Vote suppression -- now we have some evidence of the effects

[Derec]

Honestly, I doubt you understand the meaning of either word, let alone the meaning of them together.

I do, but I suspect you don't understand the meaning of half the words you are using on here. The "you keep using that word" meme is made for you.

 

[Copernicus]

The point in NY is that a great many Democratic voters in NYC do not own cars or drive, because public transportation is cheaper and more convenient.

Only 44% of households in NYC have a car, but that does not mean that many people who do not currently own a car do not have a DL. Driving is still a good skill to have.

Yes, it is. However, that does not address my point.

They don't usually need the ID except to vote.

Or do anything that requires people to id themselves. Opening a bank account, entering government buildings, renting an apartment, entering bars/buying alcohol. And if police stop you and want to write you a ticket, they'll arrest you if you can't id yourself.

Don't be obtuse. Voter suppression is about setting up barriers to vote. That is why many of these state laws place unnecessary restrictions on the type of ID that is acceptable at the voting booth, even though the same voter can use an absentee ballot without the requirement to produce such an ID. That is because the type of voter--Democrat or Republican--is what such laws target. Republican voters tend to be favored on absentee and mail-in ballots. Democrats are more likely to show up in person to vote. Hence, the choke point is imposed on in-person voting.

Those who live upstate or out on the island (i.e. in more Republican-infested areas) do need the drivers license. It isn't an insurmountable barrier to get the non-driver ID, but nor is it a high priority in the lives of most people.

I think the number of people without a dl or id is very small, even in NYC. And most of those lack id because they are lazy (like LordKirian), not because of any real barrier.

You don't know what you are talking about and have obviously never lived there. My wife grew up in NYC, and she doesn't currently have a drivers license. She had learned to drive, but she doesn't like to. So she let her license expire and relies on me for that. Just because you find it convenient or necessary to have a drivers license, don't assume that everyone else is like you.

 

[LordKiran]

2. Most minimum wage jobs do not pay their employees in checks actually.

I think it depends on the size of employer. [1]

Most direct deposit into a debit card as an option and this is usually the go to,

But those cards have fees. Would it not be better to get id, open a bank account and direct deposit into it?[2]

especially in poor urban environments where people don't have easy access to something like a bank.

Even "poor urban environments" have many banks. [3]

3. I reserve drinking for social occasions in private.

You need id to buy alcohol from a store as well. [4]

4. I guess not, as I can't remember the last time merely entering a building required me to identify myself.

Government buildings often do. [5]

5. 25, and I'll say that the reason I don't have an ID isn't because I don't want one, its because actually getting one proves incredibly difficult if your means are limited as mine are. This is why voter ID laws disenfranchise the poor.

If you really wanted one, you'd have gotten one years ago. What is "incredibly difficult" about gathering a few documents and going down to the DL place. [6]
And while you're at it, why did you never bother to learn to drive and get an actual DL? [7]

6. I just did. Not everybody owns identification and if they don't then its not always because they merely wish to 'remain off the grid'.

No, but vast majority do. [8]

If you ask me, state ID (At least for the first time!) should be provided at cost.

Well states that have voter id requirements mostly provide id for free. And in states that don't they're still pretty affordable. [9]
Not sure what the cost of making the id, staffing the DDS locations etc. all cost. Do you?

7. Except not really. In reality, your real ID is your SSC which is problematic for a whole host of reasons

A SS card is not a photo id.

1. Most minimum wage employees work for companies big enough to pull this off.

2. It would be if you lived near one that would even allow you to open an account. A lot harder when you have little-to-no credit built up or available because you're poor.

3. You sure about that? You live in one?

4. Why would I be the one buying the alcohol when I don't normally drink?

5. This has not been my experience.

6. I've tried on several occasions actually. After those attempts fell through I just got distracted with life for a variety of reasons over the last year. But that is neither here nor there.

7. I'm not comfortable answering this question. So I won't.

8. We're not talking about the majority here so it doesn't matter. We're talking about minority, poor, and young voters being broken down into demographics and singled out from the voting booth through policy.

9. Citation Needed.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

too judgmental bra

Tough love.

more like ignorant insults.

