Appeals court strikes down North Carolina’s voter-ID law

[Donc]

That's probably one of the tougher States. Here in NJ, you know what I do? I walk in, tell them my name, they find it, and I sign. I could be anyone. The Democrat machine is very corrupt here, so I doubt that will change.

If I were you i'd complain to the gov...if/when you can find him in the state.

 

[LaylaWindu]

So why don't you explain to me why the left thinks it's too much to ask for Black people to vote in their own districts, but not too much to ask of white people?

Explain why the left feels that black people aren't capable of registering to vote prior to election day, but feel white people are?

Explain why democrats feel that unlike white people, black people can't be expected to vote on election day, so need an entire week to vote?

Finally, why is it such a difficult requirement for black people to obtain a drivers license, state ID, passport or military ID in order to vote, but not difficult for white people... especially since they are offering them for free for those who can't afford them?



If my post was really so ridiculous, then answering the above questions should be a breeze for you.

.

You're right it is a breeze, since nobody here said any of the stupidity you just tried to claim they did above the answer is you made it up. That's the hole reasons why you post was one of the most dishonest, ignorant and stupid posts I have read here. Now you can keep trying to defend the dishonest and completely moronic post you made but it won't stop it was from being completely made up and dishonest. :shrug: Facts are hard for you, we get it but nobody is fooled hahaha

 

[danarhea]

It’s not surprising when you have GOP precinct chairs like Don Yelton, of Buncombe County, North Carolina, on “The Daily spouting off **** like this.

“if it hurts a bunch of lazy blacks that want the government to give them everything, so be it.”

Well, I do give the GOP credit for kicking that dirtbag to the curb.

 

[Caine]

Jim Crow has just taken another hit. A Federal Court has concluded that North Carolina's Voter ID Act was designed solely to keep black folks out of the voting booth.

Article is here.

Jim Crow is too busy in India then I guess.

 

[Caine]

Legislators eliminated same-day voter registration, rolled back of a week of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. Exactly how does that discriminate against blacks? Are the judges saying that blacks are uniquely so disorganized and stupid that they can't adjust to these changes?

Don't forget...

Not only can they apparently not adjust to these changes, they can't do so with 3 years advanced warning.

 

[joG]

What could possibly make you conclude it's an either/or question?

But you've made your point. The REAL problem here is not that NC targeted the voting patterns of blacks, it's that the court took the case and struck down the results, which is "spreading hate" by the judges, unlike the white legislature targeting blacks, which is apparently Okee dokee. And slaves had it better than HALF the country back in the day, the reason blacks didn't succeed after the Civil War was their "culture" not Jim Crow and being violently repressed with the full backing of the government, and the CRA was a mistake.

Seems to be a pattern developing.

You didn't get it at all. But that was not to be suspected. It is after all one of you mythical cornerstones of the ideology you represent that is crumbly. That is always difficult to deal with other than by decrying the messenger.

 

[Grim17]

You're right it is a breeze, since nobody here said any of the stupidity you just tried to claim they did above the answer is you made it up. That's the hole reasons why you post was one of the most dishonest, ignorant and stupid posts I have read here. Now you can keep trying to defend the dishonest and completely moronic post you made but it won't stop it was from being completely made up and dishonest. :shrug: Facts are hard for you, we get it but nobody is fooled hahaha

That is exactly what the ruling indicates, that legally requiring those things for black people in order to vote discriminates against them, but doesn't discriminate against white people... and correct me if I'm wrong, but you support that ruling do you not?

So if my post was as moronic as you indicated, then why is it you won't address those questions I posed and explain why it is that you feel black people aren't able to comply, but white people are?

 

[American]

More Con whine and BS... when Barack won the national election Willard won North Carolina handily 76 to 32%. Only major urban areas went for Obama- that fits the historic voting pattern for most of America. Dems would have to count on far more than what Conservatives 'fear' to win such places like North Carolina...

But thanks for parroting false rabid right lies... eace

The only lies are those spreading the rumor that ID requirement keep people from voting.

 

[Moon]

They wanted the statistics so they could find out where blacks were the most vulnerable and then they passed laws specifically targeting those vulnerabilities.

That's your opinion. Do you have facts to back it up?

