Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.4K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 33 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 391 Fun & Games
- 101 BA Predictor Threads
- 31 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 288 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 112 Current West Ham
- 199 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 11 PL2 & Academy
- 31 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 25 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 388 Match Threads
- 61 MOTM
- 8 West Ham Nostalgia
- 34 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 53 Internationals
- 46 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 116 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 267 Other Teams & Matches
- 24 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Now, let's look at the early voting window, in North Carolina.
I'm not sure what problem, or fraud, or whatever anomaly, was identified as being perpetrated in the early voting window. And why reducing it from 17 to 10 days would solve whatever that problem was. (Any info gratefully received on this topic maybe it was a cost thing ;hmm .)
Anyway.
N. Carolina did some data gathering. They collected information on who use the early-voting window, and at what points, then broke this information down by racial grups.
what periods of the 17-day early voting window. The data showed that whites used it much less than African-Americans overall. Also, that for the African-Americans this difference was particularly marked in the 1st week of that period, as well as the 2 Sundays - it was common for 'black' churches to organise buses on the 2 Sundays to take people to vote. I
So, what did North Carolina do?
Go on. Guess.
The bill legislated to reduce the length of the window - from 17 to 10 days.
It eliminated thereby one of the Sundays avalaible for early voting.
So tell me - what problem did that solve?
And did it CAUSE more problems for white voters or non-white voters.
NE i am glad you value my opinion, seems to me Obama has moved it the most recently over to you...
;wink
I don't know the full range of which IDs were banned and preferred, but at least one form of 'banned' IDs was a photo ID, based on the text of the court document.
i dont see an issue with requiring all adults over 18 to have a valid government issued id to vote.
That just seems logical to me
However
I think I will now have to revert to sausages, chips and beans
And there is nowt wrong with that, (as my mancunian father would say)
Time to build a wall, I think, Grey.
Father from Manchester, Mother from Liverpool, the allegiances are such that the only thing I can say with certainty is that there is no blue blood in my family ;wink
Until I discovered the famous Claret and Blue of course ;ok
Each citizen has aright to vote. Why should the state restrict that right? And even more, why should it be a government-issued ID?
On to the wider issue: leaving aside that there is really no voter fraud going on at anything like a large scale...
1. Having a photo ID to vote would prevent only 1 type of fraud: voter impersonation. So Fred Smith turns up to vote only to be told he can't because someone saying they were Fred Smith has already voted in their place. That's a single vote. And it might not even have made a difference.
2. If the issue is to stop people voting who have no right to vote (illegal - and presumably legal - immigrants, although it seems for some reason, can't imagine what that might be, it is only the former category that get mentioned), then it is at the level of voter registration where procedures perhaps need to be tightened up, so that those not entitled to can't get on the voting register.
But I repeat, there's no evidence that there is much voter fraud going on.
And, here's the kicker for those of the 'but it might be, you have to prove it isn't' persuasion ... studies were done actively looking for instances of fraudulent voting. And they found almost none.
A lot of people get their drivers licence when they are still too young to vote. So there they are, aged 17 at the DMV, where its all nice and simple to register to vote while you are getting your state-sanctioned form of ID. That's what the state wants you do do, it's their preferred method.
But, only 17. So, a sensible thing - let the person register to vote, but the registration is 'post-dated' and doesn't come into effect until they turn 18. Meanwhile, the admin processes are completed that ensure the young driver isn't an illegal immigrant. Or dead. ;wink
So far so sensible. But, can you guess which race uses this form of registration the most? Ah, ya will. Go on. Go on.
The system as it stood was disproportionately used by African-Americans.
So, North Carolina decided to abolish it.
Now, tell me what voter fraud is being prevented?
And, since the answer will be NONE, suggest a reason why the state goverment might want to end pre-registration?
Imagine if they tried to introduce it in the UK (and specifically a govt-issued photo ID). There'd be uproar. What would be valid - passport, driver's licence? Anything else?
There must be many people who have neither.
;lol
Of course ;hug
If they were out of the country when Trump signed the executive order, aren't going to be allowed back for 3 months. They are excluded from their homes. Kept apart from their families. Can't go back to work or school. Marooned in whatever country they were visiting.
And any legal residents can now not travel abroad for work or leisure. Because they won't be allowed back in.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-greencard-idUSKBN15C0KX
Disgraceful.