Voter ID and claims of fraud - Page 12 - Politics version 7.0 -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

You support laws that suppress their votes and you already stated these laws don't bother you even if the politicians who passed them did so intending for black votes to be suppressed. Pretty sure MLK would have a bone to pick with that!

04-05-2017 , 04:30 PM

#277

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,278

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

"Literacy tests are racist because their intent is to limit African American voting". "No we just want to make sure that people who vote understand who and what they're voting for": "Voter ID is racist because their intent is to limit African American voting". "No we just want to make sure to guard against fraud".

The thing is the literacy tests are just to make sure that people who vote understand what and who they're voting for had a stronger argument than the modern day voter fraud argument. There was a legitimate issue about African American (and white) illiteracy, unlike non existent voter fraud.

Yeah the only problem with your argument is that you have no proof voter fraud isn't an issue and of course your whole argument goes down the tube with out it.

04-05-2017 , 04:32 PM

#278

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,278

Quote:

Originally Posted by goofyballer

Like I have said 100 times: every law is racist if the threshold is that it effects one race more than another. I believe some laws you support are racist and suppress the black vote (ex: MW).

04-05-2017 , 04:34 PM

#279

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

Like I have said 100 times: every law is racist if the threshold is that it effects one race more than another.

Like we've said 100 times, including in the post you just responded to, that's not the only threshold being crossed here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by goofyballer

You support laws that suppress their votes and you already stated these laws don't bother you even if the politicians who passed them did so intending for black votes to be suppressed. Pretty sure MLK would have a bone to pick with that!

And you're okay with it, because you're not an ally for civil rights, at all.

04-05-2017 , 04:58 PM

#280

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

I just looked back and I credited you with a post from bert. I guess I am just so used to bert posting link after link after tweet that my mind couldn't accept the fact that bert learned how to post his own thoughts. Either way, I do apologize.

Your apologey sounds like a personal attack against someone else.

Quote:

I have known for a while crack was rock(s) and cocaine was a powder, but that was about all I knew about them. I have often wondered how you can possibly punishment people fairly for possession of all these different drugs considering how some are worse than others - it sounds like the answer is you don't. I've never seen any drug outside of pills and pot IRL.

Hard to understand what you wrote are you American?

But no I don't think drugs should be punished as a crime. As far as the diffreces in drug sentencing. Yes I think they have been unfair to AA and MLK would agree.

04-05-2017 , 06:04 PM

#281

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

Yeah the only problem with your argument is that you have no proof voter fraud isn't an issue and of course your whole argument goes down the tube with out it.

Quote:

Studies Agree: Impersonation Fraud by Voters Very Rarely Happens

The Brennan Center’s seminal report on this issue, The Truth About Voter Fraud, found that most reported incidents of voter fraud are actually traceable to other sources, such as clerical errors or bad data matching practices. The report reviewed elections that had been meticulously studied for voter fraud, and found incident rates between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent. Given this tiny incident rate for voter impersonation fraud, it is more likely, the report noted, that an American “will be struck by lightning than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls.”

A study published by a Columbia University political scientist tracked incidence rates for voter fraud for two years, and found that the rare fraud that was reported generally could be traced to “false claims by the loser of a close race, mischief and administrative or voter error.”

A 2017 analysis published in The Washington Post concluded that there is no evidence to support Trump’s claim that Massachusetts residents were bused into New Hampshire to vote.

A comprehensive 2014 study published in The Washington Post found 31 credible instances of impersonation fraud from 2000 to 2014, out of more than 1 billion ballots cast. Even this tiny number is likely inflated, as the study’s author counted not just prosecutions or convictions, but any and all credible claims.

Two studies done at Arizona State University, one in 2012 and another in 2016, found similarly negligible rates of impersonation fraud. The project found 10 cases of voter impersonation fraud nationwide from 2000-2012. The follow-up study, which looked for fraud specifically in states where politicians have argued that fraud is a pernicious problem, found zero successful prosecutions for impersonation fraud in five states from 2012-2016.

