DeSantis Is in

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
There was an exceptional candidate to inspire blacks, obviously, as you also noted.

Oh, and by "exceptional" candidate, you meant "black" candidate. If you think black voters weren't energized by the fact that the "exceptional" candidate was black, you literally weren't paying any attention at all. But I know you WERE paying attention, so I know you know this is true.


For example: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41674650

"we found an overwhelming support for Obama among the black electorate, and much of this support was based on racial similarity than on their detailed knowledge of Obama's issue position."

Makes total sense, unless you think that only whites are motivated in a race-based fashion, and that blacks are not.
 

LifeIn

Well-known member
Oh, and by "exceptional" candidate, you meant "black" candidate. If you think black voters weren't energized by the fact that the "exceptional" candidate was black, you literally weren't paying any attention at all.
That is what I mean. The black candidate was exceptional because he was an exception to the rule that Presidents are white - a rule that had been followed since the founding of the nation, even after 1870 when blacks were supposedly full citizens. Having one white President is not surprising. After all, whites were 87% of the population. But having that pattern repeated in 31 more elections is not mere chance. If it were mere chance based on the percentages in the population the probability of one white President is 87%. The probability of two in a row is 76%. The probability of three in a row is 66%. Four in a row is 57%. Ten in a row 25%. The probability of 20 white Presidents in a row is 6%. And the probability of 31 white Presidents in a row, which we had, after black emancipation, when black were supposed to be as free as whites and entitled to anything whites can do, is 1.3%. So when Obama was a real possibility, it was an exception to this long-running and very unlikely winning streak. It's not like we already had 4 or 5 black Presidents already. That would not have been an exceptional election. But the first ever in over 200 years - that is very exceptional. So you are right. It was because he was black - and rightly so!
 

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
That is what I mean. The black candidate was exceptional because he was an exception to the rule that Presidents are white - a rule that had been followed since the founding of the nation, even after 1870 when blacks were supposedly full citizens. Having one white President is not surprising. After all, whites were 87% of the population. But having that pattern repeated in 31 more elections is not mere chance. If it were mere chance based on the percentages in the population the probability of one white President is 87%. The probability of two in a row is 76%. The probability of three in a row is 66%. Four in a row is 57%. Ten in a row 25%. The probability of 20 white Presidents in a row is 6%. And the probability of 31 white Presidents in a row, which we had, after black emancipation, when black were supposed to be as free as whites and entitled to anything whites can do, is 1.3%. So when Obama was a real possibility, it was an exception to this long-running and very unlikely winning streak. It's not like we already had 4 or 5 black Presidents already. That would not have been an exceptional election. But the first ever in over 200 years - that is very exceptional. So you are right. It was because he was black - and rightly so!

Exactly my point. The black vote rose considerably because they had MOTIVATION to vote. Voter ID barriers were no barriers when they were motivated to vote. When the motivation for ANY activity goes down, small impediments seem like huge barriers. But when people are motivated to do something - anything - even large barriers are overcome in the pursuit of that thing.

Ergo...this is evidence that it's not voter ID laws themselves that are the problem; it's the motivation of the people that's the problem. Because getting an ID is really a very easy thing. It's a small, small barrier that is, for 99.999% of the people, very easy to overcome. For only a tiny handful of people is it impossible to overcome; but many aren't motivated enough to overcome it, so they don't, and then complain that they're being shut out of the voting process. It's nonsense.

I'm grateful you're coming around to my point of view on this.
 

LifeIn

Well-known member
You’re citing a different stat than I did. I’ll repeat what I posted earlier.

