I say no because any skin color, or ethnicity, can have an ID. It is dishonest for the left to lie and say voter ID laws, are racist.
Are voter ID laws racist?
Posts
Total:
62
-->
@YeshuaBought
Just curious, is this stemming from fauxlaw and undefeatable's debate?
They aren't, just a common sense policy. Dems are all for extensive background checks and IDs up until it loses them some illegal votes.
This argument more than any makes the people who use it sound racist.
Like what are you trying to say? Black people are too stupid to get IDs?
For the record, most black people have IDs. For real, what made you think otherwise?
It's got nothing to do with standing up for blacks, it's a load of crap. Just like most of the racist white knight politicians and their bought out media propaganda machine.
They say getting IDs is expensive so lower income people can’t get them, so no voter id. Instead of that it would be more fruitful to say if you don’t have an ID, the govt can give it to you for free as long as you can prove citizenship
That depends on the motives of the person pushing for them. If there is already proof of ID required and you push for several more to be required, you are intentionally adding more hoops that people will have to jump through even though it adds no benefit. That is a blatant attempt at voter suppression. If you are aware that people of color are less likely to have additional ID and have more difficulty in obtaining additional ID, then you are knowingly engaging in voter suppression, and also know that the people most likely to be affected by it are people of color. At that point it becomes racist because you are intentionally trying to suppress the votes of people of color.
-->
@ILikePie5
as long as you can prove citizenship
big lol.
democrats rely on foreign meddling at the ballot box.
In some states they appear to have the reactionary effect of increased turnout, presumably even among people who didn't initially have an ID. To me that makes perfect sense, because of the headlines, and of course if you wouldn't afford a little time to get an ID, than you definitely haven't taken the time it takes to vote. Maybe a little investment upfront even made some people more enthusiastic for a year or two, hard to tell. It's only degrading if you talk about people as though they lack the agency and capacity to overcome what we expect of a 16 year old minor who's working their first job. One might argue that they're cumbersome or misinformed, but you can't really say much else.
-->
@Greyparrot
I love that video. How many black people, have genious level IQ? A LOT!
-->
@ILikePie5
I would have no problem, with subsadizing, IDs.
-->
@Greyparrot
I agree, Mr. Parrot. I am centrist, but I voted for President Trump, anyway.
-->
@YeshuaBought
I would have no problem, with subsadizing, IDs.
👍
In some states they appear to have the reactionary effect of increased turnout, presumably even among people who didn't initially have an ID. To me that makes perfect sense, because of the headlines, and of course if you wouldn't afford a little time to get an ID, than you definitely haven't taken the time it takes to vote. Maybe a little investment upfront even made some people more enthusiastic for a year or two, hard to tell.
I mean who wouldn't feel like turning out against the guy who just charged them $20? "Just what you don't need, and it'll cost twenty bucks" There's a slogan
Instead of that it would be more fruitful to say if you don’t have an ID, the govt can give it to you for free as long as you can prove citizenship
-->
@Conway
I have no problem with giving IDs for free to lower-income individuals. That being said it’s a complete disgrace how the DMV is run in certain states. It’s horrible.
As long as you also do things to make it easy for everyone to vote, then I have no issue with voter ID laws. We could do things like making IDs free. Making election day a national holiday so everyone has the ability to vote. etc.
As long as everyone has easy access to obtaining their IDs and easy access to voting, I have no issue with them. However, the people who push for these voter ID laws don't actually want that. They push for them knowing who it will keep from voting, that is why they are doing it. It is an attempt at voter suppression.
-->
@HistoryBuff
As long as everyone has easy access to obtaining their IDs and easy access to voting, I have no issue with them
Including foreigners and fraudsters? Ease of voting usually means unregulated voting.
-->
@Greyparrot
As long as everyone has easy access to obtaining their IDs and easy access to voting, I have no issue with themIncluding foreigners and fraudsters?
you will notice I specified easy access to their their IDs. IE, it is easy to get your own ID. That does not include it being easy for people to get IDs that are not theirs.
Ease of voting usually means unregulated voting.
no, you can put in checks and balances to prevent fraudulent voting. That is why there is no evidence that there has been significant amount of fraudulent voting. Trump started a commission to look into fraud from 2016. they found absolutely nothing. The idea that we need tighter laws to prevent fraud is a bad joke because there isn't much (if any) fraud to prevent. The only thing lose laws accomplish to suppress voter turnout. Which is exactly what they are designed to do.
-->
@HistoryBuff
no, you can put in checks and balances to prevent fraudulent voting
Then you sacrifice "ease of voting." You can't go around thinking you MUST make voting as easy as possible and also want a secure election.
