Jim Crow 2.0???

[Langston Hughes]

 

The New York City Department of Investigations says you're wrong

 

How????

 

DOI undercover agents showed up at 63 polling places last fall and pretended to be voters who should have been turned away by election officials; the agents assumed the names of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail. In 61 instances, or 97 percent of the time, the testers were allowed to vote.

 

 

Doesn't seem to be anything in there about people voting twice under the same name.

[Langston Hughes]

And NOTHING stops multiple registrations. No I.D. makes that inevitable.

 

We are not discussing voter registration are we?

[TomServo92]

 

How????

 

 

Doesn't seem to be anything in there about people voting twice under the same name.

 

Are you really that stupid? They vote once under their REAL name and again under another assumed name or names as described. Voter fraud isn't restricted to someone voting twice under their same name.

[cal50]

 

Are you really that stupid?

 

Oh yea, and then some.

[FiredMotorCompany]

 

We are not discussing voter registration are we?

YOU brought it up.

I quoted you in your exchanges with akirby.

Having trouble with retaining short term memory?

[FiredMotorCompany]

 

Are you really that stupid? They vote once under their REAL name and again under another assumed name or names as described. Voter fraud isn't restricted to someone voting twice under their same name.

Grandma, Aunt, others who don't plan to vote would just tell they "I ain't to the polls. I don't want to get out.

[FiredMotorCompany]

Facial recognition technology might eliminate some.

 

And we know LH has nothing to hide so let the FBI put cameras at every polling station.

[BlackHorse]

 

That's not true, but I really feel bad about correcting you in that little fantasy world you live in.

 

It's no fantasy and we all know it. You have a real deep seated hatred of white people and especially white people who regard themselves as conservatives. It's pathetic and misguided I agree but it is who you are.

[Langston Hughes]

Grandma, Aunt, others who don't plan to vote would just tell they "I ain't to the polls. I don't want to get out.

 

You telling us from experience?

[Langston Hughes]

 

Are you really that stupid? They vote once under their REAL name and again under another assumed name or names as described. Voter fraud isn't restricted to someone voting twice under their same name.

 

So your saying that registration is the problem not voter ID then???

 

You can not vote under your registered name more than once which is what I said.

 

DOI undercover agents showed up at 63 polling places last fall and pretended to be voters who should have been turned away by election officials; the agents assumed the names of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail. In 61 instances, or 97 percent of the time, the testers were allowed to vote

 

Doesn't seem to be anything in there about people voting twice under the same name.

 

 

[Langston Hughes]

 

It's no fantasy and we all know it. You have a real deep seated hatred of white people and especially white people who regard themselves as conservatives. It's pathetic and misguided I agree but it is who you are.

 

You do live in a fantasy world. I don't hate white people and other than a few specific people I don't hate conservatives. I dislike the policies they advocate for, but I more pity sycophants like you who aren't willing to open their eyes to how the RNC and the conservative talking heads play you and use race for political gain.

 

I knew once I posted this, that you would show up with the aryan nation talking points about how i hate white people.

Edited January 15, 2014 by Langston Hughes

[BlackHorse]

 

You do live in a fantasy world. I don't hate white people and other than a few specific people I don't hate conservatives. I dislike the policies they advocate for, but I more pity sycophants like you who aren't willing to open their eyes to how the RNC and the conservative talking heads play you and use race for political gain.

 

I knew once I posted this, that you would show up with the aryan nation talking points about how i hate white people.

 

I'm about as white power as Kanye West is. You on the other hand have espoused your hatred for white people numerous times on this forum so don't try to act like you haven't now.

[FiredMotorCompany]

 

 

So your saying that registration is the problem not voter ID then???

 

You can not vote under your registered name more than once which is what I said.

 

DOI undercover agents showed up at 63 polling places last fall and pretended to be voters who should have been turned away by election officials; the agents assumed the names of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail. In 61 instances, or 97 percent of the time, the testers were allowed to vote

 

Doesn't seem to be anything in there about people voting twice under the same name.

 

It seems voter fraud is easy. And 97%effective.

 

Oh, I bet photo I.D. might have stopped a few.

[FiredMotorCompany]

 

You do live in a fantasy world. I don't hate white people and other than a few specific people I don't hate conservatives. I dislike the policies they advocate for, but I more pity sycophants like you who aren't willing to open their eyes to how the RNC and the conservative talking heads play you and use race for political gain.