The overall US racial demographics are (from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_United_States ):

White: 57.8%
Hispanic & Latino: 18.7%
Black: 12.1%
Asian: 5.9%
Your second source, which defines the categories based only on those who are 18 and older, says blacks represent 12.7% of the over 18 population. But only 12.2% of the votes were cast by blacks. Meanwhile, whites over 18 represented 57.8% of the population, but the white votes made up 71% of the votes cast, using data from your bgov.com source. I would not call that "virtually identical". Here is your more relevant source:

In the 2020 Presidential election, here's how the voting demographics broke down (from: https://about.bgov.com/brief/election-demographics-and-voter-turnout ):

White: 71%
Hispanic & Latino: 10.7%
Black: 12.2%
Asian: 4.4%



The real questions revolve around the UNDER-representation among Hispanics and Asians.
Why is it necessary to answer that question in order to admit that blacks are under-represented? I never said that blacks are the only ones being disenfranchised. Some Latinos in particular are living in fear of having some members of their family deported who are undocumented, even though they themselves are documented citizens. This can also cause one to shrink from drawing attention to themselves by voting. I don't know why Asian votes only make up 4.4% of total when they represent 6.3% of the population. But I don't want to get sidetracked.

I don’t know IF it’s a “real problem”.
If you don't know whether or not in-person voter fraud is a real problem, why risk any unnecessary harm to anyone, and why complicate the job of election officials to solve a problem that may not be a real problem. I think that is a much more urgent question than why Asians are not represented in the vote proportionally to their presence in the population.

What I DO know is that in my liberal, democrat dominated state and town, democrats implemented ID requirements to vote.
First of all, we can forget about the town aspect because towns do not set voting requirements. That is set by your Secretary of State to be followed by all the towns. Secondly, I can think of any number of hypothetical reasons why a majority Democratic state legislature or Secretary of State might institute photo ID requirements. But without knowing which state it is, I can't research it to find out why it is the way it is. If you think revealing which state you live in is going to compromise your confidentiality, then don't expect this question to be answered. I refuse to guess at hypotheticals.

So three questions:

1. If voter ID laws suppressed the black vote, how come they were a tick OVER represented in the 2020 voting population?
They aren't, as explained above.

2. How come blacks voted in much higher numbers during 2008 and 2012, when most voter ID laws were on the books, if we cannot use “voter motivation” as an explanation?
We can use voter motivation as an explanation in specific elections, but not in most elections.

3. If we can see evidence of motivation as a reason for increased voting among blacks, why can’t we see a lack of motivation as a reason for DECREASED voting among blacks?
I'm not talking about a transient decrease. I'm talking about a long-standing underrepresentation.
 

LifeIn

Well-known member
Exactly my point. The black vote rose considerably because they had MOTIVATION to vote. Voter ID barriers were no barriers when they were motivated to vote.
Yes vote ID requirements were barriers. It might have been even higher in 2008 and 2012, if not for voter ID laws. We will never know.

Ergo...this is evidence that it's not voter ID laws themselves that are the problem; it's the motivation of the people that's the problem. Because getting an ID is really a very easy thing. It's a small, small barrier that is, for 99.999% of the people, very easy to overcome.
This figure is unsupported and I think very inaccurate.
 

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
Your second source, which defines the categories based only on those who are 18 and older, says blacks represent 12.7% of the over 18 population. But only 12.2% of the votes were cast by blacks. Meanwhile, whites over 18 represented 57.8% of the population, but the white votes made up 71% of the votes cast, using data from your bgov.com source. I would not call that "virtually identical". Here is your more relevant source:

I said that the percentage of blacks in the general population is virtually identical to the percentage of blacks who are in the voting population. And I’m right about that. Whits, however, are over represented in the voting compared to their representation in the general population. But that’s reflective not of underrepresentation among blacks, but among Hispanics and Asians.
So why are Hispanics and Asians underrepresented in the voting population compared to the general population? Maybe ID laws help explain it among Hispanics, but not among Asians. So here must be another reason (or reasons).

I’ve suggested motivation to vote as one reason. You think that’s bunk. Ok. What’s your explanation? It can’t be “because of voter ID laws”.

Why is it necessary to answer that question in order to admit that blacks are under-represented?

Well…..they’re not.

I never said that blacks are the only ones being disenfranchised. Some Latinos in particular are living in fear of having some members of their family deported who are undocumented, even though they themselves are documented citizens. This can also cause one to shrink from drawing attention to themselves by voting. I don't know why Asian votes only make up 4.4% of total when they represent 6.3% of the population. But I don't want to get sidetracked.

So you have a group that doesn’t fit your narrative and instead of being intellectually honest or curious, you just say, eh I don’t want to talk about THEM?

Come now.

