Southern Slavery Turns White People Into Republicans 150 Years Later

[Bonam]

The point is that some people can't afford the cost of ID as they need food for their kids. So it has nothing to do with the importance of voting to them: They're effectively disenfranchised by low income.

And that disenfranchisement of the poor effectively benefits the wealthy and the established collusion between corporate power and political power.

Those of you who benefit from that established collusion will obviously try to keep the poor disenfranchised, dismissing and denigrating them as you have. If the 40+% of the population that doesn't vote suddenly started doing so, it could really upset your applecart!!!

I'd love to see that happen!

Except, of course, that in almost all jurisdictions low income people can get IDs completely for free, and in many jurisdictions ANYONE can get an ID for free, or for a very nominal fee like $5-$25 (once per lifetime or per 5 years). The "poor can't afford ID's" is simply a factually wrong statement, a lie that left wing fanatics use to energize their faux outrage.

[Argus]

So what's the problem then? They can do it again. Getting an ID is no harder than registering to vote.

Really? Have you ever tried to get ID when you don't have any ID? You're dirt poor, have never had a drivers licence or credit card. Your family probably lost your birth certificate years ago, assuming you were born in a hospital and ever had one. Passport? LOL. Not likely.

So, Joe Smith can go out to vote, but Leon Smith is going to have to spend days jumping through hoops, filling out paperwork, going to visit places downtown (where he's never been), and you know what, it's pretty easy to just say "Ahh, what's the point. One vote doesn't matter" in the face of all that.

Which is what the Republicans are counting on in their efforts to disenfranchise the poor. After all the Republicans are a wholly owned subsidiary of the wealthy in America. Their job is to cut as many government services as possible, and as many regulations on business, no matter how many lives that destroys. The wealthy, after all, don't care about public schools or public health care or any of that crap. They certainly aren't enamored of unions or people getting benefits. All they want is to cut their own taxes by as much as possible, and to allow the companies they own to treat workers any way they want to while paying them as little as possible.

This, in essence, is what the Republicans stand for. Their constituencey is the wealthy, and they don't care about anyone else.They're all political whores who have been bought off, and promised multi-million dollar payoffs as soon as they're out of office.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Argus

[Bonam]

Voter ID laws are explicitely designed to prevent blacks and other poor people from voting. There is no argument to be made that they serve any other purpose.

Voter ID laws are explicitly designed to verify voter ID. There is no argument to be made that they serve any other purpose.

[Argus]

If the cost of the ID is problem then the correct response to voter ID laws is ask that low cost/no cost IDs provided to people who don't need an ID for other purposes.

It is not acceptable to reject a reasonable requirement or, as is more typical, call people racist for proposing such requirements.

There ARE no reasonable arguments in favor of voter ID laws in the abscence of the slightest evidence of the need for such laws.

[TimG]

Voter ID laws are explicitely designed to prevent blacks and other poor people from voting. There is no argument to be made that they serve any other purpose.

Complete BS. There may be some Machiavellian schemers that see the ID laws as a way to reduce the vote for democrats but that is only because poor people do not tend to have IDs - it has absolutely nothing to do with race. That said, the majority of support for these laws comes from people who simply think it is absurd to have a voting system where people are not required to provide evidence of eligibility. Edited September 12, 2013 by TimG

[Argus]

Voter ID laws are explicitly designed to verify voter ID. There is no argument to be made that they serve any other purpose.

Complete and utter drivel. We're supposed to believe that all of a sudden since the last election, where talk of the number of blacks and hispanics voting Democrat became big news, that suddenly almost every Republican governor in the United States decided there was a desperate need for voter Id laws to combat what exactly? There is NO evidence that such laws are needed nor have ever been needed.

I wouldn't say these laws are specifically designed to be racist, but they are unquestionably racist, and the people who impliment them are racist enough that they don't care about the vastly disproportionate effect the laws will have on minotirites, and anti-democrat enough to think deliberately preventing people from voting is a good idea.

