At Least They’re Now Saying it out Loud
For decades the Republican party has squawked about non-existent massive voter fraud as an excuse to pass draconian voting laws to make it harder for the “wrong people” to vote. We all know that the “voter fraud” trope was just bullshit to cover the real reason, which was to reduce turnout of voters who typically vote for Democratic candidates. With a few rare slip ups, the GOP has stuck to that script for years, repeating it so often that their base actually believes it.
That tactic has worked really well up until Trump took the Big Lie and turned it into the Gigantic Gargantuan Godzilla King Kong Lie. Everyone in the US (except for Trumpists and Newsmax Morons) knows Trump lost the election because he got fewer votes than Biden. All 50 states including the Red States certified their elections, and all of Congress with the exception of Trumpist ass lickers voted to certify the election. Even Pence refused to interfere with the certification, and that’s really saying something. The real problem for Republicans voter suppression efforts started a few months ago when legislatures in 43 states cited the Gigantic Gargantuan Godzilla King Kong Lie as the precise reason that it was an “urgent priority” to pass over 250 new restrictions that would do nothing to stop the massive fraud that doesn’t exist. As many have said, the GOP came up with a solution in search of a problem.
Things went along swimmingly up until the moment Georgia passed their voter suppression bill that even criminalized giving people bottled water as they stood in hours-long lines to vote. I believe they would have gotten away with the rest had they not made that one last overstep. The backlash for that provision, and the law itself was so severe that big business finally had to pull its head out of the sand and take a stand. Over the last couple of weeks, over a 100 company CEOs have condemned the laws not only in Georgia, but in many other states, and Georgia has been made an example of bad policy making which has brought out the truth of the voter suppression efforts.
Knowing that the Gigantic Gargantuan Godzilla King Kong Lie is no longer working, the GOP has taken on an entirely new tact – telling the truth. One lawmaker, Arkansas Republican John Kavanaugh, actually came out and said it on national television, admitting that Republicans want not all votes, but just “quality” votes which translates to Republican votes. Talking to CNN, he said:
“There’s a fundamental difference between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats value as many people as possible voting, and they’re willing to risk fraud. Republicans are more concerned about fraud, so we don’t mind putting security measures in that won’t let everybody vote — but everybody shouldn’t be voting.”
“Not everybody wants to vote, and if somebody is uninterested in voting, that probably means that they’re totally uninformed on the issues. Quantity is important, but we have to look at the quality of votes, as well.”
And there you have it – truth that didn’t just slip out inadvertently. And so now this truth telling is even more obvious with the National Review now admitting that voter suppression laws really are voter suppression laws. In one of the most tone-deaf articles (even for the National Review) was by Kevin Williamson who, in this tsunami of stupid statements posited this:
“There would be more voters if we made it easier to vote, and there would be more doctors if we didn’t require a license to practice medicine. The fact that we believe unqualified doctors to be a public menace but act as though unqualified voters were just stars in the splendid constellation of democracy indicates how little real esteem we actually have for the vote, in spite of our public pieties.”
He goes on about how we should vigorously test potential voters to weed out those “not qualified” to vote, which is simply a dog whistle for meaning those who might vote against Republican ideology. The GOP even said it in a hearing last month in the Supreme Court when Michael Carvin, attorney for the Arizona Republican party had this exchange with Amy Coney Barrett about how Republicans want to toss ballots cast in the wrong precinct:
Coney Barrett: “What’s the interest of the Arizona RNC in keeping, say, the out-of-precinct ballot disqualification rules on the books?”
Carvin: “Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game. And every extra vote they get through unlawful interpretation of Section 2 hurts us, it’s the difference between winning an election 50-49 and losing an election 51 to 50.”
Once again counsel for the GOP said in open court that they don’t care if a voter is qualified. They’re trying to eliminate Democratic votes, period, end of sentence. Since they’re now being truthful about their voter suppression, can they just PLEASE drop the Gigantic Gargantuan Godzilla King Kong Lie? It would sure save a lot of time and a lot of column inches.
They care if a voter is Republican. That’s the qualification. He can be ignorant; he can believe in any cockeyed theory he wants; he can be raping women and children in the basement; he can be pouring poison in the water system…but if he’s Republican he’s golden and they want him to vote.
An educated voter…a voter who depends on facts and logic…a voter who respects the law and treats neighbors well and doesen’t tell lies, and has never been violent to anyone…OK, maybe….but only if he votes Republican.
Because anyone but a Republican, rock-ribbed, iron-clad, and armed to the teeth Republican….is not qualified to vote. According to them.
1Tommy Tuberville has identified the three branches of government as the presidency, the House and the Senate. By Williamson’s “reasoning” he’s not qualified to vote, much less be a Senator. And yet…
2Buttermilk Sky @2:
Exactly.
Perhaps we should weed out unqualified candidates instead. There are less candidates than voters so it would be simpler. Any stand on any issue would be acceptable, but candidates should show they understand the details on the issues they oppose or support.
As well as a 5th grade passing knowledge of the government they wish to represent, like the three branches or what occurred after the Civil War ended.
3Y’all beat me to it.
I read “He goes on about how we should vigorously test potential voters to weed out those “not qualified” to vote, which is simply a dog whistle for meaning those who might vote against Republican ideology.”