If you don't know whether or not in-person voter fraud is a real problem, why risk any unnecessary harm to anyone, and why complicate the job of election officials to solve a problem that may not be a real problem. I think that is a much more urgent question than why Asians are not represented in the vote proportionally to their presence in the population.

Well I can tell you that I’ve asked some people in local politics in my town this question about my state’s voter ID laws. These people are democrats. Their answer? Because we want to make sure that the person who comes in to vote is who they say they are. It doesn’t dawn on them that it might be racist.

So yeah, I already knew the answer to this question before I asked you to consider it. Sorry…that was mean of me.

First of all, we can forget about the town aspect because towns do not set voting requirements. That is set by your Secretary of State to be followed by all the towns. Secondly, I can think of any number of hypothetical reasons why a majority Democratic state legislature or Secretary of State might institute photo ID requirements. But without knowing which state it is, I can't research it to find out why it is the way it is. If you think revealing which state you live in is going to compromise your confidentiality, then don't expect this question to be answered. I refuse to guess at hypotheticals.

See above.

They aren't, as explained above.

They weren’t underrepresented, that’s for sure. Not in any statistically significant way.

We can use voter motivation as an explanation in specific elections, but not in most elections.

Why not? We know that motivation is a real thing, among individuals and groups of people. We know that for a FACT. Why does that fact disappear just because you want it to? How do YOU know that motivation isn’t a reason for why people voter don’t vote in any given year?

I'm not talking about a transient decrease. I'm talking about a long-standing underrepresentation.

Before voter ID laws went into effect in the 2000s, why did blacks vote in lower percentages than whites? What was stopping them? And with these laws, why did blacks vote in higher percentages than whites in 2008 and 2012? How did they manage to overcome these voter ID barriers?


Also…. Why is it so hard for blacks to get IDs?

And if the government paid for an ID for everyone that doesn’t have one or can’t afford one, so there would literally be no reason why any adult citizen couldn’t have an ID, would you still be opposed to it? Why?
 

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
Yes vote ID requirements were barriers. It might have been even higher in 2008 and 2012, if not for voter ID laws. We will never know.

In other words, you claim it’s a barrier and even though you can’t possibly quantify it, you insist that it must be true. That‘s quite the argument. Very persuasive!

This figure is unsupported and I think very inaccurate.

Yes I totally made up that number. I did so because people need an ID for about a million things in life, and it’s incredibly easy to get one. It takes a severe situation for a person to not get an ID if they want one. And here’s the thing… you need an ID to REGISTER to vote. Four questions:

1. Why should citizens need to REGISTER to vote?
2. Why should citizens need an ID to register to vote (but not an ID to actually vote)?
3. How can a person manage to get an ID to register to vote, but lack the ability to have an ID to actually vote?
4. What kind of person lacks the ability to get an ID, but has the wherewithal to get themselves to a polling place to vote, or get a mail in ballot and send it in? A person who can manage to find a way to do the latter surely has the capacity to do the former.

(In many cases you don’t need an actual ID, as long as you have the last four digits of your SS#. That would work for voting as well.)
 

Thistle

Well-known member
I think he has a better chance of being the nominee than Trump does.

It’s tempting to believe DeSantis is a cynical, old school, Dixiecrat using bigotry to rile up the base.

But I guess we have to proceed assuming he sincerely believes all that crazy stuff.
Leave it to a rockribbed Republican like @Backup to dispense reliable advice to the Republican Party. Ron DeSantis' brand involved being faithful to Donald Trump, and in connection to that making the promise that he would not run against him in the primary. As near as I can tell, Ron DeSantis has absolutely destroyed his one credential for being president.
 

Pogo

Active member
In other words, you claim it’s a barrier and even though you can’t possibly quantify it, you insist that it must be true. That‘s quite the argument. Very persuasive!



Yes I totally made up that number. I did so because people need an ID for about a million things in life, and it’s incredibly easy to get one. It takes a severe situation for a person to not get an ID if they want one. And here’s the thing… you need an ID to REGISTER to vote. Four questions:

1. Why should citizens need to REGISTER to vote?
2. Why should citizens need an ID to register to vote (but not an ID to actually vote)?
3. How can a person manage to get an ID to register to vote, but lack the ability to have an ID to actually vote?
4. What kind of person lacks the ability to get an ID, but has the wherewithal to get themselves to a polling place to vote, or get a mail in ballot and send it in? A person who can manage to find a way to do the latter surely has the capacity to do the former.

