that's an interesting take, factually wrong and silly, but interesting.

legislators dont have a right to physically avoid the vote, they can abstain during a vote. those aren't the same.

Is this not about the voter restrictions? I haven't looked into it yet.

I don't really care if they have the right if they're doing it for a good reason. Facing punishment to stop garbage legislation is a good thing if the legislation is bad enough

trying to prevent those obvious voter disenfranchisement efforts? absolutely.

then again, i'm probably talking to someone who would criticise oskar schindler for not doing exactly what he was supposed to. now just to be clear, because i can already see right wingers' heads explode: voting rights are obviously not as immediate life and death situations as the deportation to a concentration camp (although they certainly have direct impact on decisions like "small government obsession" aka dangerous levels of corruption / science-denial during pandemics / science-denial concerning the climate and environment - that all threaten the lives of millions), but this is still individuals defying the system for a morally good cause, trying to sustain at least a semblance of democracy, rather than undermining it even further...

This post was edited by fender on Jul 14 2021 11:09am

Dangerous thinking. Who decides if it's a good reason? Does this same logic get extended to the general public? Seems like it's well over the slippery slope.

it's not a "slippery slope" if you apply common sense. preventing voter disenfranchisement is a "good reason" if you're living in a democracy, and a "bad reason" when you're trying to undermine it to rig the system even further in your favour. desperate times call for desperate measures.

just trying to pry apart the "what" from the "why" in order to criticise the former is intellectually dishonest.

This post was edited by fender on Jul 14 2021 11:18am

Get rid of these quorum laws. If you’re not there to vote or debate, tough, the bill or law one side is pushing moves on.

Problem solved.

this is about legislators, be they local, state or federal, fleeing voting on legislation.

the measure they're voting on does indeed involve voting and "preventing election fraud", but rather than attack the merits of the laws or vote against them they fled.



but under texas law doors can be locked to prevent this fleeing, and they can be tracked down and arrested, legally, for this behavior. at which time the vote will commence anyways. so really its a stunt that they may get arrested for that changes nothing.

this is the problem with modern politics, rathe than speak up against merits and shed a light on bullshit, they just run from it and delay the inevitable. this measure specifically seems pretty silly, texas isnt purple so it's not likely to change a single electoral vote and it seems less restrictive than other states have attempted to pass since the 2020 election.



this i can support. no min number of votes after 1-2 failed voting sessions.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jul 14 2021 11:19am

Common sense is rarely applied in politics, I wouldn't expect it to become a main concern for this or any other topic.

they did that. repeatedly. the fact that you're completely unaware of this, and act like they just skipped the "reasonable and civilised" part, just shows me how dishonest your whole approach here is. you're exclusively trying to criticise the move, while completely avoiding to evaluate, or even just mention the merit of the bills in question...

Then it’s time to vote on it. Running away from the vote because you know it will essentially stall the bill is undermining democracy.