 

[laughing dog]

Honestly, I doubt you understand the meaning of either word, let alone the meaning of them together.

I do, but I suspect you don't understand the meaning of half the words you are using on here. The "you keep using that word" meme is made for you.

Unfortunately for your argument, your long history of posting indicates you have no real clue what "love" means. Which would be pitiable, if you showed any inkling of empathy or sympathy for those who different from you. And given your snowflake need for a safe space for imagined slights, I am confident you have no real idea what tough means.

Getting back to the OP, your responses indicate you have no clue nor empathy with what it means to be really poor. I know what I was poor (and I was not really poor), paying for an ID to vote would have meant not eating for a day or two. Moreover, you seem to be of the anti-democratic opinion that the state should be able to charge people for exercising their constitutional rights.

 

[Frikki]

Yes. The laws against sex work are clearly unconstitutional based on reasoning in Lawrence v. Texas and Roe v. Wade SCOTUS decisions.

Should criminals be allowed to vote?

Depends on the severity of the crime. In the US it is only felons who are not allowed to vote. And you have to be convicted too - allegations of crimes by obsessed Icelanders in dire need of a lap dance do not count.

Regarding the lap dance I don´t need to rape slaves from third world countries to get my kicks.

You seriously think strippers are "rape slaves from third world"? The ridiculous feminazi propaganda is clearly working on you.
Perhaps (and to bring it even slightly back on topic) people who believe nonsensical things like this or that the Earth is flat or something should not be allowed to vote.

OK mister Dindu.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Can you give an example of the type of id that was "so obvious[sic] based" on disenfranchising "certain demographics"?

Sure.

Allowing gun licenses as ID but not college student ID

Actually, that one isn't as stupid as it sounds on the surface. They accept government-issued ID.

 

[LordKiran]

Sure.

Allowing gun licenses as ID but not college student ID

Actually, that one isn't as stupid as it sounds on the surface. They accept government-issued ID.

So if it's a state school then?

 

[OLDMAN]

I really think the US should make it harder to vote...in fact make it a test. Only the strongest, fastest, smartest and most resourceful can vote. Think the results would be any different?

 

[RavenSky]

Actually, that one isn't as stupid as it sounds on the surface. They accept government-issued ID.

So if it's a state school then?

Not in Texas.

Loren is wrong anyway because some places accept utility bills, bank statements, or paystubs as valid forms of ID.

It is only the places that are trying to suppress votes that create roadblocks via their selective choices of acceptable ID

 

[sharon45]

entering bars/buying alcohol.

"Uh, Miss, can I see some ID?"

"Oh, my, flattery will get you everything!"

 

[RavenSky]

Sure.
Allowing gun licenses as ID but not college student ID

Why? Are "certain demographics" not allowed to own guns in Texas?

"certain demographics" should not be required to obtain a gun permit in order to vote - though that sure as hell would fix the GOP's ass right up if every liberal in Texas obtained a gun permit.

I bet we would immediately see a call for gun control by the NRA, too

 

[Derec]

"certain demographics" should not be required to obtain a gun permit in order to vote -

They are not. The gun license is only one id among several and the same rules apply to all demographics.
Also, Texas has free voter id if you have no other.
So it's all much ado about nothing.

though that sure as hell would fix the GOP's ass right up if every liberal in Texas obtained a gun permit.

They are free to do so just like everybody else.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And now we have a smoking gun. It's about vote suppression, not aliens:

https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-ri.../unsealed-documents-show-kris-kobach-dead-set

 

[fast]

She’d lost her driver’s license a few days earlier, but she came prepared [to skirt the law] with an expired Wisconsin state ID and proof of residency. A poll worker confirmed she was registered [but prohibited] to vote at her current address. But this was Wisconsin’s first major election that required voters—even those who were already registered—to present a current driver’s license, passport, or state or military ID to cast a ballot. Anthony couldn’t, and so she wasn’t able to vote.

She's a black woman.

She did not bring any of the following:
1) current drivers license
2) current passport
3) current state ID
4) current military ID

Instead, she brought:
A) Expired state ID
B) Proof of residency

Let's say (just for the sake of argument) that the voter ID laws are suppressive and WRONG.

