Election 2020 Election Fraud: Let's face it, this year will be a shitshow

[strunkenwhite]

There is no way to make a law that surgically targets "democratic blacks" who are primarily located in cities with bus services, DMVs every few miles, and regular cheap taxis that isn't also going to target rural Republicans who live 50 miles from the nearest DMV and have no mass transit or taxis at all.

The idea that Voter ID laws somehow target blacks without targeting rurals is nonsense.

https://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/nc-4th.pdf

"on the day after the Supreme Court issued Shelby County v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013), eliminating preclearance obligations, a leader of the party that newly dominated the legislature (and the party that rarely enjoyed African American support) announced an intention to enact what he characterized as an “omnibus” election law. Before enacting that law, the legislature requested data on the use, by race, of a number of voting practices. Upon receipt of the race data, the General Assembly enacted legislation that restricted voting and registration in five different ways, all of which disproportionately affected African Americans."

"African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans. Id. at *142; J.A. 2291-92. As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

I mean, even in your own post, aren't you essentially asking me why people who have much more need of driving cars are more likely to have driver's licenses? That's a question that answers itself.

 

[BlackDragon98]

"African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)."

Hold up.

You're telling me that the hillbilly redneck from the hills of Arkansas has ID but the black guy that live across the road from government offices in Detroit doesn't have ID?

How many clowns does it take to run the USA?

 

[bintananth]

"African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)."

Hold up.

You're telling me that the hillbilly redneck from the hills of Arkansas has ID but the black guy that live across the road from government offices in Detroit doesn't have ID?

How many clowns does it take to run the USA?

African Americans often don't have ID where I'm from because getting ID where I live is not easy or cheap.

 

[Zachowon]

African Americans often don't have ID where I'm from because getting ID where I live is not easy or cheap.

What state?
Because in GA, you can get a free voter ID if you can not get any other form of photo ID. You just have to have a multitude of other paperwork to get it.
GA also only has 32 bucks for a state ID.

 

[Rocinante]

What state?
Because in GA, you can get a free voter ID if you can not get any other form of photo ID. You just have to have a multitude of other paperwork to get it.
GA also only has 32 bucks for a state ID.

How long for them to expire there?

 

[Zachowon]

How long for them to expire there?

I know the State ID and DL is 8 years. Voter I think is 5

 

[Bacle]

African Americans often don't have ID where I'm from because getting ID where I live is not easy or cheap.

Getting ID is relatively easy and cheap, as long as you have your birth cert and a local address.

If you cannot provide a birth cert and local address, how can anyone be sure you are who you say you are?

 

[S'task]

You're telling me that the hillbilly redneck from the hills of Arkansas has ID but the black guy that live across the road from government offices in Detroit doesn't have ID?

Actually, when you stop and think about it, it makes sense.

Reframe it in 19th century terms for a moment: "you're telling me the hillbilly redneck from the hills of Arkansas owns a horse, but the get that lives across the road from the government offices in the city doesn't?"

Suddenly it seems a lot less ridiculous, doesn't it? Of course the person living in the boonies is going to have what they need for the major form of transit they have available to them, whereas someone living downtown in a city may not. Heck, the redneck probably owns two or three vehicles, while the person living downtown may own none. Sure, they're two or three beater cars that are held together with spit and bailing wire, but they do own them.

Thus the reason it be more likely that rural residents have drivers licenses than urban residents... they need them to drive and get places, whereas the urban residents do not.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Actually, when you stop and think about it, it makes sense.

Reframe it in 19th century terms for a moment: "you're telling me the hillbilly redneck from the hills of Arkansas owns a horse, but the get that lives across the road from the government offices in the city doesn't?"

Suddenly it seems a lot less ridiculous, doesn't it? Of course the person living in the boonies is going to have what they need for the major form of transit they have available to them, whereas someone living downtown in a city may not. Heck, the redneck probably owns two or three vehicles, while the person living downtown may own none. Sure, they're two or three beater cars that are held together with spit and bailing wire, but they do own them.

Thus the reason it be more likely that rural residents have drivers licenses than urban residents... they need them to drive and get places, whereas the urban residents do not.

There were so many horses in New York in the late 19th century they caused the great horse manure crisis of 1894. That's the problem with going for feels over reals and "it makes sense" reasoning.

The Great Horse-Manure Crisis of 1894 | Stephen Davies

A classic example of this is a problem that was getting steadily worse about a hundred years ago, so much so that it drove most observers to despair. This was the great horse-manure crisis.

fee.org

Continuing the horse metaphor, there're a few problems anyway. For one thing in this scenario, you can't buy a house, rent an apartment, or otherwise have a place to live without a horse unless you're crashing on a friend's couch. Now there're surely people who crash on a friend's couch but are there so many, and so precisely broken down by race that it could seriously influence elections? Further, if you want to have a line of credit or deposit/withdraw money in the bank, they ask to see your horse. If you want to collect welfare, food stamps, or government benefits, you have to present your horse to them. If you go to college you need to show them your horse to enroll, and if you get a job they'll need to see at least two horses before they can legally hire you.