 

[JasperL]

You didn't get it at all. But that was not to be suspected. It is after all one of you mythical cornerstones of the ideology you represent that is crumbly. That is always difficult to deal with other than by decrying the messenger.

If you think I'm only decrying the messenger, you might respond to the very specific points I raise in response to your arguments.

In this instance, you said, "So it is about Republicans and Democrats and not civil rights? That is getting to the point. Very good!"

The "and not" indicates in your mind that it's an either/or question - it's about party politics/political power OR civil rights. Why do you think that it's an either/or question? It's a simple question and you should be able to answer it easily.

Of course in my own view it's both. Violations of civil rights are frequently if not almost always at least in part motivated by the pursuit of power. It's certainly completely asinine to conclude that because the motivation was, in whole or in part, political advantage that it therefore does not have civil rights implications.

 

[Moon]

Not worked up at all, kinda marveling at the willful ignorance. North Carolina went from opening up voting rights to restricting them... it's very simple. Why restrict the time to early vote? How is that helping anyone or anything?

ALL states have some sort of early voting, a dozen require an excuse, so once again you seem to struggle with the truth... :roll:

Some states have not EXPANDED their voting rights as much as others, North Carolina is RESTRICTING voting rights. You struggle with reality...

The firearms issue is about 'restricting'... do you see limiting mag cap as a restriction on that right? If a state has no limit on the size of the magazine then outlaws all above say 20 for rifles and 10 for pistols- has the firearms owner had their rights restricted???

So in NC having 10 days to vote is restricting a right, but another state with no early voting isn't restricting that right? So 17 days is the correct amount of early voting days? Why isn't 10 sufficient?

And try to keep the insults to a minimum if your able.

 

[JasperL]

That's your opinion. Do you have facts to back it up?

I'm not trying to be flippant here, but the facts are laid out in great detail in the opinion of the court, and have been discussed in quite a bit of detail in this thread.

 

[Moot]

That's your opinion. Do you have facts to back it up?

From the OP...

"... In North Carolina, for instance, the judges at oral arguments noted that government-issued driver’s licenses are an acceptable form of identification but that *government-issued public assistance cards — used disproportionately by minorities in the state — are not."


My opinion is based on the court's opinion. What is your opinion based on?

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

I'm pretty sure you shouldn't be admitting to knowingly be in violation of quite a few laws on DP.

I will be fine as long as Hillary does not get in and take away our right to due process. There is no evidence of a crime so the only thing is suspicion from a forum. The fact that it never happened will work in my favor until the democrats strip us of our rights on suspicion alone. I guess I could be in trouble if Hillary gets into office. She does not believe in due process. Then again if I am an illegal alien with no respect for our laws she might reward me with a citizenship. How do I go about becoming an illegal alien so I don't have to worry about our laws.

 

[Grim17]

From the OP...

"... In North Carolina, for instance, the judges at oral arguments noted that government-issued driver’s licenses are an acceptable form of identification but that *government-issued public assistance cards — used disproportionately by minorities in the state — are not."


My opinion is based on the court's opinion. What is your opinion based on?

Are those cards now, or have they ever been recognised by the state as a form of legal identification?

Have such cards ever been considered a form of legal ID in any state?

 

[Moot]

Are those cards now, or have they ever been recognised by the state as a form of legal identification?

Have such cards ever been considered a form of legal ID in any state?

Both are government issued ID's are they not? So why would a drivers license be the only acceptable form of ID and not the other?

 

[JasperL]

I will be fine as long as Hillary does not get in and take away our right to due process. There is no evidence of a crime so the only thing is suspicion from a forum. The fact that it never happened will work in my favor until the democrats strip us of our rights on suspicion alone. I guess I could be in trouble if Hillary gets into office. She does not believe in due process. Then again if I am an illegal alien with no respect for our laws she might reward me with a citizenship. How do I go about becoming an illegal alien so I don't have to worry about our laws.

OK, so you don't vote 3 times per cycle.... Thank goodness, was a little worried for your sanity there risking fines and jail time for nothing.

And illegal aliens are arrested on a regular basis for committing crimes, so becoming one isn't going to help you much unless the crime you want to commit is to come here illegally, and that would be weird.

 

[Slyfox696]

You are saying that to vote under the old law, they still had to provide ID?

