From: nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com   
      
   On Mon, 23 Feb 2026 20:09:53 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"   
    wrote:   
      
   >BTR1701  wrote:   
   >>Feb 23, 2026 at 8:18:27 AM PST, suzeeq  wrote:   
   >>>On 2/23/2026 3:40 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >   
   >>>>Today's rant is about in person early voting. March 17 primary. Not that   
   >>>>concerned as two years ago, I already voted by mail, giving the post   
   >>>>office enough time.   
   >   
   >>>>Indiana just cut early voting in half. It is a Republican state. A handful   
   >>>>of Republican legislators were familiar with the statistics and knew   
   >>>>that this is popular with their own voter and in a few counties, half of   
   >>>>voters vote early. But the idiot Republican legislators in a heavily   
   >>>>Republican state still want to eliminate it despite their own voters   
   >>>>using it and liking it.   
   >   
   >>>>My state has 40 days since COVID. However, it is not full time and each   
   >>>>county sets its own hours with 1 location. For the last 15 days, there   
   >>>>are an expanded number of locations and weekend hours.   
   >   
   >>>>Some day, Republicans will come to understand they are pissing off their   
   >>>>own voters with their false claims and fears about making voting more   
   >>>>convenient.   
   >   
   >>>But they're trying to make it harder to vote so less people will   
   >>>actually vote. And they believe only the Rs will acutally vote in   
   >>>person, ensuring that they'll get to stay in office.   
   >   
   >>And the Democrats don't?   
   >   
   >>California just disenfranchised 40% of the electorate by gerrymandering them   
   >>out of existence.   
   >   
   >Were you going to comment on "in reaction to Trump ordering Texas to do   
   >it" or simply ignore that this bad idea is entirely the fault of   
   >Republicans, esecially John Roberts? Republicans gave Democrats cover to   
   >go with their worst instincts. It's a bad day in America; John Roberts   
   >made it so.   
      
   Agreed. California would never have done what they did without Texas   
   making the first move and Texas would never had done what it did   
   without Trump and the Supreme Court giving them cover to do so. Will   
   this happen again after Trump leaves office? Sadly, I bet it will   
   until a new Supreme Court steps in and says it isn't allowed.   
      
   >If the two pro gerrymandering decisions are ever to be reveresed, does   
   >the Equal Protection clause provide any hope of protecting minorities,   
   >in this case, voters who don't want to be represented by assholes?   
      
   If that were the case would we have the politicians that are in charge   
   now.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)