[TimG]

There ARE no reasonable arguments in favor of voter ID law

There are no reasonable arguments against such laws. If you have a society where only some people are allowed to vote then providing evidence of eligibility is a reasonable requirement and it perverse to suggest otherwise.

[Bonam]

This, in essence, is what the Republicans stand for. Their constituencey is the wealthy, and they don't care about anyone else.They're all political whores who have been bought off, and promised multi-million dollar payoffs as soon as they're out of office.

Presumably unlike the democrats? Hah. Almost all members of both parties are completely bought off by one group or another. Nah, the main strike against the Republicans in my mind that makes them (at this point in history) worse than the democrats is their authoritarian-theocratic (Christaeofascist) tendencies.

[Argus]

Complete BS. There may be some Machiavellian schemers that see the ID laws as a way to reduce the vote for democrats but that is only because poor people do not tend to have IDs - it has absolutely nothing to do with race. That said, the majority of support for these laws comes from people who simply think it is absurd to have a voting system where people are not required to provide evidence of eligibility.

No, the majority of the support comes from people who use the words nigger and spic a lot.

[Argus]

There are no reasonable arguments against such laws. If you have a society where only some people are allowed to vote then providing evidence of eligibility is a reasonable requirement and it perverse to suggest otherwise.

No arguments against them? How about the fact it costs a lot of money to impliment a scheme to combat something which virtually never happens?

[Argus]

Presumably unlike the democrats?

Yes, unlike the Democrats, as evidenced by the Democrat's political agenda, which includes support for the poor, support for unions, for public health care, school lunches, poverty reduction, educational assistance and laws and regulations against corporate misbehavior, none of which the Republicans support.

[Bonam]

Complete and utter drivel. We're supposed to believe that all of a sudden since the last election, where talk of the number of blacks and hispanics voting Democrat became big news, that suddenly almost every Republican governor in the United States decided there was a desperate need for voter Id laws to combat what exactly? There is NO evidence that such laws are needed nor have ever been needed.

It's not to combat anything. It's to verify ID. Almost any activity in the US which requires your identify to be given, requires proof of that identify with an ID. Opening a bank account, buying alcohol or tobacco, driving or purchasing a vehicle, renting or owning an apartment or home, going to college or sending your kids to school, enlisting in the military, heck sometimes even just using a credit card. It's a simple, cheap, and efficient precaution.

All people should have ID. If there is a demographic which for some reason is less likely to have IDs, than that is an issue that should be addressed, as not having ID has many adverse side effects, like not being able to have a bank account and save money. People without ID are less able to access many financial and social services, not even talking about voting. A program that helps streamline and encourage the process for poor people to freely get ID would be a giant economic boon, helping these people and helping the economy for pennies on the dollar compared to welfare payments, subsidies, or police and prison costs.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Bonam

[Bonam]

Yes, unlike the Democrats, as evidenced by the Democrat's political agenda, which includes support for the poor, support for unions, for public health care, school lunches, poverty reduction, educational assistance and laws and regulations against corporate misbehavior, none of which the Republicans support.

In other words they are bought off by big labour, big business, the environmental movement, lobbyists representing hospitals and universities, and advocacy groups for the poor. Just like the Republicans who are bought off by big business, lobbyists representing church groups, and advocacy groups for gun ownership. Everyone is bought off. There are no selfless/virtuous politicians. Just different groups that buy different people off.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Bonam

[Bonam]

I wouldn't say these laws are specifically designed to be racist, but they are unquestionably racist, and the people who impliment them are racist enough that they don't care

Mindlessly screaming "racist" at the top of your lungs is not a good argument, and hasn't been for some decades.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Bonam

[jacee]

In other words they are bought off by big labour, big business, the environmental movement, lobbyists representing hospitals and universities, and advocacy groups for the poor. Just like the Republicans who are bought off by big business, lobbyists representing church groups, and advocacy groups for gun ownership. Everyone is bought off. There are no selfless/virtuous politicians. Just different groups that buy different people off.

And Republicans have more buying power.

[Bonam]

And Republicans have more buying power.