(In many cases you don’t need an actual ID, as long as you have the last four digits of your SS#. That would work for voting as well.)
1. Why should citizens need to REGISTER to vote?
Is this a serious question? Registration is the demonstration to the appropriate body that you are eligible to vote.
2. Why should citizens need an ID to register to vote (but not an ID to actually vote)?
Actually, you don't, you can register with an affidavit, not uncommon amongst your Asian example where parents come over who do not speak english, drive etc. I registered 40 some odd years ago with a birth certificate and an affidavit from my parents. I have never presented an ID to vote, In NYS and I believe California is the same, you do not need to present ID at the polling place, but the polling place has a record of your resistration and your signture.
3. How can a person manage to get an ID to register to vote, but lack the ability to have an ID to actually vote?
see above, as a poll inspector, I had a elderly oriental woman who who had no need of a DL or any of the common ids, (I don't think anyone would have accepted her Medicare card. Her children had to explain to her everything about the voting process and had to sign an affidavit to help her in the booth. She did the one thing she had to do which was to sign her name to declare that she was in fact eligible to vote. I then verified that it was the signature on file and gave her a ballot. Note, in the past, illiterate people would sign with an x, and accommodations are made for persons who are unable to fill out a ballot with a pen.
4. What kind of person lacks the ability to get an ID, but has the wherewithal to get themselves to a polling place to vote, or get a mail in ballot and send it in? A person who can manage to find a way to do the latter surely has the capacity to do the former.
Again, see above, there are quite a few people who have no need of a formal ID, but not having one should not disenfranchise them any more than forgetting your wallet on the day of election should.
If you have demonstrated the eligibility to vote at some time, there is no reason you should ever be denied it thenceforth for lack of some piece of paper or difficulty getting to the polling place at a limited set of hours.
(In many cases you don’t need an actual ID, as long as you have the last four digits of your SS#. That would work for voting as well.)
NO ss number or card is not a valid form of ID.

Your Social Security card is not an identification document and, in many situations, you only need to know your Social Security number (you do not need to show the physical card).
Social Security Administration (.gov)
 

Attachments

  • 1685482786350.png
    1685482786350.png
    649 bytes · Views: 0

LifeIn

Well-known member
In other words, you claim it’s a barrier and even though you can’t possibly quantify it...
That is no worse than you claiming we NEED photo ID to solve the problem of in-person voter fraud even though you cannot possibly quantify that problem.


I did so because people need an ID for about a million things in life.
There are people without suitable voter ID who still manage to live.

, and it’s incredibly easy to get one.
How do you do that if the office that issues voter ID is 150 miles away and you don't have a car? It may be very easy for many people, but not for all.


It takes a severe situation for a person to not get an ID if they want one.
We should not write off those in severe situations just because they are not like most people.

And here’s the thing… you need an ID to REGISTER to vote. Four questions.
I'm not going to get into answering distracting questions that you have not connected to an argument, especially since you have not answered my very relevant question, which is, why do we NEED voter ID? What is the problem without it?
 

glenlogie

Well-known member
That is no worse than you claiming we NEED photo ID to solve the problem of in-person voter fraud even though you cannot possibly quantify that problem.



There are people without suitable voter ID who still manage to live.


How do you do that if the office that issues voter ID is 150 miles away and you don't have a car? It may be very easy for many people, but not for all.



We should not write off those in severe situations just because they are not like most people.


I'm not going to get into answering distracting questions that you have not connected to an argument, especially since you have not answered my very relevant question, which is, why do we NEED voter ID? What is the problem without it?
Give an example of people who live 150:miles away from any services. How do they survive?
 

