- Joined
- Jan 31, 2015
- Messages
- 5,435
- Reaction score
- 1,675
- Location
- PA
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
The judge who wrote the decision said “The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision”
That was because the law considered drivers licences and state IDs acceptable, but not government issued public assistance cards, which have never been recognised as a form of legal id.
So I ask you again, why do those of you on the left feel that it's too difficult for black people to obtain a drivers license, state ID, passport or military ID in order to vote, but don't think it's difficult for white people to do so?
I find it very telling that democrats have such a low opinion of black people, that they feel they aren't capable of obtaining a legal ID, of knowing what precinct they are supposed to vote in, see them as too lazy to register to vote before election day, and not responsible enough to show up on election day, therefore needing a week of election days.
So would someone explain to me again, why it is black people keep voting democrat?
.
Correct he said it targets them along with low income . . .odd you didn't talk about the many other things discussed. I wonder why????The rest of your idiotic assumption is a strawman because you made it up. What are you having trouble understanding? Your made up reasoning is NOT his reasoning or what they found hahaha try again. Do you honestly think anybody will fall for the amount of dishonesty in you post? You can ask your question 100 times it's still made up, you might want to actually look into the whole situation so you don't come of so ignorant and dishonest about this subject
When you have anything that supports this dishonest post below you let us know because the ignorance and dishonesty in it is completely imbecilic.
Those were are parts of the new law that were struck down. Since the reasoning for the law being struck down was that it discriminated against black people, I simply wanted to know why the left feels that they are discriminatory against black people?
I'm still waiting for you to explain why you feel that black people can't comply with them, but white people can?
I find it very telling that democrats have such a low opinion of black people, that they feel they aren't capable of obtaining a legal ID, of knowing what precinct they are supposed to vote in, see them as too lazy to register to vote before election day, and not responsible enough to show up on election day, therefore needing a week of election days.
So would someone explain to me again, why it is black people keep voting democrat?
.
So I see you can't support your asinine strawman you just think repeating that retardation will work, got it. You are sinking fast!! Incase you forgot I post that stupidity again. HAHAHA
Legislators quickly eliminated same-day voter registration, rolled back of a week of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. The appeals court’s ruling reinstates those provisions that civil rights groups, led by the state NAACP, said were used disproportionately by African American voters.
From the article:
Now since you support the ruling, there is no reason in the world why you can't answer my questions... Unless of course your support is just a political rubber stamp, rather than one of logic and reason. In that case, I would fully expect you to dodge the questions.
I simply want to know why you believe that black people are less capable than white people, of complying with those laws that were struck down?
.
I find it very telling that democrats have such a low opinion of black people, that they feel they aren't capable of obtaining a legal ID, of knowing what precinct they are supposed to vote in, see them as too lazy to register to vote before election day, and not responsible enough to show up on election day, therefore needing a week of election days.
So would someone explain to me again, why it is black people keep voting democrat?
.
Kid you already lost, your asinine post and the lies in it already got its ass handed to itself. Until you can explain the retardation in this post below you will continue to have nothing like other posters also pointed out.
Look, if you don't want to answer the questions, then just say so... There's no need for all the subterfuge.
Personally, I find that when a person refuses to answer questions about the things they believe in, it's usually because their beliefs aren't built on a solid foundation to begin with.
Have a nice evening.
Now since you support the ruling, there is no reason in the world why you can't answer my questions... Unless of course your support is just a political rubber stamp, rather than one of logic and reason. In that case, I would fully expect you to dodge the questions.
I simply want to know why you believe that black people are less capable than white people, of complying with those laws that were struck down?
If I pass a law that says everyone who owns a pickup truck has to get a new ID, I know that some % of them won't or can't by the next election. Has nothing to do with black versus white and who is more "capable" of doing some act. If I also find out farmers, being busy folks during the week, disproportionately use weekend early voting, so shut that down, everyone will get that I'm targeting farmers. If I also close down several hundred polling locations out in the boondocks and consolidate them in the cities for "money saving" reasons, no one would be confused that I'm hoping to skew the electorate from rural areas to city dwellers. Etc.
Yes, because the legislators deliberately targeted methods black people used to vote. The judges did NOT say that black people were incapable of doing other things, they simply said the legislators deliberately targeted the black vote.Read the ruling again and what the judge who wrote that ruling said. She clearly states that it is based on discriminating against black people.
.
Yes, because the legislators deliberately targeted methods black people used to vote. The judges did NOT say that black people were incapable of doing other things, they simply said the legislators deliberately targeted the black vote.
Your strawman argument that "the left" says black people are less capable than whites is a position lacking in any facts. The facts are the legislature deliberately targeted popular voting methods employed by black people and legislated against them, which is why the law was struck down. The judges did not evaluate whether black people could meet different standards, merely that the legislature targeted black methods.
False. Completely and utterly false.Look, if the law discriminates against black people, that means that the law requires things that white people have no problem adhering to, but black people do have a problem with.