 

I knew once I posted this, that you would show up with the aryan nation talking points about how i hate white people.

Of course you don't hate white people. You're white.

[TomServo92]

So your saying that registration is the problem not voter ID then???

 

You can not vote under your registered name more than once which is what I said.

 

Yes, you are that stupid. It's not registration. Without an ID to prove identity, you can vote in place of any registered voter. For instance, the recently deceased or the infirmed elderly. It is possible for someone to forge an ID so nothing is foolproof. However it will weed out most of those voting multiple times.

[phil1336]

This entire matter is simply a Red Herring and a continued effort of attempting to continued Voter Suppression and you damn well know it. Voter (fraud) has never proved to have changed the outcome of any recent Election results, period! The matter of Picture Voter ID is bias against the young, old, and minorities because of the (select) Picture ID`s that are approved as Valid in most Red States. If you want to bring back Jim Crow Laws, lets do it the correct way. Reinstate Poll Taxes and more importantly "literacy tests"! Lets see how many Southern Red Necks like those from Honey Boo Boo`s Family and Duck Dynasty will pass. Want to include those Moonshiners from Kentucky and West Virginia too? In that way, you will not only thin the (herd) of Black, Browns, and other Minorities from exercising their Right to Vote but a large portion of Racist White Bigots that are just as impoverished and illiterate as the Minorities that they fear will Vote Democrat. By the way, was it just a coincidence that the entire South that were stead fast Democrats (Dixiecrats) South of the Mason-Dixon Line all the way through Texas suddenly became Conservative Republicans after LBJ pushed through Civil Rights Legislation? So refreshing to know that America is now "Post Racial" and the electing of a (2) Term MIxed race President who`s Father was a Kenyan and who`s Mother was a Milk Moustache Mid-Western White Woman as well as her (entire) Family, both on the Paternal and Maternal sides, all from Kansas and Caucasian as well. Whats the next "Aryan" test that will be used to question the validity of our next President? How about Certification that they were either direct descendants of The Daughters of The American Revolution or The Sons of Liberty? Proof they came off The Mayflower too?

Edited January 15, 2014 by phil1336

[akirby]

It's not a Red Herring and you cannot say that voter fraud has never changed the outcome of an election. The only way you could say that is if every vote in every election had been verified. Given that some elections are decided by just a few votes it's totally naive to believe that voter fraud has not and could not affect the outcome of an election.

 

And please explain exactly how it's "voter suppression" to require an ID that almost everyone already has and that is available FREE to anyone else who doesn't already have one? It's bullshit, plain and simple. It doesn't stop anyone from voting - it simply ensures that every person who votes is who they say they are, that they're registered and allowed to vote and that they're voting in the correct location and that they're not allowed to vote more than once.

[NickF1011]

 

 

Bullshit. In your mind everything is about trying to keep minorities down because you can't get around your own pathetic hatred of white people.

 

If it wasn't for the minorities being down, Democrats wouldn't have a voter base. It would seem based on that premise, Republicans would want to do absolutely everything possible to lift up minorities, not keep them down so they keep voting for their opponents.

[RangerM]

 

.....minorities being down.....keep them down......

What makes minorities "down"?

 

I can name several minorities who aren't just NOT down, but are above average (in wealth, education, etc).

[akirby]

In Georgia, one of the first states to require voter id, minority voting actually went UP significantly, not down. There is absolutely no evidence that requiring voter id represses voting. THAT is a red herring.

[TomServo92]

In Georgia, one of the first states to require voter id, minority voting actually went UP significantly, not down. There is absolutely no evidence that requiring voter id represses voting. THAT is a red herring.

I'm sure they won't let facts get in the way of their narrative...

[Langston Hughes]

Of course you don't hate white people. You're white.

 

Duh! Tell that to as not white as Kanye there.

[Langston Hughes]

In Georgia, one of the first states to require voter id, minority voting actually went UP significantly, not down. There is absolutely no evidence that requiring voter id represses voting. THAT is a red herring.

 

 

I'm sure they won't let facts get in the way of their narrative...

 

Facts??? It's a fact that voter turnout increased, but once again you fall into the trap of thinking that you made a case for "Cause".

 

"correlation is not causation"

 

Any good student of Statistics 101 will tell you that correlation does not imply causation. Apparently, many voter ID supporters never got the memo.