LifeIn

Well-known member
I said that the percentage of blacks in the general population is virtually identical to the percentage of blacks who are in the voting population. And I’m right about that. Whits, however, are over represented in the voting compared to their representation in the general population. But that’s reflective not of underrepresentation among blacks, but among Hispanics and Asians.
So why are Hispanics and Asians underrepresented in the voting population compared to the general population? Maybe ID laws help explain it among Hispanics, but not among Asians. So here must be another reason (or reasons).
As compared to whites, the minority races are all under-represented. The problem with voter ID laws is that they disenfranchise other already marginalized groups too. And all for no purpose.

I’ve suggested motivation to vote as one reason. You think that’s bunk. Ok. What’s your explanation? It can’t be “because of voter ID laws”.
Your suggestion of motivation is a good one. Blacks were not as motivated as they might have been before Obama because none of the candidates before then seemed to hold out much hope of being concerned about them. If all the choices appear to them to be inadequate choices, it stands to reason that they might not care as much. But on top of this, voter ID is yet another hurdle combined with the others.



Well I can tell you that I’ve asked some people in local politics in my town this question about my state’s voter ID laws. These people are democrats. Their answer? Because we want to make sure that the person who comes in to vote is who they say they are. It doesn’t dawn on them that it might be racist.

So yeah, I already knew the answer to this question before I asked you to consider it. Sorry…that was mean of me.
Understood. I don't agree with your answer, but since you don't really want me to answer it, I won't try.



Before voter ID laws went into effect in the 2000s, why did blacks vote in lower percentages than whites?
You mean back in the 1950's? Well, there was lynching, state laws, grandfather clauses, literacy tests, etc.


Also…. Why is it so hard for blacks to get IDs?
I can only speculate on why the system is set up to make it hard for them, but if I had to guess, I would say it is hard because those in power want to appease their rich political supporters and prevent the riff-raff from gaining power.


And if the government paid for an ID for everyone that doesn’t have one or can’t afford one, so there would literally be no reason why any adult citizen couldn’t have an ID, would you still be opposed to it? Why?
Oh, then I would definitely be in favor of it. But understand this means the government takes the full responsibility for translating birth certificates into voter registrations and IDs, coming to the person's home to take the photo and deliver them and ID. The actual cost of the ID is not the issue. It is the onerous procedure one has to go through. There is no reason why anyone should have to produce a birth certificate. The government has already got all the records of birth certificates. Same thing for naturalization papers. If the government took full responsibility for the ID process, I would have no objection. Of course that will never happen. But then we don't have a problem without voter ID, do we?
 

glenlogie

Well-known member
As compared to whites, the minority races are all under-represented. The problem with voter ID laws is that they disenfranchise other already marginalized groups too. And all for no purpose.


Your suggestion of motivation is a good one. Blacks were not as motivated as they might have been before Obama because none of the candidates before then seemed to hold out much hope of being concerned about them. If all the choices appear to them to be inadequate choices, it stands to reason that they might not care as much. But on top of this, voter ID is yet another hurdle combined with the others.




Understood. I don't agree with your answer, but since you don't really want me to answer it, I won't try.




You mean back in the 1950's? Well, there was lynching, state laws, grandfather clauses, literacy tests, etc.



I can only speculate on why the system is set up to make it hard for them, but if I had to guess, I would say it is hard because those in power want to appease their rich political supporters and prevent the riff-raff from gaining power.



Oh, then I would definitely be in favor of it. But understand this means the government takes the full responsibility for translating birth certificates into voter registrations and IDs, coming to the person's home to take the photo and deliver them and ID. The actual cost of the ID is not the issue. It is the onerous procedure one has to go through. There is no reason why anyone should have to produce a birth certificate. The government has already got all the records of birth certificates. Same thing for naturalization papers. If the government took full responsibility for the ID process, I would have no objection. Of course that will never happen. But then we don't have a problem without voter ID, do we?
I notice that you jumped from the 1950s to the 2000s.
CI has countered your objections with hard numbers and you react by speculating.
 

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
Is this a serious question? Registration is the demonstration to the appropriate body that you are eligible to vote.

