• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
TestOfTide said:
I'm not saying that voter suppression has no effect, but that by itself was not enough to elect Donald Trump.

Voter Apathy is still a bigger problem than Voter Suppression, especially in non-presidential elections, and that issue will go away because as our generation gets older it will vote more (just like every generation).
Click to expand...

Some 200k people in Wisconsin didn't vote, apparently due in large part to the voter ID law passed up there. Pass a law like that in a state that could potentially go either way and it'll go reliably red, regardless of who the Dems have on the ballot.

Sirpopopop said:
I think a lot more Dems support her Assad position than you think.

I've met more than my fair share who think that "we don't know what's going on in Syria."
Click to expand...

It's really sad that this is true. Really, really sad. With any luck she'll get stomped on by the party when she tries to run.
 
K

kirblar

Member
B-Dubs said:
Voter suppression efforts. Look what happened in Wisconsin, it was enough to flip the state. Get that shit passed at the right time in the states you can swing and it'll be enough to hold power.
Click to expand...
Yup. Instant we get power a new VRA is a must.
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
B-Dubs said:
Some 200k people in Wisconsin didn't vote, apparently due in large part to the voter ID law passed up there. Pass a law like that in a state that could potentially go either way and it'll go reliably red, regardless of who the Dems have on the ballot.
Click to expand...

Was it 200k that tried to vote but were prevented from voting, or 200k people affected by the law that includes both people that planned to vote and people that didn't plan to vote?

kirblar said:
Yup. Instant we get power a new VRA is a must.
Click to expand...

It's not even like SCOTUS actually struck down the concept of pre clearance itself. They just stuck down the specific 2006 list.

Which means that all that Dems would have to do when they regain power is pass an entirely new list of states, counties, and districts that must pass pre-clearance.

But the biggest thing Dems need to do is a national ID system that states it must be accepted as a form of ID for Voting purposes.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
TestOfTide said:
Was it 200k that tried to vote but were prevented from voting, or 200k people affected by the law that includes both people that planned to vote and people that didn't plan to vote?
Click to expand...

The latter.

EDIT: Spoke too soon. It was 300k that were affected by the law, regardless of whether they tried to vote. The 200k figure comes from an analysis by Civis Analytics, but keep in mind that analysis has not undergone any form of peer review.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
TestOfTide said:
Was it 200k that tried to vote but were prevented from voting, or 200k people affected by the law that includes both people that planned to vote and people that didn't plan to vote?
Click to expand...

Wisconsin's Voter-ID Law Suppressed 200,000 Votes in 2016

Prior to the 2016 election, Eddie Lee Holloway Jr., a 58-year-old African-American man, moved from Illinois to Wisconsin, which implemented a strict voter-ID law for the first time in 2016. He brought his expired Illinois photo ID, birth certificate, and Social Security card to get a photo ID for voting in Wisconsin, but the DMV in Milwaukee rejected his application because the name on his birth certificate read ”Eddie Junior Holloway," the result of a clerical error when it was issued. Holloway ended up making seven trips to different public agencies in two states and spent over $200 in an attempt to correct his birth certificate, but he was never able to obtain a voter ID in Wisconsin. Before the election, his lawyer for the ACLU told me Holloway was so disgusted he left Wisconsin for Illinois.

Holloway's story was sadly familiar in 2016. According to federal court records, 300,000 registered voters, 9 percent of the electorate, lacked strict forms of voter ID in Wisconsin. A new study by Priorities USA, shared exclusively with The Nation, shows that strict voter-ID laws, in Wisconsin and other states, led to a significant reduction in voter turnout in 2016, with a disproportionate impact on African-American and Democratic-leaning voters. Wisconsin's voter-ID law reduced turnout by 200,000 votes, according to the new analysis. Donald Trump won the state by only 22,748 votes.
Click to expand...

Do voter identification laws suppress minority voting? Yes. We did the research.

When a state has strict voter ID laws, those who do vote are more conservative

All of this, of course, has real political consequences. Because minority voters tend to be Democrats, strict voter ID laws tilt the primary electorate dramatically.

All else equal, when strict ID laws are instituted, the turnout gap between Republicans and Democrats in primary contests more than doubles from 4.3 points to 9.8 points. Likewise, the turnout gap between conservative and liberal voters more than doubles from 7.7 to 20.4 points.

By instituting strict voter ID laws, states can alter the electorate and shift outcomes toward those on the right. Where these laws are enacted, the influence of Democrats and liberals wanes and the power of Republicans grows. Unsurprisingly, these strict ID laws are passed almost exclusively by Republican legislatures.
Click to expand...
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
GoldenEye 007 said:
Are there any organizations out there that is working on registering voters starting now for elections in 2018 and 2020 at all?

