you are a resident of the state/town/city in which you live and enjoy all the benefits of said residency, aka right to vote there, local tuition rates, et. al. (as long as you fill out whatever forms to change residency) or you get none of those privaleges.

I ask you, where should college students be allowed to vote? I say wherever their greater amount of time living is, but along with that they should get local tuition rates as that is their main address, especially when they live off campus as my duaghter has for over two years now.

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6722
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Long Run »

oldr_n_wsr wrote:
For federal congressional representation, the Census counted students as resident where they go to college
Actually, the census asked if we had college students "elswhere" and ended being counted on my household's number.
I guess this has been an ongoing confusing situation. From my earlier link:
That means most college students should be counted at their college address, either on campus or off campus. They should be counted at their parents' home only if they live and sleep there most of the year.

This is puzzling to many people. Even Census Bureau Director Robert Groves wrote on his blog that his two college-student sons were not sure whether they should fill out forms at their school addresses or at their parents' house. Census research has found that some students are counted twice, once in each place.

To deal with this problem, the Census Bureau added a new question to the 2010 Census form: "Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?" For those who answer "yes," the options include "in college housing." Census officials hope that the answers to this question will help them determine the correct address for everyone who is counted and avoid counting college students more than once.

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by rubato »

oldr_n_wsr wrote:
For federal congressional representation, the Census counted students as resident where they go to college
Actually, the census asked if we had college students "elswhere" and ended being counted on my household's number.
rubato wrote:
oldr_n_wsr wrote:As I said before, until the stat/county/city/village give my daughter "LOCAL" tuition (which only occurs after three years of full time rental in the area) thne her vote counts in her home (aka my) state/district.

So if you moved to another state you should never be allowed to vote in that state for 3 years? What address will you use when you register to vote in your prior state of residence? A PO box? Or do you just give up the right to vote for three years?

Or is this just a dumb idea which reflects the fact that you don't think college students really have the 'rights' the law says that they do?

yrs,
rubato
You misunderstand. Either you are a resident of the state/town/city in which you live and enjoy all the benefits of said residency, aka right to vote there, local tuition rates, et. al. (as long as you fill out whatever forms to change residency) or you get none of those privaleges.

I ask you, where should college students be allowed to vote? I say wherever their greater amount of time living is, but along with that they should get local tuition rates as that is their main address, especially when they live off campus as my duaghter has for over two years now.
No.

Good colleges and universities are paid for over long periods of time by the taxpayers of those states who have a reasonable expectation that their own children, relatives, neighbors &c will benefit from those shared sacrifices and not the children, relatives and neighbors of people in states that prefer ignorance to paying taxes.

Otherwise we would have the states with good universities like California flooded with the children of cheap moronic bastards like nearly all of the conservative states.

Voting rights, yes. Parasites, no. Even the out of state tuition in California is too low, far less than the cost of a comparable private college anywhere in the 1st world.

yrs,
rubato

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

Even the out of state tuition in California is too low,
How low?
I pay over $26,000/year for my daughter to attend Univ of Maryland. (not including the extra fee's, parking pass, books, etc).

Big RR
Posts: 14897
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by Big RR »

Good colleges and universities are paid for over long periods of time by the taxpayers of those states who have a reasonable expectation that their own children, relatives, neighbors &c will benefit from those shared sacrifices and not the children, relatives and neighbors of people in states that prefer ignorance to paying taxes.
Well, one thing we can do is to eliminate all the foreign students who come in as grad students and teach lab/recitation sections without being able to speak english even understandably, leaving more room for in-state students to get the graduate degrees and the assistantships. But I wouldn't count on it.

dgs49
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:13 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by dgs49 »

It's a damn good thing tax money for state colleges and universities is not allocated by popular vote. The curricula would be cleaned up right quick.

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by rubato »

oldr_n_wsr wrote:
Even the out of state tuition in California is too low,
How low?
I pay over $26,000/year for my daughter to attend Univ of Maryland. (not including the extra fee's, parking pass, books, etc).
Tuition for a comparable private institution is over $40,000/yr.

Tuition and fees for UC for OOS are $34,000/yr. Cheap.


yrs,
rubato

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: Republicans want to disenfranchise an entire generation

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

Actually I just checked Univ of MAryland for this year and with room and board and mandatory fees it amounts to a little more than $36,000 per year. I assume the Ca OOS $34000 is with tuition, room and board and fees.

She has been living off campus for the last two years so base tuition with mandatory fees (minus books, parking fee's, comuter fee's, etc) is $26500. Add rent and food and I believe it ended up more expensive than her living on campus. But living on campus was not an option as once a junior there is no more guaranteed on campus housing. (personally I think they do this to boost the income of local landlords)

SUNY (State Unversity of NY) system is $28,460 per year for out of state students which includes tuition, room, board and mandatory fees along with estimates of books and supplies and personal expenses and transportation. Seems NY shoucl up their out of state tuition rates.

ETA
SUNY in state for the same breakdown is $20,050

Post Reply