I thought–a bi-partisan established test out I might consider, but only if we can also create a bi-partisan screening of candidates, including passing knowledge exam on government function and process type questions AND a psychological exam–and person with certain disorders would be excluded–like severe narcissism, imaginary thinking, pathological liar, conspiracy theory embracer…
4Not sure how the Qgop mouthpieces can say “quality voters” with a straight face. What comes to mind are the numerous interviews with trumpf voters during the election. Those were quality voters? How about the insurrectionists that stormed the capital. I guess from what’s been reported that many of them didn’t vote. Guess only the quality insurrectionists voted.
5Also, this attorney representing the Arizona Qgop talks about the difference between repugnanticans losing 49-50% and winning 51-50%. Hmm. Not exactly a math wizard.
Great suggestions to “weed out the candidates.” Since the QOP insists on running total bozos with a grievance a la Boebert, Tubbersville, et al, we cannot afford to take a pass on any seat for which a Democratic candidate has even the slimmest chance of winning. “Howard Dean Scream” them in all 50 states.
Secondly, we’re “good” with whatever Stacey Abrams tells us to do to register voters to make those slimmest of chances for Democrats into highly probable.
Three, still following and donating to former Attorney General Eric Holder and others’ efforts to bring suit against some of the more bizarre state election laws and efforts to suppress the vote.
And, apologies to all for electioneering when there hasn’t been much time to enjoy the 2020 wins. The good news is that that may be a larger factor against the QOP’s real time desperation. The next 4 years may seem long, but if that sends the QOP in a crypt finally, y’all may forgive us; maybe.
6Simpler tests for lower-level candidates. Stronger tests for governors and state legislators. For federal offices, more. For Senators and POTUS and VP, and presidential appointees, full on “you know if or you don’t.” Also, mental health exam. Nobody has to be perfect (no such animal anyway) but sound mind and good character is important at all levels: a psycho sheriff or police chief is a disaster in progress. Some things are usually treatable, like anxiety disorders and depression, so a history of depression in someone who’s doing fine now shouldn’t be a Nope if otherwise you’ve got a very functional person for the job. Same with not knowing something–nobody knows everything, and someone who says “Sorry, I never even thought about international marine trade agreements, but I’m sure I can learn” is better than a bloviating arrogant guy who tries to convince you he’s the world expert.”
Presidential candidates should have experience in national, and preferably also international, politics. International business experience doesn’t cut it; it’s too narrow. Presidential candidates should have a solid grasp on US geography–name all the states and their capitals and know what growth zone they’re in and what they produce and consume. They should understand how science is done, how to determine good and bad sources of information, something about error analysis in real life situations (planning, organizing, etc) , have some experience in direct contact with other cultures and languages, etc.
American and world history *and anthropology*, the history at reasonable depth. They should understand quite a bit about the military w/o reference to TV or movies, and have read substantial recognized sources in military history and science–more important to understand the culture than the minutiae of current military tech. Etc, etc, etc. The more breadth and depth of what a president needs they have going in, the less additional to acquire between election and Inauguration. And given access to a library and a computer, should be able to find the answer to most questions of the type president gets very fast.
H. Clinton had the full package of qualifications. K. Harris has most (not yet all the Clinton had but she’s a fast learner. Biden’s good–multiple experience at multiple levels, like both of those.
Then we get back to character. Raw intelligence is worth nothing without character. Intelligence and knowledge is worth nothing without character. Character’s the foundation. Smarts, education, knowledge, experience shape the structure–its size, its style–but w/o foundation you’ve got a hot mess like the former.
7Ms. Moon, there’s nothing with which to disagree with your suggestions for candidate qualifications. But, yeah that word – how do we encourage the RNC and QOP voters to actually vet their candidates? The RNC already laid down for Donnie through Mort Blackwell, and apparently there’s no Quack-a-Non candidate either too crazy or otherwise vile not to appeal to QOP voters.
The QOP seems powerless to help themselves which leaves registering voters and running Democratic candidates to help them the hell out of office.
8While I agree that we’re getting too many unqualified nut cases in office, I’m reluctant to give any kind of test, especially a psychiatric exam. That’s still too squishy of a field to trust. Also you will never get Republicans agreeing to anything like that, and even many Democrats would be leery of allowing psychiatrists have a veto on who can run.
Plus I well remember the “literacy tests” that the South used to suppress black votes.
I do think a multiple choice test like the current US citizenship test could be useful. But even then, it should be something where the results are published, and voters get to evaluate their importance at the ballot box. True, we’d still be stuck with Alabama football coaches and Colorado banshees who think decorating with guns makes qualifies you for governance. But in places where some voters are thoughtful, it might make a difference.
[Side story: teaching math I once gave a test with some stupid “robbers leave the bank and drive at x miles per hour, the cops chase them driving at y miles per hour, how soon will the cops catch the robbers” question. The answer turned out to be 14 hours, and one student wrote “this cannot be right, no car can run at those speeds for that long without refueling”. I hired her for my lab immediately, even though she was an undergrad taking basic math. That kind of wisdom is too valuable to pass up on, even if her math had turned out to be wrong. I hate to think what the lab would have missed out on if I had just marked the question wrong.]
9