A review of the 2016 election found four documented cases of voter fraud.

Research into the 2016 election found no evidence of widespread voter fraud.

A 2016 working paper concluded that the upper limit on double voting in the 2012 election was 0.02%. The paper noted that the incident rate was likely much lower, given audits conducted by the researchers showed that “many, if not all, of these apparent double votes could be a result of measurement error.”

A 2014 paper concluded that “the likely percent of non-citizen voters in recent US elections is 0.”

A 2014 nationwide study found “no evidence of widespread impersonation fraud” in the 2012 election.

A 2014 study that examined impersonation fraud both at the polls and by mail ballot found zero instances in the jurisdictions studied.

A 2014 study by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office, which reflected a literature review of the existing research on voter fraud, noted that the studies consistently found “few instances of in-person voter fraud.”

While writing a 2012 book, a researcher went back 30 years to try to find an example of voter impersonation fraud determining the outcome of an election, but was unable to find even one.

A 2012 study exhaustively pulled records from every state for all alleged election fraud, and found the overall fraud rate to be “infinitesimal” and impersonation fraud by voters at the polls to be the rarest fraud of all: only 10 cases alleged in 12 years. The same study found only 56 alleged cases of non-citizen voting, in 12 years.

A 2012 assessment of Georgia’s 2006 election found “no evidence that election fraud was committed under the auspices of deceased registrants.”

A 2011 study by the Republican National Lawyers Association found that, between 2000 and 2010, 21 states had 1 or 0 convictions for voter fraud or other kinds of voting irregularities.

A 2010 book cataloguing reported incidents of voter fraud concluded that nearly all allegations turned out to be clerical errors or mistakes, not fraud.

A 2009 analysis examined 12 states and found that fraud by voters was “very rare,” and also concluded that many of the cases that garnered media attention were ultimately unsubstantiated upon further review.

The Fifth Circuit, in an opinion finding that Texas’s strict photo ID law is racially discriminatory, noted that there were “only two convictions for in-person voter impersonation fraud out of 20 million votes cast in the decade” before Texas passed its law.

In its opinion striking down North Carolina’s omnibus restrictive election law —which included a voter ID requirement — as purposefully racially discriminatory, the Fourth Circuit noted that the state “failed to identify even a single individual who has ever been charged with committing in-person voter fraud in North Carolina.”

A federal trial court in Wisconsin reviewing that state’s strict photo ID law found “that impersonation fraud — the type of fraud that voter ID is designed to prevent — is extremely rare” and “a truly isolated phenomenon that has not posed a significant threat to the integrity of Wisconsin’s elections.”

Even the Supreme Court, in its opinion in Crawford upholding Indiana’s voter ID law, noted that the record in the case “contains no evidence of any [in-person voter impersonation] fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history.” Two of the jurists who weighed in on that case at the time — Republican-appointed former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens and conservative appellate court Judge Richard Posner — have since announced they regret their votes in favor of the law, with Judge Posner noting that strict photo ID laws are “now widely regarded as a means of voter suppression rather than of fraud prevention.”
Government Investigations Agree: Voter Fraud Is Rare

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, a longtime proponent of voter suppression efforts, argued before state lawmakers that his office needed special power to prosecute voter fraud, because he knew of 100 such cases in his state. After being granted these powers, he has brought six such cases, of which only four have been successful. The secretary has also testified about his review of 84 million votes cast in 22 states, which yielded 14 instances of fraud referred for prosecution, which amounts to a 0.00000017 percent fraud rate.

Texas lawmakers purported to pass its strict photo ID law to protect against voter fraud. Yet the chief law enforcement official in the state responsible for such prosecutions knew of only one conviction and one guilty plea that involved in-person voter fraud in all Texas elections from 2002 through 2014.
A specialized United States Department of Justice unit formed with the goal of finding instances of federal election fraud examined the 2002 and 2004 federal elections, and were able to prove that 0.00000013 percent of ballots cast were fraudulent. There was no evidence that any of these incidents involved in-person impersonation fraud. Over a five year period, they found “no concerted effort to tilt the election.”