Two and a half years ago, Justin Levitt wrote on this blog about how some proponents of voter ID requirements were asserting that stringent ID laws in Georgia and Indiana did not depress turnout in 2008. Those proponents thought they had found their magic bullet: turnout in Georgia and Indiana was higher in 2008 than in 2004, despite the implementation of strict ID laws in the interim.

Mr. Levitt gave them a simple statistics lesson. Even if turnout increases at the same time as the adoption of a new voter ID law, there may be something other than the voter ID law - Mr. Levitt identified campaign mobilization, in particular - that caused the turnout increase. In other words, correlation does not imply causation.

Bad statistical practices - like old habits - die hard. Supporters of voter ID requirements are at it again, this time misinterpreting a new set of election results in Georgia. In response to E.J. Dionne's Washington Post column on vote suppression efforts across the United States, Georgia's Secretary of State wrote to the Post's editors about how an increase in black turnout between 2006 and 2010 showed that voter ID laws do not suppress turnout. Hans von Spakovsky repeated the assertion on NPR and in USA Today, and Ohio House Speaker William Batchelder picked up the same message in defending Ohio's proposed voter ID requirement. Citing the Georgia statistics in a see-this-couldn't-be-that-bad sort of way has become a central talking point among proponents of voter ID laws.

Once again, these proponents have mistaken simple correlation for causation. You don't need to be a statistician to know that without controlling for other factors that might influence turnout, the assertion that Georgia's voter ID requirement didn't depress turnout is meaningless -- at best unscientific, at worst just plain wrong. [brennan Center For Justice, 7/6/11]

 

 

I spoke with Charles S. Bullock III, the Richard B. Russell Professor of Political Science at the University of Georgia who said that the state’s voter ID law “is not a cause” for the increase in minority voter turnout and “that you can’t build a case for a causal link” between the implementation of the voter ID law and the increase in minority voter turnout. In fact, voter turnout would have increased in Georgia in the 2008 presidential election with or without the voter ID law for a number of other factors, says Lubbock, including a “gradual increase” in the voting-age population of African Americans, and also the excitement around the possible election of the nation’s first black president. But this does not mean that everyone was able to “easily” get an ID card.

“Obama’s candidacy was certainly a major factor in promoting” voter participation in 2008 says Lubbock. But also the unprecedented numbers of black voters registered for the 2008 elections in Georgia was a significant factor. Says Lubbock: “There was a huge increase in black registration in Georgia [for the 2008 elections] also. The Obama campaign began to register African Americans early on in December of 2007 in anticipation of the Georgia primary, which came early that year [super Tuesday, February 5] and their aggressive voter registration efforts continued all the way up to when the books closed in October 2008.”

this is consistent with the conclusion reached in the academic study “Achieving Validation: Barack Obama and Black Turnout in 2008,” by M. V. Hood III of the University of Georgia and Seth C. McKee of the University of South Florida. In that study, published in a recent edition of State Politics & Policy Quarterly, they state that almost a quarter of the record high black turnout in the state “is due to the mobilization of new voters in the year prior to the election. In addition, the mobilization efforts of the Obama campaign are also evident among registrants who had not participated in the 2004 presidential contest.”

The Increase in Georgia’s minority voter turnout was due to large increases in voter registration and the excitement around the Obama campaign, despite the voter ID law, but not because of it. And while Von Spakovsky argues that the turnout increase for African Americans “far outpaced the growth rate” of their total population, he uses the 10-year Census period (2000-2010) growth rate to measure against voter turnout growth between 2004 and 2008. It’s a flawed statement to say that growth in voter turnout “far outpaces” total population growth when using two different baselines. But if you’re going to use the 10-year baseline, total population growth isn’t what you measure by — you measure by the total voting-age population, which for African Americans was almost 31%

 

.

Once again we have conservatives letting evidence get in the way of their narrative.

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2014 by Langston Hughes

[napfirst]

 

 

 

 

Facts??? It's a fact that voter turnout increased, but once again you fall into the trap of thinking that you made a case for "Cause".

 

"correlation is not causation"

 

 

.

Once again we have conservatives letting evidence get in the way of their narrative.

 

 

 

 

"correlation is not causation"

[NickF1011]

What makes minorities "down"?

 

I can name several minorities who aren't just NOT down, but are above average (in wealth, education, etc).

 

I was speaking in generalizations. Call me racist for it if you want. You know exactly what I meant.