"Blue wave" a "Tsunami" or a "ripple"?

Jul 2011
44,458
7,710
NYC
It is racist because it's driven not by a desire to respond to a material problem (in-person voting fraud is so incredibly rare that the likelihood of it ever tilting an election is basically non-existent), but rather by a desire to disproportionately suppress voting among certain classes of people, including racial minorities.



What makes you think I believe white people are more capable than black people "in [sic] obtaining id [sic]"?




How does it disproportionately suppress voting among racial minorities?


You are talking in circles.
 
Jul 2011
44,458
7,710
NYC
House Democrats now hold the majority, in spite of gerrymandering and voter suppression, so they'll do as they damned well please. It was a huge win for the Democrats. It was a huge loss for Republicans. Nobody really expected the Democrats to win the Senate this year, but 2020 will be much more favorable for them.

Gerrymandering?


Like they did to peter king?
 
Jul 2011
44,458
7,710
NYC
Because that's the only exit door in this reoccurring video game of an argument.

You point out statistical truth of whose life is most affected by voter ID and suddenly your Republican opponent pretends to care about the "feelings" of black people.

"Color blind society" is about as sincere as "right to work."
Communists like you only care about blacks and minorities from your white towns and neighborhoods.
 
Sep 2017
3,705
4,636
Massachusetts
Because that's the only exit door in this reoccurring video game of an argument.

You point out statistical truth of whose life is most affected by voter ID and suddenly your Republican opponent pretends to care about the "feelings" of black people.

"Color blind society" is about as sincere as "right to work."
Well said. Presumably they'd instantly spot the dis-ingenuousness (or stupidity) of the argument, if we simply turned it around and applied a similar argument against a group they favor. For example, picture if Democrats were pushing to disallow military IDs as acceptable voter ID, and when Republicans objected to that patently partisan gambit, Democrats pretended to believe that Republicans were saying military personnel were not smart enough to get other allowed forms of ID. Surely, in that case, these same right-wingers would see right through such a ridiculous debate tactic.
 
Jul 2011
44,458
7,710
NYC
Well said. Presumably they'd instantly spot the dis-ingenuousness (or stupidity) of the argument, if we simply turned it around and applied a similar argument against a group they favor. For example, picture if Democrats were pushing to disallow military IDs as acceptable voter ID, and when Republicans objected to that patently partisan gambit, Democrats pretended to believe that Republicans were saying military personnel were not smart enough to get other allowed forms of ID. Surely, in that case, these same right-wingers would see right through such a ridiculous debate tactic.

FAIL

Military ID is a valid form of ID that is used by military members of all races sex, colors and creed. everyone in the military gets one. It is actually more valid than a state ID. It has nothing to do with capability to get a state ID.


Dumb comparison..
 
Sep 2017
3,705
4,636
Massachusetts
How does it disproportionately suppress voting among racial minorities?
For starters, racial minorities are disproportionately likely to live in urban areas, and to be poorer, and to be younger, and those who live in urban areas, those who are poorer, and those who are younger are all disproportionately less likely to have a valid driver's license. Thus, white people are more likely to start from a position where they can vote without having to take any additional steps to get a qualifying form of ID, because they're already carrying one around with them.

This shouldn't be hard for you to understand, if you stop and think it through. For example, imagine an alternate voter-ID law, where you need to get qualifying ID to vote, but the only forms of ID (other than the special voter ID) that qualify are current student IDs issued by state universities and high schools, and IDs issued for receipt of public benefits. That would mean that young people and poor people would be disproportionately likely to be in a position where they need take no additional steps to have qualifying voter ID, while older people and wealthier people would need to jump through a hoop to qualify. That would disproportionately suppress the vote of older and wealthier people, hurting Republicans.

Obviously, if you were to object to that alternate voter-ID law, on the grounds that it would disproportionately suppress Republican turnout, I'd sound like a complete idiot if I pretended that by making that objection you were asserting that Republicans were less capable of getting ID.

You are talking in circles.
As you can see, I was doing no such thing. You'd just never thought it through before.
 
Likes: Babba
Sep 2017
3,705
4,636
Massachusetts
FAIL

Military ID is a valid form of ID that is used by military members of all races sex, colors and creed. everyone in the military gets one. It is actually more valid than a state ID. It has nothing to do with capability to get a state ID.


Dumb comparison..
Reread. Nothing I wrote is addressed in any way by your reply. My point wasn't to knock the validity of military ID, nor to argue that it isn't used by members of different races, etc. My point was that conservatives would be more capable of spotting the foolishness of the "your'e saying they're too dumb to get ID" rhetoric, when it's turned about against a group like the military.
 
Jul 2011
44,458
7,710
NYC
For starters, racial minorities are disproportionately likely to live in urban areas, and to be poorer, and to be younger, and those who live in urban areas, those who are poorer, and those who are younger are all disproportionately less likely to have a valid driver's license. Thus, white people are more likely to start from a position where they can vote without having to take any additional steps to get a qualifying form of ID, because they're already carrying one around with them.

So there are no poor whites. in the city or elsewhere? you live a sheltered life.

This shouldn't be hard for you to understand, if you stop and think it through. For example, imagine an alternate voter-ID law, where you need to get qualifying ID to vote, but the only forms of ID (other than the special voter ID) that qualify are current student IDs issued by state universities and high schools, and IDs issued for receipt of public benefits. That would mean that young people and poor people would be disproportionately likely to be in a position where they need take no additional steps to have qualifying voter ID, while older people and wealthier people would need to jump through a hoop to qualify. That would disproportionately suppress the vote of older and wealthier people, hurting Republicans.

So you are comparing getting an id from a college you don't attend with walking into a dmv?

Obviously, if you were to object to that alternate voter-ID law, on the grounds that it would disproportionately suppress Republican turnout, I'd sound like a complete idiot if I pretended that by making that objection you were asserting that Republicans were less capable of getting ID.
I agree with what you sound like,.


[quote[
As you can see, I was doing no such thing. You'd just never thought it through before.[/QUOTE]



You still have not adequetly explained how black people as you believe are less capable than white people in obtaining id
 
Sep 2017
3,705
4,636
Massachusetts
So there are no poor whites.
What makes you think that?

So you are comparing getting an id from a college you don't attend with walking into a dmv?
No, obviously I made no such comparison. What made you imagine I did?

You still have not adequetly explained how black people as you believe are less capable than white people in obtaining id
You're fixated on asking me to defend a position I have never taken. I have never said black people are less capable than white people of obtaining ID. So, why do you keep asking me to explain how that's true? It would be like me whining that you have yet to adequately explain how rainbows taste like peanut butter. Since you've never claimed that rainbows taste like peanut butter, I'd sound like an idiot if I kept asking you to explain such a claim, even after you'd repeatedly explained you were making no such claim.
 

Similar Discussions