Not really. Campaign contributions to Republicans and Democrats are fairly competitive in most areas, with no overwhelming advantage to either side on average.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Bonam

[dre]

Not really. Campaign contributions to Republicans and Democrats are fairly competitive in most areas, with no overwhelming advantage to either side on average.

Yeah thats the nice thing about influence peddling. Special interests are never sure whos going to win, so they donate to both sides.

[jacee]

Mindlessly screaming "racist" at the top of your lungs is not a good argument, and hasn't been for some decades.

If it quacks like a duck ...!

TimG, for example, quickly acknowledged that making ID freely available is necessary so poorer people, mostly black people in the states discussed, can vote.

But first, in ignorance of the facts, he dissed the non voters by saying voting wasn't "important" enough to them.

That's racism ... born of ignorance or sometimes refusal to acknowledge the barriers that continue to disempower and disenfranchise racial minorities.

Ignorance is no excuse for racism. Inform yourself before denigrating people and you can avoid racist statements.

"Hasn't been for decades" ???

Now there's a racist statement !

I suggest you survey some black people in the Southern states to see if they agree that racism is no longer relevant.

Or in your neighbourhood.

[cybercoma]

My point is the small obstacle is easily overcome. If people are not willing to over come it then voting is obviously not that important to them.

What about the people that aren't aware of the requirement only to find out the day of? Or forget day of, it could take 4-6 weeks to get your ID in the mail by the time they process it and everything. What about those that only find out a few weeks before the election?

[TimG]

What about the people that aren't aware of the requirement only to find out the day of? Or forget day of, it could take 4-6 weeks to get your ID in the mail by the time they process it and everything. What about those that only find out a few weeks before the election?

No sympathy for people who 'forget'. People who did not know in time because of a change in rules will lose out in one election. After that they will have more than enough time to get their papers.

The fact is this requirement would be a non-issue if it did not happen to adversely democrat election chances and in typically democrat form they start screaming racism instead of working to streamline the process of issuing IDs to poor voters.

Edited September 12, 2013 by TimG

[jacee]

The fact is this requirement would be a non-issue if it did not happen to adversely democrat election chances and in typically democrat form they start screaming racism instead of working to streamline the process of issuing IDs to poor voters.

"Screaming racism" where it occurs is still very relevant:

Unemployed black woman pretends to be white. Job offers suddenly skyrocket.

Edited September 12, 2013 by jacee

[TimG]

"Screaming racism" where it occurs is still very relevant:

First: this has absolutely nothing to do with absurd claim that voter ID laws are racist.

Second: I noticed that when I first posted my resume on Monster I got a lot of contacts from employers. But after a while I got nothing. I suspect a lot of this burst activity has been the result of her creating a new listing at a time when the job market is picking up and has absolutely nothing to do with racism. If she continued the experiment for 6 month she would find the number of contacts drops to 0.

Of course, these kinds of confounding issues are why they say 'anecdotes are not data'.

Edited September 12, 2013 by TimG

[cybercoma]

First: this has absolutely nothing to do with absurd claim that voter ID laws are racist.

It's so absurd that it has been explained to you several time exactly how and why they're racist. Whether you want to admit that they are or not is irrelevant.

[TimG]

It's so absurd that it has been explained to you several time exactly how and why they're racist.

A law may have side effects which disproportionately affect minority groups, however, that does not make the law racist - especially when there are plenty of remedies that would address this disproportionate effect. Remedies which have been explained to you.

The only racist laws are laws which specifically target people based on the race.

The only reason you call voter id laws racist because you see the term as a propaganda tool and you are not interested in a rational discussion of the issues.

Edited September 13, 2013 by TimG

[cybercoma]

A law may have side effects which disproportionately affect minority groups, however, that does not make the law racist

Yes it does. If that's not racism then words no longer have meaning. Institutional racism is rarely intentional. The law disproportionately affects one race over another, making it harder for them to vote. That's ray definition institutional racism. Below is an article you won't bother to read describing this kind of unintentional racism.

http://academic.udayton.edu/race/2008electionandracism/raceandracism/racism02.htm