Actually, you don't, you can register with an affidavit, not uncommon amongst your Asian example where parents come over who do not speak english, drive etc. I registered 40 some odd years ago with a birth certificate and an affidavit from my parents. I have never presented an ID to vote, In NYS and I believe California is the same, you do not need to present ID at the polling place, but the polling place has a record of your resistration and your signture.

see above, as a poll inspector, I had a elderly oriental woman who who had no need of a DL or any of the common ids, (I don't think anyone would have accepted her Medicare card. Her children had to explain to her everything about the voting process and had to sign an affidavit to help her in the booth. She did the one thing she had to do which was to sign her name to declare that she was in fact eligible to vote. I then verified that it was the signature on file and gave her a ballot. Note, in the past, illiterate people would sign with an x, and accommodations are made for persons who are unable to fill out a ballot with a pen.

Again, see above, there are quite a few people who have no need of a formal ID, but not having one should not disenfranchise them any more than forgetting your wallet on the day of election should.
If you have demonstrated the eligibility to vote at some time, there is no reason you should ever be denied it thenceforth for lack of some piece of paper or difficulty getting to the polling place at a limited set of hours.

NO ss number or card is not a valid form of ID.

Your Social Security card is not an identification document and, in many situations, you only need to know your Social Security number (you do not need to show the physical card).
Social Security Administration (.gov)

LOL well you’d better tell that to the state of Minnesota.


“REGISTER TO VOTE (or Update Your Registration)
Step 1 (Of 5): See If You're Eligible

Before You Begin:​

  • You will need an email address. Use a paper application if you don't have one.
  • You will need your Minnesota driver’s license or Minnesota identification cardnumber. If you don't have one of these, you may use the last four numbers of your Social Security number.”
Or the state of Connecticut.


“to use the online voter registration system you must have a current and valid driver’s license, learner’s permit or non-driver photo identification card issued by the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and a signature on file with DMV.…When you register to vote, you must provide your Connecticut driver's license number, or if none, the last four digits of your Social Security number.”

Or the IRS.


Note the box in the upper right. Social security number. Why do you need to put your SS# on your tax forms if not for identification purposes?

So yeah federal and state governments use your Social Security number for ID purposes literally all the time, in all kinds of circumstances. You may not need to present your SS card, but they do use your SS number all the time for ID purposes.
 

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
That is no worse than you claiming we NEED photo ID to solve the problem of in-person voter fraud even though you cannot possibly quantify that problem.

Where did I say we need photo ID to solve the problem of in person voter fraud? I’d like for you to quote me or cite a post of mine.

There are people without suitable voter ID who still manage to live.

Right but who can live in this country reasonably without SOME form of ID?

How do you do that if the office that issues voter ID is 150 miles away and you don't have a car? It may be very easy for many people, but not for all.

I love these totally fictional scenarios. There is this incredible thing called the internet or US postal service that can be used to get an ID.

We should not write off those in severe situations just because they are not like most people.

Sure. Of course. But this is suuuuuuuch a tiny percentage of people, right?

I'm not going to get into answering distracting questions that you have not connected to an argument, especially since you have not answered my very relevant question, which is, why do we NEED voter ID? What is the problem without it?

Well I’ve never said we NEED voter ID. You’ve made that up in your fertile imagination. But I did ask this question of my local politicians - Democrats - whose party implemented ID laws in my state. And I told you how they answered it: because it helps make sure that when someone comes in to vote claiming to be Joe Smith, that it’s actually Joe Smith.

Here’s how it actually works in my town. I show up at the polling place. I go to the table, and they ask for my name, address, and ID. I tell them who I am, where I live, and show them my drivers license. They look at it, look at me, then cross my name off their list, so that they know that I’ve been there, and that nobody else can come and claim to be me.

This is eminently reasonable to everyone there. Me, the poll workers, everyone.

To my knowledge there’s never been a case of voter fraud in my town. But it’s still required. Nobody seems to have a problem with it. Not even the same Democrats (it’s 5-1 D to R in my town) who decry voter ID laws while implementing them and practicing them in my own state and town.

And more to the point, my questions are absolutely relevant to this discussion. I can understand why you don’t want to answer them though.


Also: how many people have been disenfranchised by voter ID laws? Can you give me an actual number +/- 1,000, with documentation? I figure since you’re wanting me to quantify the amount of voter ID fraud you can at least quantify the amount of disenfranchisement that comes from voter ID laws.
 