I feel like now is the time to start working to try to get people registered.
Click to expand...

The issue is these laws tend to not hold up in court so they get struck down fairly quickly. As a result the GOP has been timing their passage so that by the time they get struck down, it's too late in the game and the judge has to allow it to stand for the upcoming election. So registering people now won't do much good when the rules get changed in a year or two.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
I don’t know what it is with the left, but I remember this sort of Permanent Republican Majority handwringing after Bush was reelected as well. At least he actually had got a majority of the vote that time.

I’m not saying there’s no reason to be concerned about voter suppression and the like, but I keep seeing the same takes I saw twelve years ago.
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
Box of Kittens said:
The latter.
Click to expand...
B-Dubs said:
Wisconsin's Voter-ID Law Suppressed 200,000 Votes in 2016



Do voter identification laws suppress minority voting? Yes. We did the research.
Click to expand...

So it wasn't literally 200,000 votes taken away, just potentially 200,000 votes taken away.

And again, I'm not saying it doesn't have an effect. I just think you are overemphasizing the affect.

To give you a great example, Florida had HIGHER turnout in 2016 than in 2012, yet Hillary lost it even though Obama won it in 2012.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2012
 
T

Teggy

Member
Kim Dotcom claims he helped Seth Rich get in contact with Wikileaks because yeah that's a thing that makes total sense.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
GoldenEye 007 said:
Are there any organizations out there that is working on registering voters starting now for elections in 2018 and 2020 at all?

I feel like now is the time to start working to try to get people registered.
Click to expand...

I am sure there are, but I wouldn't be surprised if rolls get purged before 2018. Republicans are worried, and they are going to try and pull out every single trick they are able to retain power in 2018.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Wilsongt said:
I am sure there are, but I wouldn't be surprised if rolls get purged before 2018. Republicans are worried, and they are going to try and pull out every single trick they are able to retain power in 2018.
Click to expand...
Only Democrats and the DNC pull sneaky, underhanded tactics like that, did the New York primary teach you nothing???
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
Wilsongt said:
I am sure there are, but I wouldn't be surprised if rolls get purged before 2018. Republicans are worried, and they are going to try and pull out every single trick they are able to retain power in 2018.
Click to expand...

How can they possibly justify purging rolls of voters that just got registered?
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
Zolo said:
I guess with the weekend on us, this is the first day to not expect any gigantic news.
Click to expand...

If you want to venture into crank territory Mensch says the judiciary committee is already considering articles of impeachment after Rosenstein's closed meeting.
 
A

Autodidact

Banned
Thaedolus said:
If you want to venture into crank territory Mensch says the judiciary committee is already considering articles of impeachment after Rosenstein's closed meeting.
Click to expand...

I believe the Democrats on the committee are. It wouldn't take a genius or insider to reach that conclusion.
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
Autodidact said:
I believe the Democrats on the committee are. It wouldn't take a genius or insider to reach that conclusion.
Click to expand...

In this case "considering" has a procedural meaning which means the charges are being drawn up to be voted upon (i.e. not just the dems) to move to the full house to vote on, and the President has been informed officially via the Senate Sergeant at Arms, which other sources have verified was at the White House Wednesday evening.

So...massive grain of salt and all that, but next week should be interesting if the biggest bombs have yet to drop.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
rokkerkory said:
why?
Click to expand...

They didn't do any pseudo-randomization process that would have allowed them to control for differences between states.

The most glaring problem with the report and how it’s being interpreted, Hersh told me by phone, is that the firm behind the analysis decided to operate at a surface level when it almost certainly had the data and expertise to dig much deeper. “Civis presents itself as a very sophisticated analytics shop,” Hersh said, “and yet the analysis they’re offering here is rather blunt.”

The group relied largely on state-by-state and county-by-county comparisons to reach its conclusions, but it could have—and Hersh maintains, should have—conducted a more granular analysis. Civis could have isolated communities that straddle the border between two states, for instance, or even used a comprehensive voter file to compare similar individuals that do and don’t live in states with new voter ID laws. Doing either would have allowed Civis to eliminate variables that may have ultimately skewed its findings. “It’s very weird to do an analysis the way they did when they presumably had a better way to do it,” Hersh said. “That’s a red flag that jumps out right away.”

