Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

More voter disenfrancise goodness

48 posts in this topic

Posted

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/12/texas-voter-id-justice-department_n_1339004.html?ref=politics

In a letter to Texas officials that was also filed in the court case in Washington, the Justice Department said Hispanic voters in Texas are more than twice as likely than non-Hispanic voters to lack a driver's license or personal state-issued photo ID. The department said that even the lowest estimates showed about half of Hispanic registered voters lack such identification.

The range was so broad because the state provided two sets of registered voter data.

It's such a slam dunk case of violating the Voter Rights Act it's not even humorous. I understand it's the Republicans last gasp effort to maintain their current policies for their old white voters but come on, have a little pride and integrity, Lincoln was once in your party.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/12/lincoln-davis-former-tenn_n_1339356.html

A white guy got caught up in all this so maybe something will be done about it. See: Everything I've said about spending money (if we absolutely had to) on election reform, not the illegal VoterID crap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gosh. Think of all the people who have been disenfranchised when they get stopped at a random license check. Or think of all the people who get disenfranchised when asked for their ID to use a Credit Card. And wow... yeah... obviously it's racism when you get carded buying beer.

And you know, voting for who are your lawmakers is the least important thing of all the things you could be carded for.

Who knew everyone was so racist? Thankfully we have the Obama administration and Critical Race Theory to sort al this out for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah that argument sucks, everyone knows it and I've proven it. You know damn well why these laws have been passed, you also know damn well that there's no evidence they are actually needed, and the money it costs has been proven to be wasted on any such effort to the point where spending it to correct the statistically insignifigant errors the voting process has would be a better allocation of assets.

Add to that the fact that the overwhelming majority of laws are passed by Republican legislatures and signed by Republican governors and it's clear that all this is is an attempt to circumvent the Voting Rights Act. That's really all there is to it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1468442/

Driving checkpoints disenfranchise hispanic motorists...according to CWG. Surprised Holder hasn't picked up on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

cant argue with simple logic and facts, so its time for the "putting words in cookins mouth defense"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah that argument sucks, everyone knows it and I've proven it. You know damn well why these laws have been passed, you also know damn well that there's no evidence they are actually needed, and the money it costs has been proven to be wasted on any such effort to the point where spending it to correct the statistically insignifigant errors the voting process has would be a better allocation of assets.

:jc:

Do you sound like Sylvester the Cat when you fire off one of these tirades?

Add to that the fact that the overwhelming majority of laws are passed by Republican legislatures and signed by Republican governors and it's clear that all this is is an attempt to circumvent the Voting Rights Act. That's really all there is to it.

These laws are being created and passed because of Voter Fraud. Just ONE case of voter fraud discredits the integrity and validity of an election process, period.

While you are spinning to make this a "Right/Left" issue, or a "Race" issue, what you fail to realize, is that no matter who passes this law, in the end the entire process is better off for it.

What were to happen if Republicans started casting fraudulent votes, or getting a group of people to vote who weren't legally allowed to? Well, a law like this would help prevent them from being successful at it. This isn't a "Democrats must show their ID law." Or a "Only Identified Repulicans can vote." law. It's a "Show your ID to vote law." Pretty fuging simple, and badly needed. I can't wait for this one to go to the Supreme Court.

You're just towing the party line, because ACORN and several other left-leaning groups got busted destroying the election process, and your party stood to benefit from it. The shoe could easily go on the other foot. It's a full blown case of Headimus Rectimus on display to argue against a law like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Oh yeah I keep forgetting the one case of voter fraud justifies it. The process is completely screwed up because of it. That's why the Voting Rights Act was passed - if the process worked that would not have been needed.

Your argument is based on nothing. Nothing at all.

My argument is based in pure statistics. I've proven over and over, to the point where I'm pretty sick of it, that the evidence shows clearly that voter fraud is much, much less of a disenfranchising activity than the mechanics of voting itself. It's not an arguable point, the two are so out of whack.

You go on and feel good about yourself and your desire to make sure that people can't vote because they don't vote the way you want them to - I'll stick with the evidence, the statistics, and the law, since they all point my way.

Thanks for the ACORN reference, been what? A week?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hmmm... Wonder why half of the hispanic "voters" in Texas don't have an ID?

Probably because half of them are not American?

Why should Mexican and other Central and South American nationals be able to vote in an American election?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Perez wrote that while the state says the new photo ID requirement is to "ensure electoral integrity and deter ineligible voters from voting" the state "did not include evidence of significant in-person voter impersonation not already addressed by the state's existing laws."

Perez added that the number of people lacking any personal ID or driver's license issued by

the state ranges from from 603,892 to 795,955, but of that span, 29-38 percent of them are Hispanic.

"According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120.0 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification," Perez wrote.

"Even using the data most favorable to the state ... that disparity is statistically significant," he said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/12/justice-department-files-objection-to-texas-voter-id-law/#ixzz1ow6tq2Jm

Um, you have to be a citizen to vote. It's already a law. The bold is why I am right and people that disagree with this are wrong. You have to provide a valid reason to enact a law, and there simply is not one. Thinking it's a good idea does not mean something needs to be a law. In this case, it's clear why the law was enacted.

And again, strange how it seems that everyone who complains about over reaching government in their lives seem to think this would be perfectly ok. I certainly don't recall that a "valid photo ID" was one of the requirements of voters in the Constitution, was it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

My argument is based in pure statistics. I've proven over and over, to the point where I'm pretty sick of it, that the evidence shows clearly that voter fraud is much, much less of a disenfranchising activity than the mechanics of voting itself. It's not an arguable point, the two are so out of whack

Statistics huh?

The only "statistic" that matters here is this:

One vote for each citizen regardless of race.

If the law enforces that essential concept of democracy, then I'm all for it.

The law in this case doesn't discriminate. If an asian immigrant wants to vote, then they have to go through the due process the same as hispanic voters.

You aren't for it, because a law like that threatens progressive tactics.

The fact you argue for the voting rights of someone who may or may not be a citizen is tantamount to treason IMHO.

Hmmm... Wonder why half of the hispanic "voters" in Texas don't have an ID?

Probably because half of them are not American?

Why should Mexican and other Central and South American nationals be able to vote in an American election?

^

The crux of the issue that CWG is side-stepping like the Macarena.

You have to provide a valid reason to enact a law, and there simply is not one

That is complete subjective non-sense. There are no requirements for any given statistical level of voter fraud to "matter" or "not matter" in any legal framework. Nothing but a sham spin tactic.

ONE case of voter fraud undermines an election. ONE. If you can't get your head around that, you're dumber than I thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I still dont see how the democrats think that a voter ID is such a bad thing.

All we want is a way for someone to prove that

1. They are American, and

2. That they can only vote once.

That is all that a voter ID is for.

The reasons that the Democrats dont want voter IDs is because they know that Hispanics vote (D) 90% of the time, and that 10s of millions of non-Americans (illegals) would definitely tip the scales in their favor.

What is so hard about proving that you are an American, and that you have only voted one time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

What is so hard about proving that you are an American, and that you have only voted one time?

It isn't hard if you are a legal citizen. You show them your ID, just like you were buying a M-rated game, or pack of smokes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites