Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 484 posts

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#301

Post by bsanr »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #280
xyzzy21 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, sure technically, but it also Streisands everything about it. The cost-benefit for prosecutors and the other party isn't a slam dunk! Personally I'd absolutely do it and take the gamble. But I'm risk-thriving (hence started several companies, enjoy international travel, etc.)

>Personally I'd absolutely do it and take the gamble. But I'm risk-thriving (hence started several companies, enjoy international travel, etc.) I did not think I would ever see someone comparing starting businesses and international travel with committing clear misdemeanors and possible felonies and opening oneself up to civil suits.

That sounds like a description of every American civil rights activist ever.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#302

Post by angelzen »

tptacek wrote: post #289
rayiner wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. It's tit-for-tat. Moderate Democrats won't push back against the "community organizers" when they push highly questionable practices such as ballot harvesting or allowing ballots to be counted that arrive days after election day. Moderate Democrats also never pushed back on two decades of claims about election fraud and stolen elections from the likes of people like Terry McAuliffe and Stacey Abrams: https:/…

The last major story about ballot harvesting was a conviction for a Republican operative doing it in North Carolina.

Great point. Mail-in voting is a disgraceful corruption of the voting process. You'd think that the elementary task of getting rid of it would be a shoe-in bipartisan issue. Not so fast, this is USA, the beacon of hope for democracy in the world. Or have we moved on to identity based rights instead? I'm losing track of the excuses.

Tribal brain kicking in 5... 4... 3...

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#303

Post by jasonlotito »

educaysean wrote: post #128
ceejayoz wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why do they get public money at all? Because we still believe there to be a societal benefit to an educated populace.

Don't speak for the rest of us please. I personally believe there to be a massive societal disadvantage to the existence of "educational institutions" with hidden political agendas.

Then why do you feel qualified to speak for me?

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#304

Post by bsanr »

president wrote: post #211
ianai wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. With all the anti-democratic practices being rolled out across the states it’s pretty scary to imagine things even a year from now and a long time forward. Life threats against election officials and all the way up to Senators. Gerrymandering. Even the SCOTUS is biased. Seems civics in the US are about to be rigged for one party rule.

Serious question, does anyone have any insight into how we got into this mess? It seems like the past few years has seen a whirlwind of anti-democratic rule at almost every level of government - state, local, and federal.

Any answer that doesn't include the phrase "Southern Strategy" is suspect. Not that that is the ultimate source of the issue; but that, from that era forward, there is an unbroken through-line of tone and tactic.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#305

Post by cmh89 »

the_snooze wrote: post #278
cmh89 wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two things that could alleviate the problem without disenfranchising voters. One, don't purge voter roles right before major elections. Two, allow for same day registration updates. You show up, they find you in the system at your old address, you submit an updated registration card, they hand you a ballot, and we all move on with our lives.

I think that's totally reasonable, but I'm still left wondering when and how states should actually carry out purging their voter records. Would a year before a presidential/midterm election be fair? Six months? What about primary elections? As for same-day registration, I'm sort of for it, but only if people understand the cost involved. And it's not about money. I served as a poll worker in California many years ag…

Why would you do it before major elections if it's just about book keeping? You could purge them a month after mid-terms and a month after general Presidential because those get the most turnout.

When you purge your voter roles becomes a lot less important if you allow for registration/reregistration on election day regardless.

Oregon has same day registration update (and we have motor voter) and no long-lines because we vote primarily by mail.

Disenfranchising voters to 'avoid long-lines' is just a red herring.

There are lots of ways to create quick, safe voting. Election problems are the result of a deliberate attempt to make voting harder for certain people. Full stop.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#306

Post by bgorman »

ceejayoz wrote: post #279
bgorman wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any direct refutations to my allegations? Do you have proof states are auditing for dead voters for example? I am willing to change my opinion if there is evidence to suggest credible voter fraud audits happen, but so far I have not been able to find any.

