Obama campaign sues to restrict military voting....

Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

user 64972

Well-Known Member
4 wheel drive
2nd Gen owner
V8 Engine
Joined
Dec 23, 2006
Messages
1,884
Reaction score
70
Obama campaign sues to restrict military voting....what a fine group the D-crats are





Obama campaign sues to restrict military voting....what a fine group the D-crats are. Looks like they're not worried about all voter's rights!



http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/02/obama-campaign-sues-to-restrict-military-voting

 
Last edited by a moderator:
First wanting to ask the military to pay their medical bills and denying them to vote?

Anyone who thinks he deserves a second term is nuts!
 
Site is locked up for me.



I found this. Not sure I total understand, but also not sure it is to restrict military voting? Seems like it is to extend some voting.



Obama campaign sues over Ohio early voting law

By By ANN SANNER Jul 17, 2012

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) President Barack Obama's re-election campaign on Tuesday filed a federal lawsuit against Ohio's top elections official in a dispute over the battleground state's law that restricts early, in-person voting during the three days before Election Day.



The lawsuit filed in Columbus comes after a series of election law changes cleared the state's Republican-controlled Legislature and were signed by Republican Gov. John Kasich.



Obama's campaign and Democrats argue that the law unfairly ends early, in-person voting for most Ohioans on the Friday evening before the Tuesday election, while allowing military and overseas voters to cast a ballot in person until Monday.

Before the changes to the law, local boards of election had the discretion to set their own early, in-person voting hours on the days before the election. And in-person voting on the weekend varied among the state's 88 counties.



The state's elections chief, Secretary of State Jon Husted, has argued that all counties should have the same early voting hours and be open on the same days. Husted and his fellow Republicans contend it's unfair that a voter in one county can cast an early ballot on a day when a voter in a neighboring county cannot.



"I didn't see a lawsuit occur when six counties had weekend voting and extended hours and 82 of them didn't," Husted said in an interview with The Associated Press. "I'm sympathetic to the idea that we should have consistency, because that's exactly what we've been doing on a number of fronts."



Obama for America was joined in the lawsuit by the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democratic Party.



Ohio is one of 32 states that allow voters to cast an early ballot by mail or in person without an excuse. About 30 percent of swing state's total vote or roughly 1.7 million ballots came in ahead of Election Day in 2008.



Obama won Ohio in last presidential election, but Republican rival Mitt Romney is expected to make a strong play for it.



The state doesn't track its early voters by party, so the stats don't show exactly how much Obama might have benefited from early voting in Ohio. But both parties are sure he did.



An extended voting period is perceived as benefiting Democrats because it increases voting opportunities for those harder to reach for an Election Day turnout Hispanics, blacks, new citizens and poor people.



It's the first time Obama's re-election campaign has stepped in to challenge changes to the state's election law.



His campaign supporters helped circulate petitions last year in an effort to have voters this fall overturn a contentious bill that overhauled election rules. State lawmakers later repealed that measure, in a move that also reaffirmed a technical change made in a separate bill that resulted in early voting ending on Friday evening before Election Day.



Asked why the lawsuit shouldn't be seen as a political play by the campaign, the state's Democratic Party chairman, Chris Redfern, told reporters Tuesday that he assumes that both parties will be working to get out the vote this fall.



"It's a chilling notion that we should be opposed to those voting in the final three days because they may or may not vote on our side of the issues," said chairman Chris Redfern. "What is important in this lawsuit is that there are two sets of standards and Ohioans, Americans are offered equal protection."



The state's GOP chairman, Bob Bennett, called the lawsuit "just another circus sideshow."



"Nobody is being disenfranchised here, as Ohio's voters who choose to vote early can do so by mail 24 hours a day, seven days a week or at early voting polls," Bennett said in a written statement.



 
Redfish:



There, I fixed the link
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Obama knows that he has been losing Military votes and only wants to minimize the damage. The men and women of the military should be allowed a little extra time to cast their ballots since they are often serving their country in places far away from their home states. It is not unfair, it is making an unfair situation more fair. Odd they don't mention how that is unfair, or how that can be used against them?



Obama and the Democrats continue to fight against any law that requires approved photo ID's to vote.....claiming it will disenfranchise minorities???? We require Proof of ID for a drivers license, a passport, to cash a check, apply for credit, and to even get access to utilities like water and electricity, why not require ID to vote? That will certainly reduce the amount of ballot box stuffing that has been going on for years, with people voting multiple times, and even dead people voting and most often for Democratic candidates.



