There's a reason for that. You think being critical implies something about my position on voting laws, or you wouldn't ask the question. Consequently, you try to get me to talk about that. And I wouldn't classify it as narrow, but a more macro view. People here, including yourself, want to argue in vacuums, and more micro aspects of an issue, and what's worse, none of you can distinguish between the two.

I don't support the Georgia law, but I also not going to go batshit over it, because the information that's available to us, tells us it is low impact.

Moving the All-Star game is probably going to generate far more, and lasting animosity toward the left in Georgia than the degree and staying power of the voting law's animosity.

No, you assume that's what I think, which you seem to do a lot with me. Despite me trying to always be sincere with you, you continually seem to think I'm up to something, trying for some kind of "gotcha". I asked you a sincere question that I actually don't know how you would answer, which is why I'm asking it. I even gave you a follow-up based on either answer. And I think they're relevant questions, because they speak to concerns people have with the voting laws; reasons their reactions might not be the overreactions they think you are, and not all tied to how much it will or won't affect turnout. I'm hoping to discuss the broader implications rather than arguing over it will or will not suppress turnout. If that's not of interest, then just say so - but don't blow it all of as some kind of nefarious interrogation tactic.

Fair enough, and this is where we disagree. I haven't been involved in the back-and-forth about the numbers because I think others that are more knowledgeable have it well-covered, but let's just say I don't find your argument compelling. And I very much agree with the post I saw alluding to the fact that even if this law doesn't have a substantial direct impact on voting numbers, the more barriers you add, the more likely you make it that those numbers are going to start dropping in future elections.

Meh. I kind of doubt that's going to make much of a difference with GA swing voters, but I guess we'll see. I like that it's made conversation about the law more high profile, but I'm not convinced it was a good move for MLB, only because it might put them in difficult positions in the future. Nothing that would be impossible to handle, though.

Braves fans, there's 20 million of them.

http://baseballot.blogspot.com/2016/...-have.html?m=1

From what I've seen, the reaction generally has been that the team/city was punished by lefty outrage. Republicans are going to capitalize on that across the southeast.

Yup. And the 18 million of them (I'm pulling that number out of my ass - maybe it's 15, maybe it's 19) that are strong R or D voters will oppose or support the move depending on who they always vote for. Well, I'm sure there will be some Braves-supporting D voters that will be mad but it won't change their vote. The question is, what effect will have it on the swing voters? I'm not convinced a substantial number will be swung to the Rs by this, especially when the ones that are mostly "angry fans" have had a year and a half to cool down and realize they have more important things to base their vote on.

Of course I'm just speculating here.

But it may make them not vote, if they are D leaning.

Wait, I thought you said the voting laws wouldn't suppress voting?

Ha.

What's funny is the macro view is far worse for you! A crazy former president, spread lies about election fraud that incited a small group of his rabid followers to attack US capitol during a largely ceremonial session to rubber stamp an election he clearly lost. Rather than disavow election fraud conspiracies and the terrorists, Georgia republicans have chosen to feed into the delusions of the worst elements of the republican base and pass laws vindicating the crazy former guy's lies. The macro message is "those insane criminals who smeared feces on the walls of congress have valid concerns about elections"!

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/mee...aking-n1263429

.

Yeah I think this sums up my thoughts as well

Though the democrats and the President calling it Jim Crowe or Jim Eagle or Jim Crowe on Steroids is total BS. As well the GOP in the state putting this threw based on a stolen election is total BS as well
MLB boycotting the All Star game just as they sign a 10 year streaming deal with China and I am sure Coca Cola is not boycotting the Olympics is total hypocrisy as well.

Bottom line the folks that stand in line for anymore than 30 minutes is the issue and they tend to be in the poorer counties of Georgian mainly black but white also

I carried around a doc that I'd always just assumed was my birth cert. and always worked as if it was until I was close to 40(it was actually just a birth reg. notice--still looks like a car title or whatever). Then around the time the realId? stuff was becoming a thing found out otherwise Which of course you have to get at some other line-filled nightmare of a place. Good times.

Young people in general are probably another group that seem to lose their IDs etc at a pretty good clip.

Once again lozen you seem to be purposely missing the point.


If you see someone purposely deflating the footballs before a game trying to cheat, you do not assess whether that is good or bad based on what the ultimate impact is.

Everyone should care they are trying to cheat and more so notice they are not done trying to find ways to cheat.

Republicans are looking at every statistic they can find and when they find something they think can make Dem voters life a little harder, ...force them to jump a few more hoops, they then see if they can reverse engineer a way to justify making that happen and things more difficult.

I had the same experience. Thought I had original BC secured away since the mid-sixties. Looked very official and worked for ALL the times needed over the years.

Only to discover when applying for Medicare that my "BC" wasn't anything other than a birth registration doc.

Oh the steps I had to go through (from 2000 miles away) to get a certified BC since the hospital no longer exists AND the township was absorbed/annexed and rubbed off the map. Yikes!

Nah. The poorer white counties are fine. Rural heavily white counties have some of the lowest wait times in the state. They get a hugely disproportionate umber of polling stations because republicans want their wait times to be low and black voters time to be high.

No I do not think I am. I stand by my point voting should be easy and at most require you to stand in line 15-30 minutes. As well every voter should provide an ID in person or by mail in ballot.
As well every state should accept multiple forms of ID
I have never stood in line longer than 15 minutes to vote in a municipal election, provincial or federal here in Canada and I require an ID .

Federal elections here are managed federally as well.

I meant you are missing the point over what people are going "batsh*t" over.

There is a tendency for everyone to say 'oh everyone should have ID, it is beneficial and good for everyone to have".

That is not, in any way, what people are complaining about.

The problem is both sides are going batsh*t over the wrong things or reacting the wrong way. Throw in the so called woke corporate America....

You will have to explain as I do not know what that means.

Again I see people on the left saying 'this is a Jim Crow type attempt to steal elections by throwing obstacles at Dem voters'

And I see those on the right saying 'wah, wah, wah... everyone benefits from having ID, what is the problem?'


The first is an honest and necessary assessment. The second is a dishonest talking point.

As to the first point comparing it to Jim Crow is like calling republicans Nazis

Yes everyone should have a ID to vote but there are other elements in the bill that make it easier for the GOP to overturn or make it harder for folks to vote. Sadly they are to stupid to realize its some of their voters.

Reality is they should want Georgians to have the same voter rights as Colorado folks and go after those votes.

Nonsense.

Republican talking point nonsense.

If you understand the intent and tactics used in many States to suppress voting you will see this is very aptly called the modern day version of that.

Some ~400 new laws all based on a big lie, most of which have been very deliberated directed at any voting habit they find targets Dems more than Republican voters.

Why?

again i concede in general having the form of ID they are demanding for voting has no downside and is a good thing to have but why do they need it to vote.

In neighbouring Colorado they allow a combination of Utility Bills, pay checks, etc and other forms of ID and voter fraud is no issue there and it was not an issue in Georgia.

So why?


They don't care if it impacts their own voters as long as it impacts Dems more.

Can't figure out what you mean by this?? If you are buying the Republican talking point??

Colorado voting is far easier in every way.

When you think about it, not passing voter suppression laws is its own kind of voter suppression

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/a...g-restrictions

Maybe someone should buy Mesnard a dictionary.

Agreed that is why I said they should just copy Colorado law nationally. I consider a combination of those as ID .