You need a balance. Making voting as easy as possible has consequences.
-->
@Greyparrot
Then you sacrifice "ease of voting." You can't go around thinking you MUST make voting as easy as possible and also want a secure election.
you aren't making sense. Of course you can. You should make sure voting is secure and also make it is as easy as possible to vote. But there hasn't been any evidence presented that elections aren't secure. Trump formed a commission to try to prove that there is widespread fraud and accidentally proved there isn;t.
You need a balance. Making voting as easy as possible has consequences.
yeah, like having a larger portion of the electorate actual give their vote. something the republicans are desperate to prevent.
-->
@HistoryBuff
You should make sure voting is secure and also make it is as easy as possible to vote.
You can't have both things. If you make it easy as possible to vote, you also make it easy as possible for foreigners and fraudsters to vote as well.
What the hell do you think ballot harvesting is all about? It's far easier to have your vote ballot harvested than to show up in person at a voting booth with an ID.
You need a balance, not a tunnel-visioned principle to one side or the other.
There are consequences for making voting as easy as possible. Dire consequences as it turns out.
-->
@ILikePie5
I don't know much, about it. Thoughts?
-->
@Mopac
There is nothing racist, about asking for an ID. Don't play, the race card. You sound, like a leftist.
-->
@YeshuaBought
You structured the thread so that there is both a "Yes" and "No" context. It seems obvious that he's not referring to your argument, those that WANT people to get ID's
This argument more than any makes the people who use it sound racist.Like what are you trying to say? Black people are too stupid to get IDs?
It would be reasonable to assume for a moment, that maybe he's being critical of the argument "Yes, voter ID is racist". They DON'T want people will get ID's.
The reason people say "Yes, voter ID is racist" is because they've reasoned that it's "more difficult" for some people because of their race.
-->
@Greyparrot
You should make sure voting is secure and also make it is as easy as possible to vote.You can't have both things. If you make it easy as possible to vote, you also make it easy as possible for foreigners and fraudsters to vote as well.
that makes no sense. If you make ID's easy for people to legally get. require IDs to vote. and make voting easy to do (like by giving people the day off, having lots of polling sites, etc) then you can absolutely have secure elections where it is easy to vote.
It's far easier to have your vote ballot harvested than to show up in person at a voting booth with an ID.
true, because trying to actually vote in america (depending on where you are) can be extremely difficult. People have to go to work and can't stand in a line for 3 hours in order to vote. So make it easy enough to vote yourself, then things like ballot harvesting are not needed.
You need a balance, not a tunnel-visioned principle to one side or the other.
no one has ever suggested that we don't need balance. No one has ever suggested that we should not check who is voting.
There are consequences for making voting as easy as possible. Dire consequences as it turns out.
like what? there is no evidence that voter fraud on any kind of significant scale has happened despite trump trying hard to find it. So what are these dire consequences?
no evidence that voter fraud on any kind of significant scale...
It's significant enough to undermine trust in authority. That's a dire consequence to democracy no matter whatever corrupt party politician's balls you choose to lick.
The "my guy won, therefore no fraud" only works if you live in a vacuum.
-->
@Greyparrot
It's significant enough to undermine trust in authority. That's a dire consequence to democracy no matter whatever corrupt party politician's balls you choose to lick.
no, a conman telling people there is fraud is enough to undermine trust in authority. the truth is that no one has found any evidence such fraud exists, including trump's commission he set up to find it.
The "my guy won, therefore no fraud" only works if you live in a vacuum.
literally no one is saying that. They are saying, "there is no evidence of fraud, therefore no fraud". as opposed to republicans saying "my guy didn't win, so there must be fraud even though we have no evidence of it".
-->
@HistoryBuff
Apparently, the authorities in D.C. act as a shitty con man because D.C. lost the confidence of the public.
Everyone knows some fraud happened. Even if you have a personal opinion that it isn't significant.
It doesn't take much at all to topple the cardhouse of the public trust D.C. has destroyed by playing power games.
-->
@YeshuaBought
I'm pretty sure I said the opposite of whatever it is you think I said.
-->
@Greyparrot
Apparently, the authorities in D.C. act as a shitty con man because D.C. lost the confidence of the public.
i don't really know what you are referring to.
Everyone knows some fraud happened. Even if you have a personal opinion that it isn't significant.
so everyone "knows" something happened even though there is no evidence it happened. And lots of investigation has been done and no one can find any supporting evidence it happened. In this scenario, the people in that "everyone" category are either delusional, wildly misinformed or stupid.
It doesn't take much at all to topple the cardhouse of the public trust D.C. has destroyed by playing power games.
true, and trump's conspiracy theories are doing lots more damage. Even though they are all lies.