no one implied an expectation you were to be impressed.
the point is that it represents a valid, viable alternative. such numbers represent the kind of grass roots support you pretend to favor. they represent a substantial basis for developing a movement which can influence congress should one choose to build on it.
it's interesting you consistently take the conservative position that the grass roots have nothing of value to contribute to their govt when it suits you, then wax giddy about grass roots activism like ACT and moveon.org -- which will probably dissipate after next week's election -- when it means democrats will get elected.
>>-what are the odds favoring eliminating felony disenfranchisement, speeding
>>-up naturalization of immigrants seeking citizenship, installing voting day
>>-registration?
>>-where is your evidence, nathan newman, as you like to ask others? tell me
>>-the likelihood of achieving these goals of voting rights.
>>
>>There are active legislative campaigns and litigation against felon
>>disenfranchisement (including at my policy shop), many of which are making
>>real advances.
active legislation campaigns where? activists are involved in how many of these campaigns? where is the litigation and who's litigating?
what "real advances"? and how many?
>>Most states already restore voting rights to people who
>>have finished their time in jail or on probation,
how many states already restored voting rights *before* voting rights people got involved? and how many states haven't?
>>and many are improving
>>their laws.
how many more are improving their laws? what's motivating them?
>>In 2001 Connecticut legislators enacted a new law that
>>restored voting rights to people with felony convictions on probation.
>>Alabama, Delaware, Maryland and New Mexico have also recently reformed
>>their voting policies.
was any of this due to voting rights activists? if so, how did you measure it?
>>Under Clinton, naturalization procedures were speeded up, while they have
>>slowed to a crawl under Bush, so there are demonstrable differences from
>>party control in immigration naturalization.
yes. but it doesn't answer my question. in fact, to use your term, it appears quite unimpressive.
>>As for voting day registration, six states already permit same-day
>>registration - Minnesota, Maine, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Wyoming and
>>Idaho.
was this before activist's got involved?
>>In other states, we are moving towards that as early voting moves
>>closer to the end of registration.
what other states?
>>In some states you can now register to
>>vote and then vote the same day.
in how many states is this due to activism rather than a natural progression of state political policy?
>>So we are already enacting that reform
>>step by step.
where?
what do you mean by "we"? legislators enact reforms, not nathan newman.
>>So there's your evidence.
>>
>>-- Nathan Newman
this is not evidence, nathan newman; this is an overview largely filled with generalities, and unexplored references. it's like you lifted copy from a fund raising brochure. i asked for specifics. if that wasn't clear, i'm asking now.
R
>>___________________________________
>>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk