EnricoPallazzo said:
I defend what is correct and I defend that we follow established rules, if there is one thing I hate the most is politicians trying to change rules to make it beneficial for them. If there is a set of rules today, why change it? What are the interests behind the decision? From what I see usually the left wants to change rules to increase their voting base while the right wants to keep the rules. And I am always in favor or keeping the rules. You should not change the rules so you can win. Myself I'm 100% pro voting inside prisions. If I'm not wrong, people serving jail time in US cannot vote, which I think is 100% wrong, these people should be able to vote. At the same time, I am against voting below 18 years old of whatever is the adulthood age in the country, and when I see politicians trying to bring it down to 16 it's always to increase voting to left leaning parties for obvious reasons. Also I am against illegal immigrant voting and it baffles me that people are pro it. Its an obvious tactic to increase voting for pro mass immigration parties that in exchange will be able to bring more people in that will vote for those politicians and etc. I am also 100% pro mail in voting as long as it is really possible to avoid fraud. |
It is hard for me to reconcile the first paragraph with the second. You say that we should keep the existing rules, because changing the rules in ways that help a party is wrong, yet then you advocate for changing the rules in a way which would help a party. How do you draw this distinction, and might you be making a rash judgement on the first point given the revelations of the second?
