Republicans and voter surpression!


Good take on Ga voter law from a black man.....

Almost two weeks ago, Gov. Brian Kemp signed SB 202 into law. It was an election reform bill that Democrats effectively branded as “racist,” “voter suppression” and “anti-civil rights.”
The law expands early voting for primary and general elections, includes more voting on Saturdays and Sundays, and requires voter ID.

Only in the world of radical liberalism can more of an opportunity to do something be “suppression”; requiring one to prove they are who they say they are as “racism”; and applying the same rules to everyone as “anti-civil rights.”
 
How do you convince a group of people a law that was just passed in the United States has racist intent, when you can't convince them that a law that was written 60 years go by a Segregationist in the segregated south, that has admitted (20 years later) he had a racial intent when writing it, has racist intent??? The answer, you don't,
Exactly!!!
 

Good take on Ga voter law from a black man.....

Almost two weeks ago, Gov. Brian Kemp signed SB 202 into law. It was an election reform bill that Democrats effectively branded as “racist,” “voter suppression” and “anti-civil rights.”
The law expands early voting for primary and general elections, includes more voting on Saturdays and Sundays, and requires voter ID.

Only in the world of radical liberalism can more of an opportunity to do something be “suppression”; requiring one to prove they are who they say they are as “racism”; and applying the same rules to everyone as “anti-civil rights.”

It removed Raffensperger from the electoral process and allows the legislature to replace any local election officials at any time. These changes would have made it possible to completely change the election results. It also allows anyone to challenge a ballot as many times as they want. If these things had been the law during the 20 election Trump would have been able to cheat and today would be President. Stop ignoring the entire law and just cherry-picking voter ID.
 
It removed Raffensperger from the electoral process and allows the legislature to replace any local election officials at any time. These changes would have made it possible to completely change the election results. It also allows anyone to challenge a ballot as many times as they want. If these things had been the law during the 20 election Trump would have been able to cheat and today would be President. Stop ignoring the entire law and just cherry-picking voter ID.
Trump's loss was that narrow that it solely came down to Georgia?
 
The SoS in Georgia saying outloud he does not want college kids to vote....meanwhile half of America suport Dwayne Johnson for President

" "

He's not wrong. College aged kids don't know enough to be voting. It's his opinion though not policy.

He is also from Mississippi not Georgia. I understand they are all rednecks to betas from mason.
 
He's not wrong. College aged kids don't know enough to be voting. It's his opinion though not policy.

He is also from Mississippi not Georgia. I understand they are all rednecks to betas from mason.
Context matters. He was worried about a recent Biden executive order and thought that it would automatically register college students to vote without them making any effort to do so other than signing up for class. His response was in regards to that. It wasn't a blanket "college kids shouldn't vote." He was concerned about college kids who otherwise aren't informed and having no inclination to make themselves informed being forced to be registered, and possibly have mail-in ballots automatically sent to them.

FWIW, he was wrong about the EO. There was nothing in it that would force states to register college students.
 
College kids usually come from bad homes and are dumb. Republicans prefer the uneducated.
You spelled democrats wrong.

College kids aren't dumb. They just don't pay attention to the topics enough to have a reasonable opinion. They get excited about free stuff and are easily swayed so they can be "woke" which is why you ladies love them so much.
 
You spelled democrats wrong.

College kids aren't dumb. They just don't pay attention to the topics enough to have a reasonable opinion. They get excited about free stuff and are easily swayed so they can be "woke" which is why you ladies love them so much.

Nazis, supremacists, militia boys, Q believers, flat earthers, covid hoaxers, climate deniers, who think Trump actually won think so because they pay attention. Yeah ok. That takes a special kind of stupid and teens ain't there yet.
 
Nazis, supremacists, militia boys, Q believers, flat earthers, covid hoaxers, climate deniers, who think Trump actually won think so because they pay attention. Yeah ok. That takes a special kind of stupid and teens ain't there yet.
Nazis. Lol. If that is what you're leading with no point talking any longer.

