using your own link
Based on the experts review and survey, LDF estimates 3 percent of white voters, about 5.5 percent of black voters and 6.1 percent of Latino voters did not have a photo ID that would allow them to cast a ballot, Ross said.
simple math will tell that that it means that 94.5% of black voters have proper ID. In your own link you have provided evidence that the vast majority of black people have ids
Post debunked nonsense to defend racial disenfranchisement and prop up the racist Republican party
Lets get our facts straight about what happened.
@Bollywood Hulk Hogan posted a story that apparently he did not read. The NY Times story was about how the predictions of voter id laws causing voter suppression did not pan out
I find it fascinating how blind these people choose to be regarding concrete evidence that there is racial targeting to disenfranchise black voters and not only that, one particular person in this thread has been shown numerous times that it’s beyond just showing an ID.
I mean I understand the fatalistic cynical view of thinking “everyone is against us what does it matter” if it was sincere. But why are these people so triggered by other individuals saying “ you know I actually don’t want to take this laying down” and either do something whether speaking out and informing others or actually doing some sort of action? At most you would think the above person would be apathetic.
I find it fascinating that i stated explicitly that voter id laws are stupid and racist and people have the nerve the write some self righteous soliloquy implying that i support voter suppression
Voter suppression is real and anyone denying it is denying racism and should be permanently banned.
who is saying that voter suppression isnt real?
all i said is that voter id laws dont suppress the black vote because the notion that black people lack id is a myth
this is the article in the OP which apparently none of you actually read
Black Turnout in Alabama Complicates Debate on Voting Laws which is pretty much saying what i said
Not only that, but I clearly showed him the contradiction in his views a few pages ago.
He acknowledged that the laws were unfairly targeted at black people...but went on to argue that they didn't have as huge of an effect as people claimed, and therefore it's not worth disputing those laws.
nikka it was still struck down twice basically for being racist in it's intention, who cares if it failed to work the way they intended it to?
you did not clearly show how i contradicted myself , all you did was quote some random phrases from my posts, i have no idea what those quotes are suppose to infer, especially since they were not full quotes,
this is the nytime article which is saying that voter id laws did not appear to supress the black vote
Black Turnout in Alabama Complicates Debate on Voting Laws
It is clear you did not understand the point the author was making. If you need it explained to you more slowly, I'll number the main points so you can get it point by point and not jump ahead and get confused again.
1. Yes, voter suppression laws almost certainly will suppress minority votes.
2. However, you will probably only see that effect in the main elections where the largest numbers are voting.
3. That is because in primary elections and special elections, only a small subset of the voting populace is going to show up. And that is going to be a subset that is least likely to be effected by voter suppression laws.
4. Such suppression laws are most effective at blocking the more borderline or casual voters, the ones who make the difference in the general election. Those sorts of voters weren't showing up to primaries and special elections anyway.
5. Therefore, voter turnout in such primary/special elections is a useless measure in determining the effect of voter suppression laws. What you really have to see is what happens in major elections when the full "normal" electorate turns out. The effect should be largest in presidential election years, smaller in other regular general elections, and minimal the rest of the time.
so lets go through this step by step so we dont miss any facts along the way
1. The NY Times wrote an article explaining the the predictions of black voter suppression in AL did not pan out
2.
@Bollywood Hulk Hogan who has low reading comprehension and did not realize what the point of the article was made a thread about this article
3. Retarded posters called my a troll and a right winger for basically saying what the article was saying
That leads is to fact #4
4.
@tru_m.a.c posted a tweet from some random guy on twitter who actually read the article and understood the implications of the article and wanted to write a rebuttal to the article
This fact#4 is EXTREMELY important to understand and it shows why all you guys are full of shyt.
Question: Why is this twitter person writing a rebuttal to the nytimes article???
Answer: Because the nytimes article is saying that voter suppression didnt work in AL
Question: Why am I being attacked as a right wing troll and getting warning ponts for saying the same thing that is in a ny times (you know that right wing newspaper ) article?
