I'm not going to fret over people who don't have the fortitude to remain somewhere, and am certainly not going to blame someone for "running someone off," like that person has some hidden power to make people act. Hell, we've banned @Ssmiff probably 4 times, and called him all kinds of shit, everyone, all the time, and he's still here. Still an idiot, but at least he's a tough idiot. I'd buy a guy like that a beer. The rest can just run along. They made their choice.
Lol this is one of the funnier posts I've read on this site in a while. Edit: To clarify - the funny part is your analysis of the people who leave.
In what way is it funny? People made a choice, and I'm not going to fret over someone's choice. I'll go one farther if it helps, and say I would never be somewhere someone doesn't want me. If anyone doesn't want me here, all they have to do is say so. Doesn't take a majority, or a vote. Just one, and I'll leave. But, the agreement will be, I'll leave, and not come back. But if it turns out people wanted me here, for whatever reason, the person or persons that wanted me gone have to leave, or be banned. Whatever. Hell, when I get back, I might lobby to get them back. Who knows. There is one person who has my contact info in real life, and it turns out they run this [itch bay]. Open invitation.
This is the essence of the problem in this country's politics. Because you can't have walked in anyone else's shoes but your own, you are blind to anything that doesn't relate to you personally with this kind of thinking.
Gerrymandering is a thing that exists. The American South has a history of voter suppression dating back to the end of Reconstruction. Any take not informed by these two facts seems disingenuous, at best. You could probably defend corporate tax code in the same way, "well, at least they tried", "heart was in the right place", "better than what was in place". But we all know the loopholes will be exploited to the fullest, and no one is paying a dime. I feel like it's appropriate to look for the loopholes here. I would propose that this was Georgia Republicans' attempt to catch more flies with honey than vinegar... and then just run elections however they wanted down the road. But I think the original bill contained more naked ambition. So everyone saw through it. You don't lose the presidential vote and both senate seats by being competent, I guess.
Let me connect some dots. Can polling places close at 5? Yes. Who decides whether to extend the hours to 7 or close at 5? Local voting officials. Can the voting officials be changed through a partisan body? Yes they can. Are there safeguards, or is it at will? It is at will. Get the picture? Out in the rural areas, polls will stay open until 7. I have no doubt. In the city? In Fulton county? Well, that depends on whether a partisan body thinks the election officials are doing a "good job," by whatever metric they deem to use. I'm not leading you to water, we are swimming in it.
The guy is a human mountain and a genuinely good dude, nobody runs him off anywhere. He decides where he wants to be.
Everyone has made someone bothered enough to leave. Well, everyone likely to be somewhat polarizing. I don't think Norris has caused anyone to leave, but he also got here late.
I think I may have driven tenny away with my hippy Buddhist baseball loving margaritaville singing self.
No, the problem is when people pick and choose what to quote, and surprisingly skip the part where I said in summary, "there's plenty of things I don't know and seek out those who do". You guys prefer some random person to cite in order to gain your "proof", and it's your choice. And please don't tell me I'm the issue with politics. What a joke coming from a lefty incapable of anything else but left.
If a polling location can currently close at 5 pm, and a new bill continues to allow the location to close at 5 pm, then what is changing?
And the more a couple of you call me an idiot, the more sane I am so please keep it up. I dont mind. Unharmed.