Derp
 
College kids usually come from bad homes and are dumb. Republicans prefer the uneducated.
Democrats cannot win without the votes of the ignorant. That is why Democrats support voting rights for children, non-citizens, felons, and the chemically dependent mentally ill.
 
Democrats cannot win without the votes of the ignorant. That is why Democrats support voting rights for children, non-citizens, felons, and the chemically dependent mentally ill.

"I love the poorly educated."

DJT, 2/24/16.

And this board loves him right back. :)
 
"I love the poorly educated."

DJT, 2/24/16.

And this board loves him right back. :)
“I want to thank the sec the the uh the former general I keep calling him general my my uh the guy who runs the outfit over there …”

Congrats. You voted for this guy. I would say he loves you back but he isn't aware enough to realize he is president.
 
Sorry for the length of the article from WSJ. It wouldn't let you read it unless you had a subscription and not sure how many have one. This is a thoughtful writing by Jason Riley, a black man. Worth the read.


The Democrats Are Stuck in 1964
By constantly invoking the ghost of Jim Crow, they treat black voters as if they were helpless children.

Like many of our racial debates of late, the discussion about voting rights has a certain broken-record aspect to it. Republicans call for voter restrictions in the name of ballot integrity, while Democrats pretend that it’s still 1964.

That was the year before Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, which might be the greatest achievement of the civil-rights movement. In 1964 only 6% of blacks in Mississippi were registered to vote, the lowest percentage in the region. Two years later, that number had climbed to 60%, the highest in the South. “In every southern state, the gains were striking,” wrote the late political scientist Abigail Thernstrom. “Sometimes good legislation works precisely as initially intended.”
In 1970, there were fewer than 1,500 black elected officials in the U.S. Today there are more than 10,000, and they have included mayors of large cities with significant black populations—Cleveland, Philadelphia, New York, Los Angeles, Detroit, Washington—as well as governors, congressmen, senators, a twice-elected black president and the current vice president. Black voter registration in the South, where most blacks live, is higher than in other parts of the country and, in Mississippi and Georgia, black voter turnout has outpaced white turnout.
Ideally, this history would inform media discussions of “voter suppression” and “disenfranchisement,” but it seldom does. Nor does evidence of increased black voter participation, including in states with stricter voting requirements, stop the left from invoking the ghost of Jim Crow.
After several states implemented more rigorous voter-identification requirements in the early 2000s, liberals cried foul and said the new laws would depress black turnout. Not only was the photo-ID requirement upheld as constitutional in a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling authored by liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, but in places such as Georgia and Indiana, minority voter turnout increased after the laws were passed. A 2007 Heritage Foundation study concluded that “respondents in photo identification and non-photo identification states are just as likely to report voting compared to respondents from states that only required voters to state their name.”

Blacks voted at a higher rate than whites in 2008 and 2012 despite these supposedly racist laws, and the trend predates the Obama presidential campaigns, according to the Census Bureau. “The 2012 increase in voting among blacks,” reads a 2013 census news release, “continues what has been a long-term trend: since 1996, turnout rates have risen 13 percentage points to the highest level of any recent presidential election.”
A 2013 Supreme Court decision, Shelby County v. Holder, cited current black voter data as a justification for lifting the Voting Rights Act requirement that states with a history of racially motivated voter intimidation have changes to voting procedures cleared by a federal court or the Justice Department. Once again, the political left claimed the end of the black franchise was nigh. It’s true that black voter turnout overall dipped in 2016—basically returning to pre-Obama levels—but if right-wing voter suppression efforts are to blame, what explains the Pew Research Center finding that in the 2018 midterm elections “all major racial and ethnic groups saw historic jumps in voter turnout”?

Earlier this year, Kyle Raze, a doctoral candidate in economics at the University of Oregon, produced a paper on how the Shelby decision affected the racial composition of the electorate. “Despite well-founded fears to the contrary,” he concludes, “the Shelby decision does not appear to have widened the turnout gap between black and white voters.”
Why treat the black electorate like helpless children? It’s clear that when blacks are sufficiently motivated, they have little trouble meeting the same requirements that other groups meet and casting a vote. Democrats continue to claim that Republicans are advocating modern-day poll taxes and literacy tests in disguise, even as evidence to the contrary continues to mount.