An investigation in Colorado, in which the Secretary of State alleged 100 cases of voter fraud, yielded one conviction.

In Maine, an investigation into 200 college students revealed no evidence of fraud. Shortly thereafter, an Elections Commission appointed by a Republican secretary of state found “there is little or no history in Maine of voter impersonation or identification fraud.”

In Florida, a criminal investigation into nine individuals who allegedly committed absentee ballot fraud led to all criminal charges being dismissed against all voters.

In 2012, Florida Governor Rick Scott initiated an effort to remove non-citizen registrants from the state’s rolls. The state’s list of 182,000 alleged non-citizen registrants quickly dwindled to 198. Even this amended list contained many false positives, such as a WWII veteran born in Brooklyn. In the end, only 85 non-citizen registrants were identified and only one was convicted of fraud, out of a total of 12 million registered voters.

In Iowa, a multi-year investigation into fraud led to just 27 prosecutions out of 1.6 million ballots cast. In 2014 the state issued a report on the investigation citing only six prosecutions.

In Wisconsin, a task force charged 20 individuals with election crimes. The majority charged were individuals with prior criminal convictions, who are often caught up by confusing laws regarding restoration of their voting rights.

https://www.brennancenter.org/analys...ter-fraud-myth

Quote:

As historians and election experts have catalogued, there is a long history in this country of racially suppressive voting measures — including poll taxes and all-white primaries — put in place under the guise of stopping voter fraud that wasn’t actually occurring in the first place. The surest way toward voting that is truly free, fair, and accessible is to know the facts in the face of such rhetoric.

*Scratches chin*
*Looks at bahbahmickey*
*Looks at text*
*Looks back at Bahbahmickey*
*Scratches chin*

Last edited by Huehuecoyotl; 04-05-2017 at 06:11 PM.

04-05-2017 , 08:43 PM

#282

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,278

Quote:

Originally Posted by batair

I'm on the fence of drugs should be legalized or not. I've heard solid arguments from both sides.

04-05-2017 , 08:46 PM

#283

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,278

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

https://www.brennancenter.org/analys...ter-fraud-myth

*Scratches chin*
*Looks at bahbahmickey*
*Looks at text*
*Looks back at Bahbahmickey*
*Scratches chin*

I'm surprised the studies found .0025% of votes were fraud. How did they even catch that many? Once someone votes for someone who isn't going to vote how would you catch them?

04-05-2017 , 10:49 PM

#284

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

I'm surprised the studies found .0025% of votes were fraud. How did they even catch that many? Once someone votes for someone who isn't going to vote how would you catch them?

Do a county to county comparison, comparing voting trends across various factors. Presumably, if voter impersonation is done at a scale that would effect the race you'll see significant variations from the norm, i.e. in one county you'll see an unusually high number of voters vs the predicted value of what should be for race/gender/ income, or an unusual amount of voters who vote once and then don't vote again, or an unusual amount of people voting twice, unusual number of the same race, etc

Otherwise you're stuck saying voter fraud could happen and you wouldn't know about it because it happens at such a massive scale across the entire US to throw the entire population numbers off.

You'll have the same problem with voter ID by the way. You could say voter ID will make it harder for voters to impersonate others, but we can just take the skill of the perpetrators one step further and say, once they fake their ID to impersonate the person who isn't voting, how can we catch them? We can't, and we could always hypothesize that massive voter fraud continued unabated.

Last edited by Huehuecoyotl; 04-05-2017 at 11:04 PM.

