Judges Overturn Racially Motivated Voter Suppression Laws in WI, TX, & MI

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,348
3,426
126
The main impact of this law is to slow voting in black neighborhoods. The judge found it does nothing to improve voting as the state suggested. You yourself said you could easily take an extra minute or two and select each candidate manually. So again what was the point of this law?

If it slows voting in black neighborhoods why don't we see issues related to slow votes among blacks in the other 40 states that don't allow this? If the argument is that it might increase wait times there was the inclusion of $5 million to fund additional staffing which has been an issue for 20 odd years in Detroit.

The judge didn't find this doesn't improve voting - just that the state didn't support its case in that regard. I do find it interesting that the judge says they have the right to vote straight party when other states specifically prohibit this. If its a right why isn't this established across all states? I find this especially odd given that states have been regularly abolishing including as early as 2015 with no court cases. FWIW the democrats benefited from the removal of that in WV. Same for both Kentucky and Oklahoma.

There has also been some critique among the new stations here that some of the arguments against it were 'cherry picked'. For example only 9 of the 33 counties were used in the examination of straight ticket voting. Ottawa county was not on that list which is the county with the second highest percentage of straight ticket voters in the state and was also 3:1 in terms of R straight party votes to democrat votes

Personally I agree with the numerous third party candidates that point out that straight ticket voting disproportionately affects their chances as they cannot get the same treatment on the ballot. If you're against specialized treatment and discrimination I would be interested to hear your arguments about giving certain candidates special treatment over others.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/09/half_of_michigan_voters_used_s.html


the court made a finding of fact that black people hugely disproportionately use this method of voting.

Just because one group disproportionally uses a certain method doesn't mean that method should still be used. If it did we should reinstate this in other states where white republican voters predominately use this - like WV.

Each person that would have and now can't is quintupling their time in the booth by your estimate. That adds up really fast.

And yet other states have managed to deal with the change. $5 million in additional resources seems like it would go a long way. That said it would also be helpful if MI allowed "no reason" absentee ballots but that proposal met bipartisan opposition despite its introduction by Republicans and support by the governor.[/quote][/QUOTE]
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,176
28,168
136
Well except for the fact the not having a straight ticket voting option doesn't racially discriminate or suppress people from voting in any way. You cannot lump that in to a thread about racially discriminatory voter suppression laws ever because that's not what it is. Straight ticket voting is lazy voting and anyone who does it is the worst kind of lazy voter. They do their country a disservice with their failure to properly fulfill their responsibilities as a voter. While Voting is constitutional a right it is also a responsibility and we as citizens availing ourselves of those constitutional guarantees have a responsibility to use them wisely. Straight ticket voting is not very wise. It is just people being to lazy to actually take the time to gather a rudimentary amount of information about who they are voting for and why.
Oh so you get to determine who should be allowed to vote now? Lazy people shouldn't be allowed to vote?
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,348
3,426
126
Anyone who pretends that forcing an already 6-8 hour wait to vote

Citation needed. I've seen lots of reports of 1-3 hours. Nothing in any news article I can find offers a confirmed wait time higher than 3.5 hours. Part of the issue is the substantially higher turn out in Detroit and Flint over the last couple of elections compared to historical norms (66% turn out vs 52%)
http://www.citylab.com/politics/2012/11/where-people-are-waiting-vote-longest/3818/
http://michronicleonline.com/2012/11/07/long-lines-don-t-stop-detroit-voters/
http://datadrivendetroit.org/uncate...icans-turned-out-last-year-in-record-numbers/

Anecdotally I lived in Livonia (Chicago Rd) and waited no where near that amount of time to vote.

That said I do agree that there should be an increase in funding but I believe the counties are responsible, in part, for funding and staffing, including volunteers. Wayne country (Detroit and surrounding areas) has long had a shortage of volunteers
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Sure there is, sorry that the illegal aliens and dead people your idiot party relies are going to have a difficult time voting in Texas. Normal people don't need two years to get a photo ID, no matter how much liberals insist that their pet minorities are incapable of performing simple tasks.

Apparently there are 600,000 normal people in Texas alone who don't need the required picture ID in their day to day lives. If they did, they'd already have that ID.

Too easy, obviously.
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
Apparently there are 600,000 normal people in Texas alone who don't need the required picture ID in their day to day lives.

Sure there are, we all know that companies all over the state hire people who don't have photo IDs.
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
Willfully constructing deceitful obstacles so as to restrict, disenfranchise and suppress specific demographics right to vote.

No one's been "suppressed" from voting because they don't have a photo ID, liar. Better luck next time :)
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
From the article:



The main impact of this law is to slow voting in black neighborhoods. The judge found it does nothing to improve voting as the state suggested. You yourself said you could easily take an extra minute or two and select each candidate manually. So again what was the point of this law?

To anger you :)
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
Black neighborhoods often have fewer voting machines and dramatically longer waits than other neighborhoods. Sometimes the wait can be as much as several hours. If you increase the amount of time to vote by 500% as you describe in your post then the wait times will be even longer. Surely any rational person can see why several hour wait times would depress the black vote because who wants to wait that long and who has the time?