> Do you have proof states are auditing for dead voters for example? I mean, that's trivial. KY: https://www.wtvq.com/more-than-10000-dead-voters-removed-fro... NC: https://wlos.com/news/local/how-are-names-of-deceased-people... CA: https://www.ocvote.com/registration/keeping-your-registratio... (this one is particularly detailed on the methods used, including "The Registrar of Voters office checks the obituaries lis…

As far as I can tell, none of those links provides evidence that the names of voters from ballots received is actually verified against death records. The links you sent seem to be around removing dead people from voter registration and instances of duplicate votes.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#307

Post by ceejayoz »

bgorman wrote: post #306
ceejayoz wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you have proof states are auditing for dead voters for example? I mean, that's trivial. KY: https://www.wtvq.com/more-than-10000-dead-voters-removed-fro... NC: https://wlos.com/news/local/how-are-names-of-deceased-people... CA: https://www.ocvote.com/registration/keeping-your-registratio... (this one is particularly detailed on the methods used, including "The Registrar of Voters office checks the obituaries lis…

As far as I can tell, none of those links provides evidence that the names of voters from ballots received is actually verified against death records. The links you sent seem to be around removing dead people from voter registration and instances of duplicate votes.

Ah, it's goalpost moves all the way down.

The names of voters from ballots received are checked against the voter registration records. Which are checked against the death records.

That there's an intermediate step doesn't mean it's not happening.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#308

Post by [deleted] »

vageli wrote: post #263
dragonwriter wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California a recording without required consent is a crime when made . Intended use doesn't play into that. It is also separately prohibit from use as evidence in court except as evidence of violation of the law prohibiting such recording itself. > If you wanted to play it on the news, however, you're still free to do that as far as I know. Sure, if you want to advertise the crime you committed on the news you are…

This article [0] states the contrary: the recording _can_ be used as evidence in a criminal trial, but it seems the actual act of recording it is still criminal as a separate matter. > Posted: Dec 5, 2019 / 05:44 PM PST / Updated: Dec 5, 2019 / 05:44 PM PST Secretly recording someone else’s conversation is illegal in California, but prosecutors can use the illicit recording as evidence in a criminal case, the state S…

[deleted]

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#309

Post by cmh89 »

andrew_ wrote: post #277
cmh89 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on where you are. In my state (Oregon), voting is easy and secure. We vote by mail as a default and if you move and don't get your ballot, you can go to any voting office and request all the way up until when polls close on election day. Now, if you are in republican held states like Alabama or Georgia, it's going to be a different story. republicans use several methods to disenfranchise voters, voter ID i…

I've lived in Michigan, Georgia, Florida, and Texas and (again, as a minority) have never experienced any of these. I'll admit that confirmation bias is a real thing and may apply here, however these points smell of common media talking points and heavy, heavy tribalism. Even as a registered Democrat, I just do not buy into the "Democrats are purveyors of voting righteousness and the Republicans are out to destroy ou…

That's great for you! That doesn't really have any bearing on the documented reality of republican disenfranchisement of voters.

Sometimes 'common media talking points' are talking points because a real and serious problem exists. There's plenty of evidence of the problem if you want to take the time to get educated on it.

republicans ARE out to destroy the right to vote. They are actively anti-democracy to the point of spreading outright lies about the 2020 Presidential election and attempting to overthrow the democratically elected candidate for US President. This really isn't a 'both sides' thing.

When you have to pretend that both sides are bad so as to appear fair, we call that 'enlightened centrism'. republicans represent a minority of Americans. They'd never have power again if we had fair democratic elections. Democrats represent the majority of Americans. They benefit greatly from fair democratic elections. It's just that simple.

Re: University of Florida bars professors from testifying in a voting rights case

#310

Post by brazzledazzle »

mullen wrote: post #291
brazzledazzle wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating that the supreme court has upheld the ability to forgo so many purportedly inalienable rights via contract.

Well, you did voluntary signed a Contract. As part of a commercial exchange, you agree to do and do not certain things for money. Inalienable Rights can't be signed away, so the argument that you are signing away Inalienable Rights really does not hold water.

Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems to me that confining yourself to civil judgement via private arbitration removes your rights.
Post reply on HN