...Rich
 
It's payback for the Republicans in many states making it harder for early voters to vote. Hell, in some states, like Ohio, who had been ordered to make early voting easier and more available, they've actually cut back on the number of early voting days. Apparently, the Repubs think early voting favors Dems.
 
Oh boy, here we go again. Another election that polarizes the country, that has no clear majority of votes for the so-called winner, and will be contested and debated for years to come.



I'm sick of it.



Neither Romney nor Obama would get my vote to run one of our local township offices, and neither pass the general test I have of likeability/hireability/worthiness, that that is:



"Would I want to invite them over for dinner?"



TJR
 
TJR,

Don't flatter yourself by inviting any of them for dinner....they probably would not come anyway..:bwahaha:



Seriously....I'm with you on being discussed with the whole political process. That's why I think we need to get a law passed that bans political parties. Let each candidate stand on his own, without the special interest groups providing money in return for favorable legislation. And I consider the Democrats and Republicans as Special Interest Groups.



I would vote for any independent who promised to shake up the existing political gridlock by presenting a bill that would ban political parties. Of course he would fail, but we would know who to vote out the next election, and the next election. At some point the rest of the American Public will realize that it's the Democrats and the Republicans who got us into this mess and they need to go.







....Rich
 
DoctorCAD,

Good point, but there are people who will be out of town, out of state, or even out of the country on election day? This is typical of Military personnel who are serving in locations far from home.

There are also many citizens who travel as part of their business and spend much of their time on the road....Should they all be denied the right to vote because they cannot get to their local polling place?



I think perhaps too many people are using the early voting to bypass the crowded polls, waiting in line, and perhaps taking off work for an hour or so to go vote.... basically they are just lazy. The problem is that there is no easy way to separate the people who legitimately cannot get to the polls, from those who are just too lazy to get up and go.



Your point is well taken, but without creating a bureaucratic nightmare, I don't know any easy way to separate the wheat from the chaff.



...Rich
 
Oh boy, here we go again. Another election that polarizes the country, that has no clear majority of votes for the so-called winner, and will be contested and debated for years to come.



I'm sick of it.



Neither Romney nor Obama would get my vote to run one of our local township offices, and neither pass the general test I have of likeability/hireability/worthiness, that that is:



"Would I want to invite them over for dinner?"



TJR



We are in complete agreement.



I would invite Condi Rice over for dinner and a sleepover...:grin:
 
Hell, in some states, like Ohio, who had been ordered to make early voting easier and more available, they've actually cut back on the number of early voting days.



Hell, here in Ohio, they bent over backwards to let people vote early in the last Presidential election and it does help those who can't get their butts out of bed to vote on a particular day....no matter who they are. It also helps get the busloads to the polls ...whomever they are! I was not happy that no one seemed to be asking anyone for a drivers license when I did early voting but they always ask when I vote in my own precinct. I have to show my drivers license when I buy Sudafed Sinus but don't have to when I go downtown for early voting with the masses and no one cares.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
07 ST,

I agree....to much concern about when the people can vote and little or no concern about who's actually voting? Democrats do not want any ID required to vote because it will disenfranchise minorities???? Everyone who is a citizen will not have any problems getting an approved State ID card. The Democrats claim that many minorities don't trust the Government Bureaucracy...so? Neither do I, but getting and ID and showing it has never been a matter of distrust. The only time I would be concerned about getting an ID is if I was a fugitive from the law, or I was in this country illegally. I cannot even conceive of any other reason, and if those are the reasons, they should not be voting anyway.



...Rich
 
bo,

That is just a Democratic spin on the situation by flipping their intent. While they may say they want to extend the voting for non-military to the same deadline as the military voting....because they know that will probably not happen an will result in the Military deadline moved to the non-military deadline.



I think the military deserve an extra few days to get their ballots turned in If the deadline for non-military votes is extended to the same due date for the military votes (The day before the actual election) it could overwhelm the ballot counting at the last minute before the actual voting begins. These mail-in votes are not automated and must be hand counted.



What a great Democratic ploy....swamp the manual ballot system and well we have another dangling chad situation to throw a blanket over the accuracy of the election. Then the lawsuits will be filed for more and more recounts.



Even if the law is change, it should not be effective until the next election, not this one. Democrats are always wanting to shuffle the deck just before an election....they have been doing that for years.



....Rich



 
bo,

That is just a Democratic spin on the situation by flipping their intent.

Which is another way of saying, "The article Snopes is discussing is just a Republican spin on the situation by flipping their intent."
 

Latest posts

Top