People wanting to vote. But expending effort is anathema to many liberals, so I can see how that confuses you.
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
It's most certainly not a different problem, they are two strongly related problems. If people have to wait a long time to vote and you want to implement a change that makes people take 500% longer to vote, those seem pretty hugely related, no? Also I don't know where you got the idea that I assumed all black voters vote straight ticket as that's totally irrelevant, the court made a finding of fact that black people hugely disproportionately use this method of voting. Each person that would have and now can't is quintupling their time in the booth by your estimate. That adds up really fast.



Huh? On what possible basis are you making that determination that these problems haven't manifested themselves? The factual basis for the argument is as simple as can be: if voting times are already disproportionately long in some precincts and you're making it so wait times will be even more disproportionately longer, that's going to suppress the vote of minorities.

Are you suggesting that minorities are too lazy to vote? Ouch!
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
glad I live in colorado where it's a mail ballot for everything. i haven't stood in a voting line in years.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,611
47,219
136
People wanting to vote. But expending effort is anathema to many liberals, so I can see how that confuses you.

Speaking of effort can you do me a favor? If you're going to try the whole conservative trolling thing at least put enough effort in it to make it worth reading. These posts are pathetic. Have some personal pride!
 

Smoblikat

Diamond Member
Nov 19, 2011
5,184
107
106
I never understood why voter ID laws are considered "racist". I got a state ID when I was 17 or 18 (didnt have a license) and all I had to do was go to my local town clerk, give them $10 and fill out some paperwork. One part of obtaining it was kind of stupid though, I had to go to the city where I was born and obtain a copy of my long form birth certificate. Luckily I was born just a couple hours away from where I live.If these people dont have ID's already, how do they get jobs, drive, alcohol, cigarettes, lottery tickets etc...
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,780
6,029
136
I never understood why voter ID laws are considered "racist". I got a state ID when I was 17 or 18 (didnt have a license) and all I had to do was go to my local town clerk, give them $10 and fill out some paperwork. One part of obtaining it was kind of stupid though, I had to go to the city where I was born and obtain a copy of my long form birth certificate. Luckily I was born just a couple hours away from where I live.If these people dont have ID's already, how do they get jobs, drive, alcohol, cigarettes, lottery tickets etc...

Many are retired, may have never owned/driven a car. Just because it's no problem for you doesn't mean it's that easy for everyone.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I never understood why voter ID laws are considered "racist". I got a state ID when I was 17 or 18 (didnt have a license) and all I had to do was go to my local town clerk, give them $10 and fill out some paperwork. One part of obtaining it was kind of stupid though, I had to go to the city where I was born and obtain a copy of my long form birth certificate. Luckily I was born just a couple hours away from where I live.If these people dont have ID's already, how do they get jobs, drive, alcohol, cigarettes, lottery tickets etc...

Wonder all you want. It is as I said earlier- if they needed current state issued picture ID of a particular type, they'd already have it. It can be no other way.
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
I never understood why voter ID laws are considered "racist".

They're not, liberals just need illegal aliens and other ineligible voters to vote along Democratic party lines, so they constantly lie about minorities being too stupid to get photo IDs.
 

Roflmouth

Golden Member
Oct 5, 2015
1,059
61
46
Many are retired, may have never owned/driven a car. Just because it's no problem for you doesn't mean it's that easy for everyone.

It is easy for everyone with a frontal lobe (so a large chunk of the Democratic voting bloc may be excluded).
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,194
14,863
136
I never understood why voter ID laws are considered "racist". I got a state ID when I was 17 or 18 (didnt have a license) and all I had to do was go to my local town clerk, give them $10 and fill out some paperwork. One part of obtaining it was kind of stupid though, I had to go to the city where I was born and obtain a copy of my long form birth certificate. Luckily I was born just a couple hours away from where I live.If these people dont have ID's already, how do they get jobs, drive, alcohol, cigarettes, lottery tickets etc...

Does your world view and experiences preclude you from being able to think of scenarios where one would not need an ID or where one would not be able to obtain the necessary documents?
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,600
13,272
146
It is easy for everyone with a frontal lobe (so a large chunk of the Democratic voting bloc may be excluded).

Since you didn't read the thread.

For instance, Adelman describes the disturbing plight of one elderly Wisconsin man whose Mississippi birth certificate and federal social security card contained a slight discrepancy in the spelling of his name. The state agency informed him that he would need to travel to Mississippi, retrieve a new, corrected birth certificate, and return to Wisconsin before he could get an ID card and vote. Eventually, the man’s daughter persuaded the state to let her father sign an affidavit testifying to his real name. He had suffered a stroke, however, and could not write, so his daughter, who had power of attorney, signed the affidavit for her father. But because the affidavit contained the daughter’s name, the state rejected it, denying the man an ID card and, thus, his right to vote. In all, the daughter spent five months trying, unsuccessfully, to obtain a proper ID for her father.

There's other examples. Quite a few are elderly married women who don't have birth certificates from other states with their married names.

They're not, liberals just need illegal aliens and other ineligible voters to vote along Democratic party lines, so they constantly lie about minorities being too stupid to get photo IDs.

You've been asked before. Provide proof. Put up or shut up.


Lastly your name makes no sense. It's ROFLMAO. Why would you go from ass to....

Wait. Oh no! :fearscream:

:D (I kid I kid) ;).
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
35,903
27,559
136
Since you're so smart, please list all the cases of in person voting fraud that requires this type of law, I'll be waiting...
Lawyers in court cases for these voter ID laws can't. Not much chance this genius can either.