Irrelevant to the point. No one said black people aren't capable of complying. That's not the point, you're literally making that up.I just want someone from the left who agrees with that decision, to tell me why it is that they feel black people aren't capable of complying with the same law that white people are?
Read the ruling again and what the judge who wrote that ruling said. She clearly states that it is based on discriminating against black people.
Look, if the law discriminates against black people, that means that the law requires things that white people have no problem adhering to, but black people do have a problem with.
I just want someone from the left who agrees with that decision, to tell me why it is that they feel black people aren't capable of complying with the same law that white people are?
Please don't bring up the government assistance card issue, because to my knowledge, those cards have never been accepted as a legal form of ID in any state.
False. Completely and utterly false.
Stop with the strawman and actually read the ruling. You'll say far fewer ignorant things. The problem is that the law legislated against the ways black people tend to vote. They said NOTHING about whether or not a black person could vote under new rules, the court simply said that legislating against something merely because of the color of skin of those who use it is wrong.
Irrelevant to the point. No one said black people aren't capable of complying. That's not the point, you're literally making that up.
How about you tell me why the legislature feels it is appropriate to limit the primary methods black people use to vote by not the methods used by white people? Is it because the legislators are afraid of the black vote? Is that why you don't want black people to vote, because you don't want black people to vote the way they wish to vote?
That sounds awfully racist.
Right. What's your point. Discriminating against someone doesn't mean they are incompetent idiots, but surely you understand that.
I gave the example about farmers - I can discriminate against them and believe they're as competent as blacks, or white soccer moms. It's you who's made up this straw man that discrimination is only possible if the group discriminated against is incompetent.
Exactly. They requested voting data by race and then legislated against multiple methods black people use to vote and ignored any method white people were more likely to vote, even if the white method has a history of voter fraud.The judge said “The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision”.
The law also removed part of the early voting period, removed forms of ID which were accepted for vote (actually, just removed forms black people were more likely to have), and "eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used."The law makes it mandatory for people to show a legal ID to vote.
No one said it was. You're the only one saying that. We're saying what the judges said, which is that the law deliberately targeted methods black people disproportionately used to vote. You're the only one trying to insist that black people can't obtain the ID.So the question is, why do some feel that obtaining a legal ID is too much for black people to comply with, but not white people?
If it was really about voter fraud, how come they changed this rule, which the state could not present a SINGLE case of in-person voter fraud being charged and NOT changed the rule on absentee voting, which HAS shown evidence of voter fraud? You know, the absentee voting that white people disproportionately use?To prevent voter fraud the legislature passed a law requiring that a person needs to present a legal ID to vote.
No one said it was. What the court said was it was unreasonable is to gather racial voting preferences and then change the legislation to legislate against ways black people disproportionately use to vote. Which is what North Carolina did.That brings me right back to the same question... Why is it unreasonable to expect black people to obtain a legal ID, especially when the state provides them free of charge for those who can't afford them?
You just think it's okay to find ways that black people tend to register and vote and then remove those methods. Right?Don't even go there... I am the furthest thing from a racist.
You're the only one saying that. No one else has. So if that sounds racist to you, why do you keep saying it?What sounds racist to me, is people who feel black people aren't capable of obtaining a legal ID like white people do, or need special provisions like early voting.
Exactly. They requested voting data by race and then legislated against multiple methods black people use to vote and ignored any method white people were more likely to vote, even if the white method has a history of voter fraud.
The law also removed part of the early voting period, removed forms of ID which were accepted for vote (actually, just removed forms black people were more likely to have), and "eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used."
I never said that, but anyone who believes that requiring a legal ID to vote is discriminatory toward black people, but not white people, obviously feels black people are less capable.
But they did obtain the data. And then used the data to restrict methods of registration and voting used predominantely by black people.In my opinion, whether the legislature intended to target black people or not, they should all be bounced to the curb based on the optics alone. Those idiots should have never obtained that data in the first place.
They were included in the legislation before the Shelby case was decided. They were then removed.Those government assistance IDs were never considered a legal form of identification
Do you believe you are incapable of addressing the facts of this case?1. Do you believe that requiring a legal ID to vote is unreasonable, even though the state will provide them free of charge for those who can't afford them?
2. Do you believe it is unreasonable to require people to register to vote prior to election day?
3. Do you believe it is unreasonable to require people to vote within their own districts? (this one being labeled as targeting black people is perplexing)
4. Do you believe it is unreasonable to require people to vote on election day (or in this case, having 10 days of early voting instead of 17)
5. Do you believe it's unreasonable to eliminate absentee ballots? (with the exception of active military)
No one cares. This isn't about you. This is about the court seeing the North Carolina legislature requesting racial voting preferences and then using that data to specifically target methods predominantly used by black people to register and vote and remove them. Stop thinking your answers matter at all.Here are my answers:
Much like others in this thread, I suspect it's about playing dumb to avoid making it obvious they are supporting racist actions.You're either deliberately missing the point or it's not possible for you to see it. At any rate, this is hopeless.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?