Two questions. We already have evidence of what at least one BLACK WOMAN (with an infectious smile) would have done. The question is, what would YOU have done?

Question 2) Supposing she had been successful in casting a ballot, should her vote have counted?

 

[laughing dog]

She’d lost her driver’s license a few days earlier, but she came prepared [to skirt the law] with an expired Wisconsin state ID and proof of residency. A poll worker confirmed she was registered [but prohibited] to vote at her current address. But this was Wisconsin’s first major election that required voters—even those who were already registered—to present a current driver’s license, passport, or state or military ID to cast a ballot. Anthony couldn’t, and so she wasn’t able to vote.

She's a black woman.

She did not bring any of the following:
1) current drivers license
2) current passport
3) current state ID
4) current military ID

Because, like most US citizens, she did not have a passport of a current military ID. Her driver's license had expired. An expired driver's license with a picture is a perfectly good ID for identification purposes. Why do you think WI requires a current license?

Let's say (just for the sake of argument) that the voter ID laws are suppressive and WRONG.

There is no argument, they are suppressive. Apparently some people think suppressing legal voting is not wrong.

Two questions. We already have evidence of what at least one BLACK WOMAN (with an infectious smile) would have done. The question is, what would YOU have done?

Depends on how easy it would have been for me to get the requisite ID. But your preamble introduces another question - why do you feel the need to point out the evidence of AT LEAST ONE BLACK WOMAN would have done?

Question 2) Supposing she had been successful in casting a ballot, should her vote have counted?

Before WI changed the law, her vote would have counted. But given that terrible law, her vote should not have been counted.

Why do you feel that woman in that specific situation should have been effectively disenfranchised? Do you think it is appropriate for the state to make it more difficult to exercise the constitutional right to vote?

 

[fast]

Because, like most US citizens, she did not have a passport of a current military ID. Her driver's license had expired. An expired driver's license with a picture is a perfectly good ID for identification purposes. Why do you think WI requires a current license?

I don't know why. I'm skeptical of claims of intentional suppression, but then again, the effects of the laws might not be completely unintentional. I simply do not know.

Depends on how easy it would have been for me to get the requisite ID.

As difficult as it was for her.

But your preamble introduces another question - why do you feel the need to point out the evidence of AT LEAST ONE BLACK WOMAN would have done?

Honestly? Rambo. He said, "they drew first blood." They are the one's that infused race into the discussion.

Why do you feel that woman in that specific situation should have been effectively disenfranchised?

I don't.

Do you think it is appropriate for the state to make it more difficult to exercise the constitutional right to vote?

No

 

[laughing dog]

As difficult as it was for her.

I probably wouldn't have been able to get the appropriate ID within 72 hours.

Honestly? Rambo. He said, "they drew first blood." They are the one's that infused race into the discussion.

The OP did not infuse race into the discussion.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But your preamble introduces another question - why do you feel the need to point out the evidence of AT LEAST ONE BLACK WOMAN would have done?

Honestly? Rambo. He said, "they drew first blood." They are the one's that infused race into the discussion.

Sure did. But are you referring to the 2/3 compromise, the poll taxes, or the recent cases where a clear effort was being made to make it harder for certain people to vote?

 

[fast]

Honestly? Rambo. He said, "they drew first blood." They are the one's that infused race into the discussion.

Sure did. But are you referring to the 2/3 compromise, the poll taxes, or the recent cases where a clear effort was being made to make it harder for certain people to vote?

Point taken, but still, if those actions stands good as drawing first blood, it's still the case that it's about race, and since it's about race, and if we're going to be reminded of it at every turn, then why not respond in like kind?

The link provided by the OP (original poster) in the OP (original post) starts out explicitly stating the woman's race. I didn't do that. The author of the article did that, and the OP chooses an article that does that. Bilby, in post #3, makes it abundantly clear that it's about race. We can't take a shit without it somehow someway negatively affecting blacks. It's a no win situation, for even if there is no true underlying racist motive, anything that can be construed to be negatively affecting them will still be considered racist. I don't think everything that happens is based on race, but if it's going to be thrown about, why not keep track?

I'm sorry if it somehow comes across negatively, but I think the race connection is overly done in contemporary reports.