I'm not insisting on using anecdotal evidence, however that 600k figure was obtained from a court case, but I had no luck actually finding the case. I don't know if that was a worst case scenario number or what kind of number it was. The person touting it on Politifact was a Democrat activist which makes me wonder if there is some bias with that total. Also, we don't really know how that broke down demographically or along what party lines it broke down. As Bandwagoner pointed out his experience of people who lacked proper ID was more elderly people. I'm at odds with these laws being racist since IDs are required for many other aspects of life including assistance programs for low income families and people. Also, I think every major country in the world outside of Australia and the US requires some kind of federal ID to vote. https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytim...ing-the-effects-of-voter-identification-laws/ That's an older story and it does show that the ID laws seem to have helped Republicans initially. I found this study from UH in 2017 which is much more in depth than the Politifact link and other links in it. https://ssl.uh.edu/class/hobby/voterid2016/voterid2016.pdf It seems like the much greater problem was messaging and not inability to obtain a proper ID. People thought they didn't possess proper ID when they actually did. In case anyone is wondering an expired ID is valid ID for voting as long as it has not been expired for more than 4 years after the court agreement in 2016. Also, only about 16,400 or 0.2% of voters signed affidavits saying they had an impediment from obtaining an approved photo ID in the 2016 election. There is also reference to a study in 2015 talking about how voter ID laws suppressed voting prior to the 2016 changes which leads me to believe the 600,000 number is exaggerated. It also looks like it was about 2 Democrats for every 1 Republican that was pushed away from voting in 2016 even though the vast majority of those people who didn't vote because they thought they couldn't vote actually could have voted.
more anecdotal evidence pointing to the continuing strength of the Blue Wave Democrats Score Special Election Upset In Wisconsin District Trump Won Big https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrats-score-special-election-upset-024628191.html In this WI district, Trump had defeated Democratic rival Hillary Clinton there by 17 points in the 2016 presidential election. The strength of the Blue Wave as evident as the Dems were able to flip a red seat blue and electing Caleb Frostman to the state Senate, a 21-point swing from Trump’s 2016 performance. Frostman’s win is especially sweet for Democrats because WI Gov Scot Walker had tried to prevent Tuesday’s contests from taking place to begin with. He planned to keep them vacant until the regular elections in November. The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a group led by former Attorney General Eric Holder, sued Walker ― and won
An assumption belied by the evidence. Yes, boy, it does. There is definitely both a financial and logistical burden placed on people affected by voter ID laws. Yes, the other discussion where you assume unconstitutionality even though there is no relevant precedent. It can be more than "a few dollars," but you're ignoring the facts, so I wouldn't expect you to know that. To you. To others, it is. No spin, just reporting what the courts said in an actual opinion on an actual voter ID case. I know you prefer to believe your assumptions over established court precedent, but doing so merely means that you have willfully chosen ignorance over knowledge.
This is where you lose whatever credibility you had left. Getting an ID is cheap and easy to do a statement confirmed by the facts. If you disagree then either you are caught up believing propaganda blindly or you are confusing an ID with a drivers licence. I'm not sure which it is, but neither scenario is my fault.
Republicans love Trump...candidates https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/12/us/politics/primary-south-carolina-virginia-nevada.html Republican primary voters appeared more eager to punish Mr. Trump’s enemies than to reward his allies: Even as they seemed poised to turn out Mr. Sanford, South Carolina Republicans forced Gov. Henry McMaster, one of Mr. Trump’s earliest supporters, into a runoff election against a 39-year-old political newcomer. That SC primary with disgraced adulterer Sanford is like the clown show we deserve rather than the clown show we need. Wait what?
Says the guy whose credibility on this topic was destroyed by the quote in my signature, YEARS ago. Not confirmed by my own personal experience. [/QUOTE] If you disagree then either you are caught up believing propaganda blindly or you are confusing an ID with a drivers licence.[/QUOTE] Nope, I'm considering the time and expenses that a simple ID could require. Your "fault" here is willful ignorance. The facts are contained in the court case where judges struck down the Texas voter ID law. You're welcome to continue ignoring these facts, as you have now for quite literally years.
In YOUR opinion.....but how valid is that opinion? I'd argue not very. If you are so incredibly poor that you consider $16 to be "not cheap" then I truly feel sorry for you. I know homeless people that would consider that cheap.
You actually said that anyone who couldn't afford an ID doesn't have an opinion that should be taken seriously. Any reasonable person understands that you're the one without credibility on this topic. Yet again, you ignore all costs except for the actual ID card itself. Willful ignorance, you're doing it right.
And I stand by that. If you are so poor that you can't afford a 16 dollar ID (or if you are 60 or older a one time charge of $6) then your opinion shouldn't be taken seriously on just about any topic because clearly you are an absolute disaster of a person. I know, you are going to come up with some fantasy scenario of someone living 500 miles away from the nearest place to buy an ID or whatever, you can keep that nonsense to yourself. Even worse, you'll talk about how people would have to take time off work to get it.....even though I'm not sure there's ANY job you can get aside from the type of day labor gigs you might get hanging outside a Home Depot that wouldn't require you to have ID to begin with. It's funny how the same kinds of people who are absolutely ridiculous when it comes to their opposition of any kind of voter ID laws are the same people who are always pushing for the most ridiculous gun control laws.
Exactly, you're OK with denying someone's right to vote merely because they can't afford an ID. It is truly, stunningly sad that you don't see the problem with your opinion here. No, I gave my personal experience from the perspective of someone in the best possible circumstances, it isn't my fault you ignored it. I did talk about how I had to take time off of work, time which I got paid for as I have a job with PTO, something that many low-wage workers don't enjoy. I'm not opposed to "any kind of voter ID laws," just those that are specifically designed to suppress the votes of minorities and poor people. It would be truly simple to add provisions so that any legitimate citizen could easily get a free ID that would allow them to vote. We already have most of the infrastructure in place (voter registration), all you would have to add is a photograph taken in any post office (most already have facilities for passports) and voila, free, easy voter ID. Unfortunately, that isn't what the goal of these laws is, the goal is suppression, pure and simple.
2018 will be a solid D win, we all know that. Not as big as it could have been, but big enough. 2019 will be a bit of a honeymoon, but that will give way to enormous fight for the heart of the Democratic party. No telling how 2020 goes, but it will be an absolute bloodbath, both in the primaries and the general. If the Democrats nominate a populist, they win. If they nominate a bureaucratic ideologue or token regressive, they lose unless Trump goes nanners.
Unless the Dems find a way to nominate another Obama who somehow managed to simultaneously be an establishment politician while gaining overwhelming support from progressives.
Well yeah, I'm fine with it, but I fully understand why the law isn't. I think any person that can't afford a $16 dollar ID has absolutely no advice to offer the rest of society because they are clearly failures in every way. Again, I literally know homeless people who don't see the expense of an ID as a harsh burden....so keep that in mind when understanding who we are talking about here. Anyway, it's not a big deal, you are entitled to your opinion and I'll consider it for what I deem it to be worth. Fun talk.