Civis says it mostly limited itself to publicly available information so that its analysis was repeatable; Hersh counters that repeating a flawed analysis will just lead to the same flawed results. As the New York Times’ Nate Cohn pointed out on Twitter, and as Hersh echoed in his conversation with me, the absence of a detailed voter file-based analysis of the impact of voter ID laws—by Civis or anyone else for that matter—is in itself telling at this point. “I would in no way argue that these [voter ID] laws have no effect, but what we’ve found is that it’s a relatively small one,” Hersh said. Making things more complicated, he added, is that the effect of a voter ID law can be difficult to separate from that of other non-ID-based measures that disenfranchise the same types of people. “It’s just very unlikely that these voter ID laws by themselves would translate into the effect of 200,000 voters,” Hersh said.
Click to expand...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ming_clinton_s_wisconsin_loss_on_a_voter.html
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
They didn't do any pseudo-randomization process that would have allowed them to control for differences between states.



http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ming_clinton_s_wisconsin_loss_on_a_voter.html
Click to expand...

Yeah, voter ID isn't actually that big of a deal and it's hard to argue against rhetorically.

We should just pass a national ID law that sends every citizen a US ID card that satisfies all ID requirements. For free. The GOP would hate it but they don't have any good rhetorical reason to oppose it. It wouldn't be that expensive either. Easy win.
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
They didn't do any pseudo-randomization process that would have allowed them to control for differences between states.



http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...ming_clinton_s_wisconsin_loss_on_a_voter.html
Click to expand...

thank you.

There are states where turnout was actually up from 2012 that went from Obama to Trump, mainly due to really high white rural turnout.

Like yes we should absolutely do what we can to mitigate voter suppression both before we regain power and afterwards, but voter apathy is still the bigger problem. And ironically voter apathy might end up being something that benefits us as more and more conservatives become disengaged with politics due to Trump's constant fuck ups.
 
E

Ernest

Banned
B-Dubs said:
The issue is these laws tend to not hold up in court so they get struck down fairly quickly. As a result the GOP has been timing their passage so that by the time they get struck down, it's too late in the game and the judge has to allow it to stand for the upcoming election. So registering people now won't do much good when the rules get changed in a year or two.
Click to expand...
Fuck.

Which just means that they know they're cheating and what they're doing is wrong, they just don't fucking care. Fuck the rules, we gotta win!
 
M

Maledict

Member
Why is rural flight something that hurts republicans? I thought it was hurting democrats! It concentrates the democratic vote in urban areas which allows you to wrack up the population numbers but doesn't help you overall, plus it makes rural senators even more powerful and overwhelmingly republican.
 
E

Ernest

Banned
So Trump just signed a $110 BILLION arms deal with the Saudis... what are the odds of any of those arms ending up in the hands of isis/al'qaeda?
 
T

TestOfTide

Banned
Maledict said:
Why is rural flight something that hurts republicans? I thought it was hurting democrats! It concentrates the democratic vote in urban areas which allows you to wrack up the population numbers but doesn't help you overall, plus it makes rural senators even more powerful and overwhelmingly republican.
Click to expand...

Three reasons:

1) Because rural flight isn't just movement from rural areas to urban areas. It's also a lot of movement into suburban areas. And eventually those suburban areas become big and diverse like the urban areas and start voting like urban areas.

2) Because this rural flight can happen not just on an inter-state basis, but also on an intrastate basis, meaning that you end up having otherwise red states start building up populated blue cities (like we are seeing with Texas)

3) Because gerrymandering still has to divide districts evenly in terms of number of residents, and as more and more people leave rural areas, that means those rural areas start getting less representation (assuming the same factors of gerrymandering)
 
K

kirblar

Member
TestOfTide said:
Three reasons:

1) Because rural flight isn't just movement from rural areas to urban areas. It's also a lot of movement into suburban areas. And eventually those suburban areas become big and diverse like the urban areas and start voting like urban areas.

2) Because this rural flight can happen not just on an inter-state basis, but also on an intrastate basis, meaning that you end up having otherwise red states start building up populated blue cities (like we are seeing with Texas)

3) Because gerrymandering still has divide districts evenly in terms of number of residents, and as more and more people leave rural areas, that means they will mean those rural areas start getting less representation (assuming the same factors of gerrymandering)
Click to expand...
In the long term it's good (we get more big perma blue states)

In the short term it's really painful for Pres elections because of the overrepresented midwest.
 
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
This is a pretty good stretch for Donnie. He hasn't done anything (unusually) stupid for an entire Saturday and it's bedtime soon. So he may lay off the Tweets.
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
@maggieNYT
NEW- House committee probing Russian influence on election calls on @MichaelRCaputo to be interviewed, give docs.

588.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

your favorite racing games by year (2002-2022)
2
72
4K
marcincz replied
[GfK data] In the UK, Xbox Series S and X has now overtaken sales of the original Xbox. PS5 is now closing in on 3DS/2DS sales.
Sales-Age 2
51
5K
Thirty7ven replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5
238
45K
Hrk69 replied
Evolution of Open World Games 1980-2021
2 3
141
13K
IbizaPocholo replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
59K
DGrayson replied
Top Bottom