04-05-2017 , 11:18 PM

#285

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

My favorite method to detect voter fraud because it's so odd

Quote:

Used a survey list experiment to detect
fraud, particularly voter impersonation
fraud. In this method, commonly used in
survey research to detect sensitive
behaviors, survey respondents were
randomly assigned to one of two groups
and were presented with a list of
activities they may have engaged in
during the prior election (such as
attending a rally, or reading about the
election in the news). In one version of
the experiment, one list included
engaging in in-person voter fraud
(“casting a ballot under a name that was
not my own”); the other list was identical
but did not include in-person voter fraud.
Instead, the second list included an
activity respondents were unlikely to
have engaged in (“I attended a political
fundraising event for a candidate in my
home town.”). Respondents were asked
how many of these activities, rather than
which specific activities, they had
engaged in. The researchers
hypothesized that the difference
between the numbers of items selected
by respondents in the two groups would
provide an indication of the prevalence
of in-person voter fraud.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665966.pdf

pg 65

04-06-2017 , 05:53 AM

#286

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

I don't think we would. Do you think he'd support BLM? Most of what I have read about him was about him fighting real issues in non-violent ways.

There is another thing your would be against him on.

04-06-2017 , 07:56 AM

#287

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,278

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

Very interesting theory. How would this method detect if there was one race, income level, or political party that is committing voter fraud more frequently across the board than others?

For instances (throwing out random numbers to illustrate a point - no I don't think the numbers are accurate) if voter fraud has been going on for 50 years, if 5% of all votes are fraud, and if poor people are 40% more likely to be committing the crime how would they method catch any significant portion of it if there were no changes in these trends?

04-06-2017 , 10:24 AM

#288

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

You mean what if some groups were genetically or economically disposed to voter impersonation?

04-06-2017 , 01:48 PM

#289

bahbahmickey

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 15,278

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl

You mean what if some groups were genetically or economically disposed to voter impersonation?

I don't think it should be limited to just those 2 options.

04-07-2017 , 01:15 PM

#290

pudley4

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 6,828

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

Well, eventually there would be a trend showing a higher number/percentage of votes in a specific location (city/county) or toward a specific party than pre-polling numbers would indicate. If they expect x number of votes in a precinct (+/- whatever the margin for error is) but they consistently get x+5% compared to other similar precincts (when accounting for other factors), that could be one indicator. Similarly if they expect y% for a certain party but that party consistently gets y+5%, there could be another indicator.

You've been shown dozens and dozens of references to studies over many years which show that voter fraud is at MOST on the scale of 3000 fraudulent votes in the national election (approx 130 million votes). Some of these may still be simple errors and some cannot be stopped by voter ID laws (absentee voting).

All you have is ONE example of ONE group showing that it's POSSIBLE to commit voter fraud. They didn't prove the extent of fraud. Everyone knows that it's possible when there are no ID requirements. It's also possible with absentee voting. It's also possible WITH ID requirements. Your solution is to try to make voting more difficult, just to eliminate SOME of the extremely small percentage of votes that are cast. It's safe to say that requiring ID will prevent far more people from voting than the fraud that it stops.

04-07-2017 , 03:09 PM

#291

Subterranean2

adept

Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,173

maybe its not proven that large scale voter fraud is going on. That doesnt mean we shouldnt try to prevent voter fraud by looking up what type of Photo IDs is used when voting and then removing the IDs used more often by black voters. Its better to be safe than sorry

04-07-2017 , 05:31 PM

#292

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

Quote:

Originally Posted by bahbahmickey

Would you agree that there is no reason to defend against discrimination if the law is combating fraud and there has been no proof of significant widespread negative effects that many other laws have proven to have? There have been links to studies and articles that guess that x number of people don't have IDs, but none have come up with a number of people who can't vote but otherwise would if they had an ID.

Minimum wage is a great example of a law that has discriminatory results that are way more significant than that of voter ID laws.

If the law was tackling a significant voter fraud issue effectively then it would be defensible. Ensuring it doesn't discriminate would still be a priority and I'd go much further and want to see it made as easy as possible for people to vote if they wish to - that's at least as important in a democracy as preventing a bit of fraud.