Actually, that’s not quite fair to Democrats. According to the polls, most Democrats—as well as most Republicans, liberals, conservatives, blacks and whites, don’t object to things like requiring people to prove who they say they are before voting. Liberal activists and their friends in the political press like to obsess over such things, but outside that bubble none of this is especially controversial.

In a saner political environment, Democrats and Republicans would stipulate both that Joe Biden won the presidency legitimately and that the pandemic election exposed significant flaws in our voting system that ought to be addressed in a bipartisan fashion as soon as possible. We have a closely divided House and Senate and a midterm election 19 months off. Yet in lieu of a sober discussion about voting procedures we have a surfeit of political posturing and scare-mongering, along with a president who believes, Trumplike, that his job description includes things like determining the location of Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game.
 
Sorry for the length of the article from WSJ. It wouldn't let you read it unless you had a subscription and not sure how many have one. This is a thoughtful writing by Jason Riley, a black man. Worth the read.


The Democrats Are Stuck in 1964
By constantly invoking the ghost of Jim Crow, they treat black voters as if they were helpless children.

Like many of our racial debates of late, the discussion about voting rights has a certain broken-record aspect to it. Republicans call for voter restrictions in the name of ballot integrity, while Democrats pretend that it’s still 1964.

That was the year before Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, which might be the greatest achievement of the civil-rights movement. In 1964 only 6% of blacks in Mississippi were registered to vote, the lowest percentage in the region. Two years later, that number had climbed to 60%, the highest in the South. “In every southern state, the gains were striking,” wrote the late political scientist Abigail Thernstrom. “Sometimes good legislation works precisely as initially intended.”
In 1970, there were fewer than 1,500 black elected officials in the U.S. Today there are more than 10,000, and they have included mayors of large cities with significant black populations—Cleveland, Philadelphia, New York, Los Angeles, Detroit, Washington—as well as governors, congressmen, senators, a twice-elected black president and the current vice president. Black voter registration in the South, where most blacks live, is higher than in other parts of the country and, in Mississippi and Georgia, black voter turnout has outpaced white turnout.
Ideally, this history would inform media discussions of “voter suppression” and “disenfranchisement,” but it seldom does. Nor does evidence of increased black voter participation, including in states with stricter voting requirements, stop the left from invoking the ghost of Jim Crow.
After several states implemented more rigorous voter-identification requirements in the early 2000s, liberals cried foul and said the new laws would depress black turnout. Not only was the photo-ID requirement upheld as constitutional in a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling authored by liberal Justice John Paul Stevens, but in places such as Georgia and Indiana, minority voter turnout increased after the laws were passed. A 2007 Heritage Foundation study concluded that “respondents in photo identification and non-photo identification states are just as likely to report voting compared to respondents from states that only required voters to state their name.”

Blacks voted at a higher rate than whites in 2008 and 2012 despite these supposedly racist laws, and the trend predates the Obama presidential campaigns, according to the Census Bureau. “The 2012 increase in voting among blacks,” reads a 2013 census news release, “continues what has been a long-term trend: since 1996, turnout rates have risen 13 percentage points to the highest level of any recent presidential election.”
A 2013 Supreme Court decision, Shelby County v. Holder, cited current black voter data as a justification for lifting the Voting Rights Act requirement that states with a history of racially motivated voter intimidation have changes to voting procedures cleared by a federal court or the Justice Department. Once again, the political left claimed the end of the black franchise was nigh. It’s true that black voter turnout overall dipped in 2016—basically returning to pre-Obama levels—but if right-wing voter suppression efforts are to blame, what explains the Pew Research Center finding that in the 2018 midterm elections “all major racial and ethnic groups saw historic jumps in voter turnout”?

