• solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    2 months ago

    i’m saying the law is stupid and was created deliberately to cause more problems for election workers, because if you’re not painfully aware of the fact that one of trump supporters’ core purposes for existence is to flaunt their culty trumpishness, then i don’t know what to tell you.

    i am an election worker. yesterday i had someone come in with a “I’M VOTING FOR THE FELON” shirt. i can’t speak for everyone, but if it was part of my job to turn people away because they’re not following some ridiculous dress code, i’d be putting in my 2 seconds notice.

    it’s not about “following the rules” it’s about the rule is fucking stupid and intentionally created to cause conflict in a place with enough of that shit already

    • NABDad@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not a stupid law. It exists to protect voters from intimidation.

      If the law makes no provision for enforcement, then that is certainly stupid.

      As I understand it, in my state not only is it illegal to interfere with a poll worker, it’s also illegal for the police to not make an arrest when the poll worker demands it under the law.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        we already protect voters from intimidation, with very strict rules about who’s allowed in and around the voting room, and within a certain distance of the building. wearing a t-shirt is not intimidation, despite what you’ve been told by the people who somehow convinced you that it is.

        suspending everyone’s first amendment right is already a contentious issue, but there is no feasible way to have this enforcement burden sit on anyone’s shoulders except for the abysmally paid election workers who are already having to monitor and enforce dozens of voting rules.

        the law is fucking stupid

        edit: also, who’s defining what’s “political” or not? where do you draw the line? are rainbow flags disallowed? they would have to be, otherwise you’re dealing with “why can that guy wear a rainbow but i can’t wear my trump hat?!”
        what about “that guy’s wearing a shirt with a gun on it”–is that enough to turn that person away? “that guy’s wearing red, obviously trying to intimidate me”?

        again, as an election worker, if it was my job to scrutinize every piece of every person’s clothing and turn people away based on some nebulous definition of “political speech,” i’d be walking out. maybe that’s the idea

    • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem is not the law, it’s enforcement. It’s only a problem now because no enforcement is ever made until. Until it’s a huge problem. Until it’s an incident. If you let the individual act like they are more important than the society they exist in, this is what you get. Fetishized individualism.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s only a problem now because no enforcement is ever made

        classy. blame the senior citizen who was forced to confront the type of person who’s constantly looking for a reason to start fights.

        nope. the problem IS the law, which by the way, doesn’t exist in most states and hasn’t been a problem

        • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ah yes, senior citizens are the ones charged with upholding laws.

          This was a result of no enforcement, this wasn’t the enforcement.

          • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            2 months ago

            In performing duties under Subsection (a), the presiding judge may appoint one or more persons to act as special peace officers for the polling place. A special peace officer may not enforce the prohibition against electioneering or loitering near the polling place unless the officer’s appointment is approved by the presiding officer of the local canvassing authority.

            https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._election_code_section_32.075

            it’s part of the code that police don’t interfere until the election workers ask them to, aka something already happens

            so yes, senior citizens literally are the ones charged with upholding this law. no one seems to be able to refute my point that the law itself is fucking stupid

            • MSids@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              I remember as a kid going with my parents to vote. All of the folks with signs had to stand by the road instead of in the parking lot because of the electioneering laws. This was back in the 90s, so they have indeed been enforced for a long time. This was back before the red side was violent and unhinged like they are today, so I would say that electioneering laws are more important today than they ever have been.