• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing NC GOP debacle thread

Gosh, it's hard to understand why black people don't think the GOP have their best interests at heart.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 
Explanation:

Okay, thanks for posting, but I don't understand why AAs 'disproportionately lacked" IDs or were more likely to "socioeconomic factors that may hinder their political participation." What is this based on? Hunch? Feels? They just got finished saying that "African American voter turnout had expanded to almost the rates of whites".
 
Okay, thanks for posting, but I don't understand why AAs 'disproportionately lacked" IDs or were more likely to "socioeconomic factors that may hinder their political participation." What is this based on? Hunch? Feels? They just got finished saying that "African American voter turnout had expanded to almost the rates of whites".

I think it's relying on the fact that they sought out data to determine why people did/did not have ID's. Those were broken down into a variety of reasons (obviously). Some of those reasons were shared across SES and races, some were not. The law then targeted specifically "with surgical precision" the factors that caused African Americans to not have ID's.
 
Even apart from the ID portion, pre-registration and provisional voting were used much more by AA than whites. State lawmakers looked at that data and decided to remove those options without a reasonable explanation. Hence the line about the surgical precision of targeting AAs.
 
Did you have your fingers in your ears when black representatives told you over an over that this legislation affected them disparately? Or did you just not trust them for some convenient reason?
 
I think it's relying on the fact that they sought out data to determine why people did/did not have ID's. Those were broken down into a variety of reasons (obviously). Some of those reasons were shared across SES and races, some were not. The law then targeted specifically "with surgical precision" the factors that caused African Americans to not have ID's.

Right. Our country can fire a missile down a mud chimney from a robot flying over Pakistan piloted by a computer geek in the Nevada desert, but we can't give away an eight cent piece of laminated plastic to 25,000 people? Lollygaggers, the lot of you.
 
I don't disagree that people should have a form of ID to vote. That's a strawman argument if you're going to attempt to debate and engage me on it.
 
I don't disagree that people should have a form of ID to vote. That's a strawman argument if you're going to attempt to debate and engage me on it.

Headline: "Fourth Circuit Strikes Down Voter I.D. Law"

I feel like this was yet another solvable problem that didn't need to turn into a "us" versus "them" racial divide.
 
Headline: "Fourth Circuit Strikes Down Voter I.D. Law"

I feel like this was yet another solvable problem that didn't need to turn into a "us" versus "them" racial divide.

To your point, I don't know what the practices are that discriminate against African-Americans specifically are. I would have to read the bill thoroughly and then know what causes African-Americans specifically to not be able to obtain ID's/correct ID's.

To me, the bill was poorly written because it shortened the amount of time for early registration voting, didn't allow for one-stop voting, and also added to the amount of time it took to get the appropriate ID to vote. That disenfranchises people who cannot afford to take the time off of work to both get the ID and also vote. I have no idea how that proportionally impacts African-Americans vs. other races, but I assume the judges on the Appeals Court do know that, hence why they ruled the way they did.

ETA: I would guess that African-Americans disproportionately engage in early voting and same-day registration, and that's why it's deemed to "target" them over other races.
 
Last edited:
Do we really want people so divorced from society that they have no ID in 2016 to decide who is going to run the government?
 
Do we really want people so divorced from society that they have no ID in 2016 to decide who is going to run the government?

So we are clear, it's not JUST that they "don't have ID's". It's that ID's don't match birth certificates, married names have changed, addresses have changed.

To simplify it down to "well anybody can get an ID" is disingenuous in my opinion.
 
To your point, I don't know what the practices are that discriminate against African-Americans specifically are. I would have to read the bill thoroughly and then know what causes African-Americans specifically to not be able to obtain ID's/correct ID's.

To me, the bill was poorly written because it shortened the amount of time for early registration voting, didn't allow for one-stop voting, and also added to the amount of time it took to get the appropriate ID to vote. That disenfranchises people who cannot afford to take the time off of work to both get the ID and also vote. I have no idea how that proportionally impacts African-Americans vs. other races, but I assume the judges on the Appeals Court do know that, hence why they ruled the way they did.

I know this is absolute heresy, but laws that encourage people to get things that will actually help them in society aren't always pernicious raciosm. Who is so busy going back and forth to work that they don't have time to get a free document (that is essential in getting to and from work, for the 99.999% of us that don't live on the Charlotte light rail line)?
 
I know this is absolute heresy, but laws that encourage people to get things that will actually help them in society aren't always pernicious raciosm. Who is so busy going back and forth to work that they don't have time to get a free document (that is essential in getting to and from work, for the 99.999% of us that don't live on the Charlotte light rail line)?

Where did I say in my post that it "pernicious racism?"

I don't live on the Charlotte light rail line.

What about a single mother who works two jobs (65+ hours a week), and cannot afford to take two days off to get the necessary ID, and then vote?

The bill is clearly discriminating against lower SES citizens who cannot afford to take that time off. That's why there was same-day voting and a large early-voting period to begin with---to maximize the amount of voter participation and not discriminate against those who can arrange their schedule more easily than others.
 
Last edited:
So we are clear, it's not JUST that they "don't have ID's". It's that ID's don't match birth certificates, married names have changed, addresses have changed.

To simplify it down to "well anybody can get an ID" is disingenuous in my opinion.

Maybe so, but can you really function in society today without an ID? I can't imagine that someone without a valid ID is interacting with the outside world in any reasonable way.
 
Do we really want people so divorced from society that they have no ID in 2016 to decide who is going to run the government?

That's not the point. Enacting a Voter ID law for legitimate reasons is ok, as long as it doesn't have too big of a discriminatory effect. Enacting a Voter ID law with the intent to disenfranchise black voters is never ok. That's what happened here
 
Yes, and they probably wouldn't have had a voter ID law overturned if the law didn't include multiple other provisions that seemed to have no purpose other that to reduce AA turnout.
 
That's not the point. Enacting a Voter ID law for legitimate reasons is ok, as long as it doesn't have too big of a discriminatory effect. Enacting a Voter ID law with the intent to disenfranchise black voters is never ok. That's what happened here

Intent is always difficult to ascertain and easy to surmise.
 
Even apart from the ID portion, pre-registration and provisional voting were used much more by AA than whites. State lawmakers looked at that data and decided to remove those options without a reasonable explanation. Hence the line about the surgical precision of targeting AAs.

Not sure why this is hard for people to understand.
 
Back
Top