Earlier this year, Kyle Raze, a doctoral candidate in economics at the University of Oregon, produced a paper on how the Shelby decision affected the racial composition of the electorate. “Despite well-founded fears to the contrary,” he concludes, “the Shelby decision does not appear to have widened the turnout gap between black and white voters.”
Why treat the black electorate like helpless children? It’s clear that when blacks are sufficiently motivated, they have little trouble meeting the same requirements that other groups meet and casting a vote. Democrats continue to claim that Republicans are advocating modern-day poll taxes and literacy tests in disguise, even as evidence to the contrary continues to mount.

Actually, that’s not quite fair to Democrats. According to the polls, most Democrats—as well as most Republicans, liberals, conservatives, blacks and whites, don’t object to things like requiring people to prove who they say they are before voting. Liberal activists and their friends in the political press like to obsess over such things, but outside that bubble none of this is especially controversial.

In a saner political environment, Democrats and Republicans would stipulate both that Joe Biden won the presidency legitimately and that the pandemic election exposed significant flaws in our voting system that ought to be addressed in a bipartisan fashion as soon as possible. We have a closely divided House and Senate and a midterm election 19 months off. Yet in lieu of a sober discussion about voting procedures we have a surfeit of political posturing and scare-mongering, along with a president who believes, Trumplike, that his job description includes things like determining the location of Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game.


Yes invoking Jim Crow was stupid and not helpful . This doesn't mean that the many states main goal is to make it harder to vote and realize that the key to winning general elections especially is LESS voting and turnout in Urban democrat areas. See 2016 . LOW turnout in key swing state urban areas . 2020 LARGE turnout . What to do ? We can't have that . Make it harder to vote , LOOONNNGGGG lines in some areas and more restrictions . Not that hard to see . Then again 60 percent of Republicans feel the election was stolen becasue someone told them it was . So that's what they see .
 

Outrage from Democrats, corporations and Major League Baseball about voter identification requirements and Georgia's "Election Integrity Act of 2021" feels like leftovers reheated for the third time. Whenever Republicans propose commonsense voter ID measures to help safeguard our elections, liberals react by shouting that it is voter suppression and Jim Crow 2.0.

These claims are false, and they distract from the real issues of promoting election integrity and preventing fraud.

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, notes, "Virtually every person of voting age already has such IDs, and those who do not can easily get them. Every state with an ID requirement issues a free ID to anyone who doesn't already have one. Despite the empty howls of 'repression,' states that have implemented ID requirements have seen turnout go up, not down."
Arguing voter ID is a form of voter suppression is a smokescreen designed to muddle the debate. Instead of lecturing us with false arguments, Democrats should listen to Black and Latino voters who support ID requirements because they understand we need to take simple steps to protect the sanctity of the ballot box.
 
Yes invoking Jim Crow was stupid and not helpful . This doesn't mean that the many states main goal is to make it harder to vote and realize that the key to winning general elections especially is LESS voting and turnout in Urban democrat areas. See 2016 . LOW turnout in key swing state urban areas . 2020 LARGE turnout . What to do ? We can't have that . Make it harder to vote , LOOONNNGGGG lines in some areas and more restrictions . Not that hard to see . Then again 60 percent of Republicans feel the election was stolen becasue someone told them it was . So that's what they see .
PATHETICACTAULLY :ROFLMAO: ? ?
 
PATHETICACTAULLY :ROFLMAO: ? ?

Yes you described your reply aptly. Nicw work. Did you get the mail yet? lmao , big event of a typical day for you it seems. Shouldn't you be running off to defend your little buddy LBF? Oh yeah, no need . You guys stay safe in a right wing echo chamber. Brave .
 
I never watch Tucker live on TV. Who am I kidding ? WRONG as usual . I see a short clip online when he says something particularly obnoxious which is happening with more frequency . { I don'[t watch TV most nights , certainly not that loser} He also doesn;t hide his disgust with a more 'Mixed" demo. He is on record as saying that this HURTS society's . He's a hero of yours. Makes sense .
 
Top