Answer: Cuz you guys are fuking idiots.
But anyways, back to your points
1. Yes, voter suppression laws almost certainly will suppress minority votes.
that could very well be true, but i was referring to a specific form of voter suppression, which is voter id laws
my point was that voter id laws dont effect black people because the vast majority of black people have ids, in fact according to the other link fake mac posted 94.5% of african americans in AL have ID's
racist republicans are very creative so im sure there are many forms of voter suppression that effect the black vote but voter ID laws is not one of them
2. However, you will probably only see that effect in the main elections where the largest numbers are voting.
4. Such suppression laws are most effective at blocking the more borderline or casual voters, the ones who make the difference in the general election. Those sorts of voters weren't showing up to primaries and special elections anyway.
this is a very weak assertion
the more voters there are the more voters will be effected, obviously that is true, but it doesn't follow that having less voters means the impact cant be measured or that percentages become useless
basically you are trying to assert that there was a sampling error, and your evidence of this sampling error is that less people voted in the primaries.....which means you get an F in statistics
you need much more thorough analyses to show that there is a sampling error, simply showing the raw numbers is going to cut it
On top of that the statistics he posted show that black voters have consistently made up the exact same percentage (within +-1 margin of error) of the electorate in primaries and generals, which is clear evidence that any voter id laws have had no impact
4. Such suppression laws are most effective at blocking the more borderline or casual voters, the ones who make the difference in the general election. Those sorts of voters weren't showing up to primaries and special elections anyway.
5. Therefore, voter turnout in such primary/special elections is a useless measure in determining the effect of voter suppression laws. What you really have to see is what happens in major elections when the full "normal" electorate turns out. The effect should be largest in presidential election years, smaller in other regular general elections, and minimal the rest of the time.
So you are saying the impact of voter id laws can only be seen during general elections........................OK
well that is an assertion and a hypothesis, I prefer to use the scientific method so when you have data to back up your hypothesis please let me know, presenting raw numbers of votes is not evidence to back up that assertion, that is why the tweet in question is ridiculous
that's my problem with some of these posters, they don't think everyone is against us... they think (or at least pretend) only white liberals are against us... they think (or at least pretend) that conservative white people are our friends... they think that conservative whites are actually out to help us but the liberal whites have us blinded to that help.... if they thought all white people were against us, i could co-sign that... they don't or at least pretend they don't.... they desperately want to push the narrative that openly bigoted conservatives are actually our allies... i truly don't understand how some of you argue with them page after page without checking out of the conversation....
im assuming you are talking about somebody else, cuz i have no idea what the hell you are babbling about
Life must be so simple when you're this dumb. Like, blissfully enjoyable.
Other developed countries go out of their way to register their citizens when they're of voting age. Quite a few have mandatory voting laws, and I didn't even realize how many countries hold their elections on weekends just to improve turnout and make it easier to vote. That is completely foreign to most Americans.
Why are other countries better at conducting elections than we are?
U.S. trails most developed countries in voter turnout | Pew Research Center
We're one of the few countries where people try to make it harder to vote, and we've got posters in this thread acting like it's not a big deal. And people are dapping them up.
i dont know where this notion comes from that i support these laws, i said that voter id laws are stupid and racist, there is no evidence of any real voter fraud so they are pointless, i think the more people vote the better and laws should be passed to encourage people to vote
all i was saying is that voter id laws are not going to suppress the black vote because the notion of black people not having ids is a myth
for those that lack reading comprehension, notice i say VOTER ID LAWS, im not referring to other forms of voter suppression
its not just me saying it, the NY Times article which apparently none of you read
Black Turnout in Alabama Complicates Debate on Voting Laws is also asserting that voter id laws did not effect the black vote in AL, so its disingenuous to paint me as right wing troll who supports oppressing the black vote unless you also paint the NY times and the thread starter as right wing trolls who support oppressing the black vote
"Only a very small number of voters are affected."
you been sitting on that bytch ass response for 45 days