Quote:

Have you noticed that almost all political threads on 2+2 seem to favor a more liberal line of thinking. Don't quote me on this but I think for every conservative here we have 7-8 liberals.

Yes and I think that's a shame.

Quote:

Liberals ITT have been hammering how there has been no evidence of voter fraud that would be fixed by voter ID laws. I show them an example and the refuse to acknowledge it. There whole argument is that people that are pro-voter ID are racist because the law doesn't fix a solution and is just to hurt a race. BOOM there goes that argument. Now do we want to sit down and talk about what laws are racist?

Afaik, no one denies that some voter fraud happens. What I (and I think others) want to see is evidence that it's a significant problem that is effectively tackled by voter ID laws. That's a prerequisite given the concerns about discrimination and suppression.

Quote:

All, or nearly all, laws discriminate racially.

I would argue that racism is so systemic that any laws will tend to discriminate racially in practice. It doesn't make any particular law racist but it's still the that some laws are racist - imo it comes down to intent but a law can be particularly bad racially even if it's not intended to be.

04-07-2017 , 05:34 PM

#293

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

The "problem" Voter ID laws are intended to solve isn't voter fraud. It's black people voting.

04-07-2017 , 05:40 PM

#294

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

Quote:

Originally Posted by einbert

The "problem" Voter ID laws are intended to solve isn't voter fraud. It's black people voting.

Let me explain.

Trump says: "I won the popular vote because 3-5 million illegal immigrants voted for me."

One might think, oh, 45* thinks he won the popular vote. No, that's not it. It's a very transparent lie, like the Voter ID lie. The purpose of the lie is not to convince people, but merely to excuse what comes next. It's prejustification. In this case, 45* wants to institute more strict Voter ID laws because he knows he will have a tough time winning reelection (he lost the popular vote by a historic 2.9 million votes). This is how authoritarians/fascists work. They don't believe their own rhetoric, and if you start chasing that rabbit down the hole you'll be chasing your own tail endlessly. Go straight to the chase, and call them on it.

04-08-2017 , 12:38 AM

#295

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

The trouble is you will be wrong a lot when you simplify things so much while going to the chase. Nearly everything is a lot messier with the simplicity being imposed upon it rather than exposed about it.

04-08-2017 , 12:43 AM

#296

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

And if you give people like 45* and bahbahmickey the "benefit of the doubt" that they are arguing with you honestly, you're wasting your breath and you'll never get anywhere. They take advantage of that as a weakness.

04-08-2017 , 12:51 AM

#297

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

When you debate the nuances of the issue, it plays directly into his hands. It makes it look like, well there are advantages to one side, there are advantages to the other. It's just another political trade-off.

The truth is this is targeted disenfranchisement. Making it a "he said, he said" debate is exactly what fascists would like to do. There's a long history of targeted disenfranchisement against African Americans in this country, and this is just the newest incarnation of that idea. It's something America has supported for hundreds of years. We did have a set of laws in place to protect against this kind of thing, but they were largely struck down in 2013 in Shelby County v. Holder. We need a new Voting Rights Act and we need it right away. That's why we need to elect a Democratic House, Senate, and President in 2018 and 2020.

04-08-2017 , 12:53 AM

#298

chezlaw

Limey Bastard

Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 46,914

You say that as if there's some bad consequence. If anyone takes being reasonable as a weakness then they are sorely mistaken. Most people in a political argument are a combination of honesty and getting caught up in party' lines. The less reasonable the discussion the more it follows party lines.

and then you seem to confuse being reasonable with giving an inch of the politics. The fascist stuff is so unreasonable it becomes a tad silly. Just about no-one isn't voting democrat because we didn't oversimplify the debate - many will turn away when you incorrectly oversimplify the debate and do stuff like lump so many in with fascists.

Last edited by chezlaw; 04-08-2017 at 12:58 AM.

