Oh no! Its like MSNBC! That's your nemesis!

I know this doesn't matter to you since you've shown you're an idiot, but the story all references public statements by GOP representatives that call all be found in other stories. I could find other sources to show that its real but what would the point be. We know you aren't troubled by facts.

Yes cause blacks and hispanics are the same race. Again, whites are the most affected race, period. Thanks for making that so crystal clear.

Wow. Shifting goalposts. We see what you did there.

His deep concern for the never-ending struggles of white people is very touching.

Liberty - here's what I think you're missing and why its important to the people making the laws.

If we say that the laws are affecting the poor, and we acknowledge that minorities tend to vote Democrat... look what happens. I admit this is simplified but it shows how it disproportionately effects minorities-

We acknowledge that this law mostly puts barriers in the way of minorities (women more then men too but that's another whole discussion. Since I doubt we can get understanding here its pointless to bring in gender too)

The law affects approx. 27% of minorities
The law affects just under 10% of whites

So the fact that half the people affected are white is irrelevant to the goal of the laws - which is to put barriers in front of a larger percentage of the 'right voters.'

If I crafted a law that hurts 10% of 'my voters' but hurts 30% of the other sides voters, I'm coming out ahead. In this case, it just so happens that they're putting barriers that disproportionately hurts a higher percentage of minority (read: Democrat) voters then white voters.

I really just do not yet completely understand why the word "racist" is such a trigger?

My concern is righting a wrong. For the fifth or sixth time, I can give less than a flying **** about race. I've simply been addressing the fascination some seem to have with it on this particular issue.

When I look at this issue I see 44 million people potentialy being ****ed over. What you seem to see is racism when in fact it is nothing more than voter suppression. Do you really think these laws would be any different if the entire 44 million people were white? I don't.

This is like a scene from a French farce where the idiot protagonist applies for a job, vomits all over himself during the interview, and leaves the building convinced not only that his dazzling performance has earned him the job, but that he'll probably be offered the position of CEO.

I don't have time to post a gif that this response deserves. LOL.

If the 44 million people were white and voted like the average white person? They'd for sure be different.

Not only that, but this analysis generously presumes that the laws in question will be enforced in a completely color-blind and non-discriminatory way. History suggests this is a dubious assumption.

For me it is a trigger because it gets thrown around way to casually and used in ways that don't even remotely fit the definition.

Considering who these laws affect at best I can see bigotry, not that its really much better than racism but, its not racist.

Please do, so you can display your failures at math if you consider it LOL worthy.
Is what zik zak posted that difficult to read?

Let me rephrase. If those 44 million people were all white, and voted for Democrats. Do you think the laws would be any different?

My point being that they can don't care what your skin color is when it comes to suppressing the vote.

That is why even though I understand where Kurto is coming from in his example, I find it meaningless.

Dumb****, and let's not try and pretend you are'nt the dumbest of ****s in the land, Dumb****, these laws aren't being passed or proposed where the poors are white and vote republican.

Man, who could have predicted that this thread would have a libertarian poster telling us that if we just rewrite history and ignore reality then racism isn't a problem? If only blacks hadn't for decades been packed into particular regions by de facto or de jure segregation then closing the DMVs and voting precincts in those areas would affect white folks just as much as minorities. Ergo, no racism!

The funny thing to me Liberty Lost is that while you're denying a racial component, there were Republicans who admitted it. That is, they acknowledged that they knew the actions they were taking (voter ID laws, closing some voting locations, shortening voting hours in some places and expanding them in others, etc) effected mostly minorities - while you're denying it some of the people crafting the laws did not, but they okayed it in their minds because of their intent. Yes... they set out to make it harder/or to take away voting rights of minorities... but not because they are minorities, but because of who they vote for.

In other words, they admitted their actions were racial by design... they knew they were targetting minorities - but in their mind they're saying its okay because their motive is to hurt Democrats, not minorities.

To do things to hurt minorities (that is, enact racist laws) because your motive is to screw over Democrats, does not really excuse the fact that the laws are racist.

While I admit I can't link to it because I don't remember names (and maybe someone will remember who said it) but there was an interview with a GOP guy who basically said this. And I posted earlier a link to a story about several other instances of GOP lawmakers admitting that it was about voter supression.

I won't continue to badger you about this issue since we both agree that what the GOP is doing is wrong. You simply don't agree that its about race. And my point is that they know that race is involved - they're just saying "yeah, we know we're hurting blacks and latinos, but we're only doing it because they don't vote for us." Well, in my book that's still racist. They're just trying to give an ulterior motive to justify enacting racist laws.

Really. NC, VA, GA, FL, AR, SC, TN, TX, AL, WV, pretty much the entire South. Ya, no poor white folks there. Remind me how the South tends to vote. Pro tip. It isn't Democrat.

So people misuse words on occassion. Does that mean actual racists who support these kinds of laws don't exist?

I recent found out about one of the klan's big secret meeting places. It's within 100 miles of my house and they allegedly still attract quite a crowd. Do you think the David Duke-types who attend or support such events look at the racial results of these voter laws and say "no that's not fair to the races we think are lessor?" Hell no!

Kurto, maybe you're thinking of the state legislator in PA who said this while touting Republican legislative achievements:

Never said racism wasn't an issue or how blacks got herded in to inner cities isnt an issue. In fact I've discussed none of that because it isn't even on topic. Call me an *******, ignorant or whatever but, don't ****ing lie on me. Thanks in advance.

There was also a Texan who bragged about marginalizing Democrats IIRC.

That is another problem with the racist/racism angle and that is racists are not exactly forthcoming about it in public. Though the results speak for themselves, it does make it a moving target.

In my original post I said you could find examples of David Duke type quotes that you could justifiably point to as racist. Also I live in the South, so yes I know these clowns exist but, as I said in my original post they are an outlier.

Uh, yes, herding blacks into the inner city is precisely on topic for the very reason I stated in that post: the same bills that are requiring IDs are also closing DMVs and voting precincts in minority areas to which minorities have been herded. If you really insist on arguing about the lack of racism in some mythical place where poor whites vote overwhelmingly Democratic (aside: poor whites have ID more frequently than poor blacks), that's a super cool story, bro, but the fact that those Democratic voters are minorities didn't just happen by happenstance. Racial minorities have been flocking to the Democrats as a direct consequence of a systematic campaign by the GOP to brand itself as the party of white Christian men and to heap scorn upon minorities as lazy and lacking virtue. The GOP didn't approach this "problem" of restricting voting rights thinking that they needed to stop the poor from voting. They specifically targeted racial minorities, because they've spent decades branding those people as the opposition. ID was just one bullet in the gun. Restricting voting hours, precinct locations, ID locations, voter registration, and other things are all being done at the same time and in a manner that specifically targets racial minorities. You don't get to look at one tiny aspect of the campaign devoid from history and context and say "Oh, look, this affects poor whites just as much as poor blacks, blammo, no racism here."

And sure, some white people get caught up in the mix, too, but that cost is more than acceptable. The GOP knows this, but that doesn't mean the suite of restrictions they're passing aren't targeted at racial minorities.