Does this come as a shock to you? Ignoring for a moment I already posted that the expanded bill removed forms of ID, have you ever voted without having to provide either a voter registration card or ID? I always have.

 

[BWG]

If I craft the law so as to accept the IDs that a group of people who vote for me are most likely to have, and purposely push to disqualify the IDs of those who don't vote for me, I am by default ensuring that those who don't vote for me are disproportionately affected. Is this REALLY a hard concept for you to understand? Why are you being purposely obtuse?


Sent from a flower watered by the tears of Trump supporters and crazy newb liberals.

Or as the court wrote......"target African Americans with almost surgical precision"

 

[Grim17]

Both are government issued ID's are they not? So why would a drivers license be the only acceptable form of ID and not the other?

That's not what I asked you... The questions I asked were, are those cards now, or have they ever been recognised by the state as a form of legal identification? And have such cards ever been considered a form of legal ID in any state?

 

[AGENT J]

Well my "kneejerk" reaction to this is GOOD!!!!!!

But with that being said I have to admit that I do not know the actual NC law, it may have been a fine law or it may have been a terrible one that is in fact used to try and stop certain people from voting.

So ill state what I always state in voter ID law threads

I fully support voter ID laws 100% IF the law is about Voter ID . . .thats it.
The problem is typically theres lots of extras added or done at the same time.

Make the law JUST about voter ID and the super vast majority of the country supports it.

Make the ID free and readily available at government facilities or mobile units including the polling place and that it can be done same day (with proper steps just like my drivers license). Also make other forms of valid ID acceptable. State ID, drivers license, military ID passport etc.

thats it, end of law and just about everybody supports it.

as soon as the ID costs money, is hard to get or isn't and isnt easily accessible, or only one form of ID is acceptable then most people rightfully reject it.

but it doesnt stop there, at least those things still deal with ID . . .

the other things that get nonsensical bills quickly rejected or thrown out is because many change::

voting days and times
eliminate early voting, sunday voting, restrict absentee voting
change rules for student, military and elder voting
close down voting places or move them, redraw lines etc etc
none of that crap has anything to do with voter ID so again people rightfully and logically reject it.

Make the VOTER ID law about . . .wait for it . . . .VOTER ID and typically it passes right through.

Very simple solution to a basically non problem . . .
Calling it Jim Crow is over the top but its no surprass at all that people see it for what it is . . .an attempt to control votes in a certain direction. . .if it wasnt it would just be about ID . . the majority of times its not. . .

also let me repeat, im not familiar with the NC law so I don't know if it was about ID or the extra garbage that should be thrown out.

so I finally got around to looking at this specific bill. ANd it was just like I thought and just like I said. A bill that had VERY little to do with ID and a bunch of other crap in it.

It definitely should have been thrown out and the people that put it in place basically admit its about disenfranchising certain voters. My favorite part is they asked for stats/traits broken down by race then made their decisions LMAO

noooo thats not suspect at all.


Its obvious to anybody honest that this bill was about trying to control who votes. Anybody attempting to deny that is part of the problem. Both sides are guilty of this btw this is just an example of one side.

The solution is simple . . .the vast majority of americans support voter ID laws that are about . . .wait for it . . . . . . .ID lmao. Make it just about ID and not so close to any election and things pass with little to zero issues and stay passed.

include all that other BS in it and its a glaring red flag of dishonesty and manipulation..

 

[Grim17]

Nothing like a comedy show to derive one's political views... LMAO... Or should I have said "validate"?

 

[AGENT J]

Nothing like a comedy show to derive one's political views... LMAO... Or should I have said "validate"?

facts dont need your validation but you denying them is ALWAYS hilarious hence the common failure and mocking of your posts.

Im sure you would try to discredit the decision of the judges that prove your posts wrong too :laugh at:
Let us know when you can provide any facts or logic that goes against the appeals court decision
opcorn2:

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Nothing like a comedy show to derive one's political views... LMAO... Or should I have said "validate"?

Oh, was there something Oliver said that was inaccurate?

Please detail what you think he got wrong.

 

[Grim17]

Oh, was there something Oliver said that was inaccurate?

Please detail what you think he got wrong.

Liberal comedians don't interest me, much in the same way Jon Stewart didn't.