04-08-2017 , 12:24 PM

#299

juan valdez

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 5,686

Quote:

Originally Posted by pudley4

All you have is ONE example of ONE group showing that it's POSSIBLE to commit voter fraud. They didn't prove the extent of fraud. Everyone knows that it's possible when there are no ID requirements. It's also possible with absentee voting. It's also possible WITH ID requirements. Your solution is to try to make voting more difficult, just to eliminate SOME of the extremely small percentage of votes that are cast. It's safe to say that requiring ID will prevent far more people from voting than the fraud that it stops.

from the article bahbah linked showing how easy it is to fraudulently vote

Quote:

After all, even a small number of votes can have sweeping consequences. Al Franken’s 312-vote victory in 2008 over Minnesota senator Norm Coleman gave Democrats a filibuster-proof Senate majority of 60 votes, which allowed them to pass Obamacare. Months after the Obamacare vote, a conservative group called Minnesota Majority finished comparing criminal records with voting rolls and identified 1,099 felons — all ineligible to vote — who had voted in the Franken–Coleman race. Fox News random interviews with ten of those felons found that nine had voted for Franken, backing up national academic studies that show felons tend to vote strongly for Democrats.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...easy-john-fund

we can also look at the situation in florida a few elections ago. elections are every 4 years, how many elections have we had? statisticians can go ahead with these two examples and give us the odds that a local activist not even attached to a political party having very serious and game-changing consequences through fraud. We have at least 2 examples here at minimum, in how many elections? this is a real issue

on the flip side requiring ID makes it more difficult to vote. it probably has less impact than it raining on election night so lets put this whole suppression thing in to context. how low are we setting the bar here? should we have literate people help illiterate people fill out the ballot? i mean we already have things like the weather and literacy suppressing the vote, is that a net negative on the democratic process? are the people being "suppressed" here really undermining the democratic process or are they the weakest links?

when you take the size of population that is actually impacted by a requirement to have photo id, its tiny. given the fact that there is a welfare system, every single person can afford ID. to set aside 10 or 15 bucks over the course of say 6 months (never mind 4 years) isn't really suppressing anything more than the weather does. some would argue that taking responsibility and being responsible is actually the definition of being an adult. requiring voter ID actually screens people for being responsible... or an actual adult. age is just a number

the motivations behind this politically are obvious. the republicans see this as a flaw in the system that opens the door for potential fraud. the democrats see this as a situation that causes an obstacle for people to get out and vote. both fair arguments, but lets be honest about the motivations here. the right believes these changes would favor their chances in elections. the left believes keeping the rules the same would favor their chances in elections. thats the motivation. the claims of racism is a tactic used to divide people and shout down the opposition. its very effective. the people buying in to this are sheep though. the political strategist don't even believe this just like they don't believe myths a junior high student could debunk like the 77 cent gender wage gap that obama and hilary give passionate speeches to let women know they should be angry and are being oppressed. this is effective and the people delivering the message dont even believe it. the sheep believe it

and of course after asking dozens of questions a dozen different ways, posters who are claiming that voter ID laws are racist have failed to even attempt to articulate what makes a law racist. they have at best inserted incomplete thoughts. it would be like going to websters and looking up the word obese and websters says "well we know its not skinny" which would obviously make the word and arguments around what is and isnt obese useless... but here we are, with the people that tweet headlines and develop thoughts that are the equivalent to 140 characters in depth

seriously, just go ahead and articulate what makes a law racist. thats how any rational person would approach this. the constant avoidance and side stepping should tell you all you need to know

04-10-2017 , 06:06 PM

#300

einbert

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 14,911

US District Court for Southern District of Texas: Order of Discriminatory Purpose
Apr 10, 2017
Judge Ramos found that there was sufficient evidence to sustain a conclusion that the Texas voter ID bill was passed with discriminatory purpose.
http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/d...natory-purpose

Page 12 of 18

First

2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Last

...

Page 12 of 18

First

2 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Last