Last edited:

Pogo

Active member
Minnesota, SS number allows you into the system before you identify yourself, it is not used as an ID or anything. It is one step up from the I am not a robot box. After you are in to the website you go through all the normal stuff to establish residency, citizenship etc.

As for Connecticut, you have to have a Conn. DL which means we already have all your info, no need to prove it again.

Now the real question is why are you playing this silly devil's advocate game? It took us many years even to get to universal suffrage and that is the most fundamental right in our democracy. To that end, any impediment to that right is unreasonable. Unless you can actually demonstrate that there is an actual need for an impediment to increase safety in excess of the inconvenience then restrictions are not justified. Potential voter fraud is so rare already that the disenfranchisement from even losing your ID card is far worse than the "solution" .
As for the well anybody can get there, there is 200 miles as the crow flies between
DMVs where you can get a well accepted ID, that leaves a whole lot of places off that line that 150 miles or more to either location. My sister in law's family has brought numerous relatives over from Vietnam, they don't speak English and have no need of a picture ID for anything not to mention the fact that as a Caucasian , identifying someone reliably by picture? forget it. These are just a few of the potential problems, and nobody has demonstrated any significant risk of even potential fraud.

All of this is to say, maybe none of these things are a problem for you but they do affect some and that is incompatible with making it possible for all US citizens to vote
 

Crazy Ivan

Well-known member
As compared to whites, the minority races are all under-represented. The problem with voter ID laws is that they disenfranchise other already marginalized groups too. And all for no purpose.

Blacks aren’t underrepresented. If so, it’s by a statistically insignificant margin. Whites are over represented because of the under representation of Hispanics and Asians. So it’s relevant to ask why THEY are underrepresented. Voter ID laws are a terrible explanation for Asians, who have the means to get an ID easily as a demographic. Hispanics, it might work better for.

But hen I’m back to my question: how many people are disenfranchised by voter ID laws?

Your suggestion of motivation is a good one. Blacks were not as motivated as they might have been before Obama because none of the candidates before then seemed to hold out much hope of being concerned about them. If all the choices appear to them to be inadequate choices, it stands to reason that they might not care as much. But on top of this, voter ID is yet another hurdle combined with the others.

How can motivation be a good suggestion if you told me earlier in this conversation that I can’t cite that because it’s racist?

But hallelujah! I’m glad you’re here now!

Understood. I don't agree with your answer, but since you don't really want me to answer it, I won't try.

Where did you get the idea that I don’t want you to answer it? I’ve asked several times and given you several chances to share your views. You’ve chosen not to.

You mean back in the 1950's? Well, there was lynching, state laws, grandfather clauses, literacy tests, etc.

No, I mean like 1996. 30 years after the civil rights movement.

I can only speculate on why the system is set up to make it hard for them, but if I had to guess, I would say it is hard because those in power want to appease their rich political supporters and prevent the riff-raff from gaining power.

You’re begging the question. I didn’t suggest that it is actually hard, or that there’s a systemic issue. You brought that to the table. I don’t think it’s harder for blacks to get IDs than whites.

Oh, then I would definitely be in favor of it. But understand this means the government takes the full responsibility for translating birth certificates into voter registrations and IDs, coming to the person's home to take the photo and deliver them and ID. The actual cost of the ID is not the issue. It is the onerous procedure one has to go through. There is no reason why anyone should have to produce a birth certificate. The government has already got all the records of birth certificates. Same thing for naturalization papers. If the government took full responsibility for the ID process, I would have no objection. Of course that will never happen. But then we don't have a problem without voter ID, do we?

We don’t need photo IDs. I never suggested that. Just some form of ID. It’s not hard at all to put this system in place. In fact, in recent years, democrats have suggested doing this.


“As Democrats maneuver to pass voting rights legislation through Congress, some high-profile members of the party have expressed an openness to one GOP-backed policy they have long opposed: voter ID requirements.

"We do not oppose voter ID," Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, the third-ranking Democrat in the House, told NPR this month. "Every one of us who registered to vote gets a voter registration card. And you present that card every time you go to vote. That's a voter ID."

The shift comes 13 years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that if states wanted to require voters to show a photo ID to vote, they could.”
 
Top