Lastly, it's impossible to actually obtain a horse in the redneck hills of Arkansas, they can only be purchased in town centers, and will be given to you for free in town if you ask. So why is it harder for the guy across the road from the government's office to get one and under what suspicious circumstances does he not already have a horse?

 

[Abhishekm]

Besides what exactly is expensive anyway? Over the price of a Family Meal at KFC or under?

Because if it comes down to the "opportunity cost" of waiting at the DMV for a few hours In gonna laugh.

 

[Zachowon]

32 bucks here in GA, free if you absoluetly need one for voting

 

[Bear Ribs]

Besides what exactly is expensive anyway? Over the price of a Family Meal at KFC or under?

Because if it comes down to the "opportunity cost" of waiting at the DMV for a few hours In gonna laugh.

You hit the nail on the head. In reality, it has nothing to do with racism, it's all about money.

Technically speaking, if an ID is required for voting the state must provide the ID at no charge, it is illegal for the government to charge any kind of fee for exercising a constitutional right and such would constitute a poll tax. Which is where all the handwringing about voter ID comes from. I'm sure fraud plays a role somewhere but the real major objection is that people wouldn't need to pay the DMV for ID. We already use social security numbers and cards for ID in various places even though it isn't designed for that and shouldn't be used in such a way, because they're ubiquitous.

A Voter ID would be equally ubiquitous and people would quickly start using them for ID purposes, to purchase alcohol, to buy homes, to open lines of credit and bank accounts, etc. Things you currently need a Driver's License or State Issued ID for. The catch is, since driving isn't a right, they can charge for it so a lot of money flows into the state, about 40% of DMV fees tend to go straight to local government. Now Republicans don't care about Voter ID being free, because as noted, they tend to live in rural areas where everybody drives anyway so they would also pay for driver's licenses. But in the Democrat-controlled cities, as noted, people don't need cars as much so a lot of the poor might start to wickedly use their free Voter ID and not pay the DMV for IDs, depriving the Democratic leadership of their sweet, sweet poll tax dollars.

 

[Sobek]

Even if the claim is true, what is to stop the government setting up places so people can register for these IDs? They have massive campaigns to send mail in ballots and harvest votes but can't do it with voter registration? Are you telling me all of these people do not own either a credit card, a car, a house, a drivers license or a SSN at the same time?

They just don't want to. Simple as. They pretend they can't fix it when they constantly tackle much more massive problems without a second thought even when no one wants them too.

 

[Rocinante]

You hit the nail on the head. In reality, it has nothing to do with racism, it's all about money.

Technically speaking, if an ID is required for voting the state must provide the ID at no charge, it is illegal for the government to charge any kind of fee for exercising a constitutional right and such would constitute a poll tax. Which is where all the handwringing about voter ID comes from. I'm sure fraud plays a role somewhere but the real major objection is that people wouldn't need to pay the DMV for ID. We already use social security numbers and cards for ID in various places even though it isn't designed for that and shouldn't be used in such a way, because they're ubiquitous.

A Voter ID would be equally ubiquitous and people would quickly start using them for ID purposes, to purchase alcohol, to buy homes, to open lines of credit and bank accounts, etc. Things you currently need a Driver's License or State Issued ID for. The catch is, since driving isn't a right, they can charge for it so a lot of money flows into the state, about 40% of DMV fees tend to go straight to local government. Now Republicans don't care about Voter ID being free, because as noted, they tend to live in rural areas where everybody drives anyway so they would also pay for driver's licenses. But in the Democrat-controlled cities, as noted, people don't need cars as much so a lot of the poor might start to wickedly use their free Voter ID and not pay the DMV for IDs, depriving the Democratic leadership of their sweet, sweet poll tax dollars.

Voter ID should be free for people who need them, but state ID and Driver's license should also be a valid voter ID, so most people are already going to have the kind of ID you pay for, and if they're truly too poor they can get a voter ID.

That's a fair way to handle it, and securing our elections is one thing I don't mind my tax dollars going toward, as it's an absolutely vital part of this country...or it's supposed to be, at least.

No one should be voting without an ID. Period.

 

[bintananth]

32 bucks here in GA, free if you absoluetly need one for voting

32 dollars wouldn't be enough for me to buy a tank of gasoline for the homeless man who my big sis says has saved her life more than once.

He'll accept $20s. He will not accept $50s or $100s.

 

[Zachowon]

32 dollars wouldn't be enough for me to buy a tank of gasoline for the homeless man who my big sis says has saved her life more than once.

He'll accept $20s. He will not accept $50s or $100s.

32 bucks is for a license, or state ID.

A voting ID is free is you have proof of residence, and all the information saying who you are is you.
And fill out forms.

 

[Bear Ribs]

It's worth noting that a few states have managed to get through "Racist" Voter ID Laws and we've seen their effects. Needless to say, Following the Science doesn't lead where some people want.

Despite voter ID law, minority turnout up in Georgia

When Georgia became one of the first states in the nation to demand a photo ID at the ballot box, both sides served up dire predictions.

www.ajc.com

Super-Racist Voter ID laws in Georgia somehow caused the black and Hispanic voter turnout to rise dramatically.

No, Hillary, Voter-ID Laws Don’t ‘‘Suppress’’ Turnout

Hillary Clinton just doesn’t know how to lose gracefully. She does, however, have a knack for coming up with ever more inventive excuses for her loss to Donald Trump. Just last month, she chalked it up to “voter suppression” in Wisconsin. This spurious claim was a reference to the Badger State’s...

www.heritage.org

Of the eleven states with voter ID in the 2016 election, nine had higher than average turnout or increased turnout from before their ID laws were passed. While Senator Baldwin claimed that Hillary lost Wisconsin because Voter ID laws had reduced turnout by 200,000 (all Democrats, of course). But Wisconsin had higher turnout than before they passed said law, and their turnout percentage was fifth highest in the nation, 69.4% vs. the national average of 59.3%.

Measuring the Effects of Voter Identification Laws

Stricter laws, like those that require photo identification, do seem to decrease voter turnout by about 2 percent, and the effects are worse for Democrats — though not as bad as some imply.

fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com

Multiple studies have concluded that at most, voter reduction could hit 2% and that will be split between the parties fairly evenly.

 

[strunkenwhite]

It's worth noting that a few states have managed to get through "Racist" Voter ID Laws and we've seen their effects. Needless to say, Following the Science doesn't lead where some people want.

So to confirm, you've changed your stance from "they don't target blacks" to "they do but the backfire is approximately as bad as the effect", right?

 

[Bear Ribs]

So to confirm, you've changed your stance from "they don't target blacks" to "they do but the backfire is approximately as bad as the effect", right?

No, of course not. They don't target blacks, that's pretty clear from the actual science and actual practices. You can't target a predominantly urban population without hitting the rural population if the law requires you to go into town to get the required ID. Even if you try to come up with tortured arguments that blacks don't happen to have ID, you still have to grapple with the fact that there's nothing in particular stopping them from taking the bus to the DMV and getting a free ID after the law is passed (and nothing stopping either party from making an effort to facilitate that), whereas the ruralite has a much longer way to go and has to expend far more effort to accomplish it, things like bussing in groups all from one local neighborhood simply won't work for them.

The only thing suggesting Voter ID is racist is an opinion by the 4th circuit, which is penned by:

Circuit Judge Diana Motz (D)
Circuit Judge James Wynn (D)
Circuit Judge Henry Franklin Floyd (D)

Nobody's going to gasp in stunned surprise that a hand-picked judiciary of all Democrats were able to come up with some tortured logic to convince themselves Republicans are all racist. Just like white milk is racist, Darth Vader is racist,

 

[strunkenwhite]

No, of course not. They don't target blacks, that's pretty clear from the actual science and actual practices. You can't target a predominantly urban population without hitting the rural population if the law requires you to go into town to get the required ID. Even if you try to come up with tortured arguments that blacks don't happen to have ID, you still have to grapple with the fact that there's nothing in particular stopping them from taking the bus to the DMV and getting a free ID after the law is passed (and nothing stopping either party from making an effort to facilitate that), whereas the ruralite has a much longer way to go and has to expend far more effort to accomplish it, things like bussing in groups all from one local neighborhood simply won't work for them.

The only thing suggesting Voter ID is racist is an opinion by the 4th circuit, which is penned by:

Circuit Judge Diana Motz (D)
Circuit Judge James Wynn (D)
Circuit Judge Henry Franklin Floyd (D)

Nobody's going to gasp in stunned surprise that a hand-picked judiciary of all Democrats were able to come up with some tortured logic to convince themselves Republicans are all racist. Just like white milk is racist, Darth Vader is racist,

It seems to me that you're implicitly claiming that if blacks aren't prevented from obtaining such and such ID (or at the very least if it is not made unnaturally difficult to do so), they are not being targeted by voter ID law. I think that if a change to the law is made that specifically rescinds government recognition of photo IDs disproportionately owned by blacks it is reasonable to say that blacks were targeted unless an innocuous explanation is at hand. I am open to hearing such an explanation.

I confess to not having read the full opinion I cited; in my mind if a law is changed so that the types of photo ID that blacks naturally tend to have (hypothetically, bus cards instead of driver's licenses) are excluded, without that innocuous explanation, that means they are being targeted for having to go to extra effort in order to vote (as opposed to people who tend to have a recognized ID unrelated to wanting to vote).

You can argue that people not willing to expend what is in the end hardly a herculean effort don't deserve our consideration. That is immaterial to whether they were targeted.

You can also argue that the factual finding that the disproportionately black owned types of photo IDs were excluded is just plain wrong. If that is true I certainly would like to know about it.