Of the examples you posted only 2 involve FL and of those 2 only 1 involves black voters.

 

FL law outlawing early voting on Sunday - What was the reason Flordia legislation gave for this?

 

FL and OH decreased the number of days allowed for early voting - What does this have to do with black voters? What was the number of days before the change, what is it now?

 

Missing your point on the old black folk living in shotgun houses.

 

WI student mandate - Can you provide a link, the only thing I can find is you have to show an ID. Nothing about it having to be a student ID. What I did find said if it is a student id it has to have the 2 year expiration date.

 

 

WI shuting down DMV's - From what I found, which is from Aug of last year, they didn't shut down. As a matter of fact they expanded services. If you have a link that says different please post it. Also what I did find about the possible shut downs mentioned it was in areas that leaned democratic but never mentioned race.

UPDATE: DMV Announces Expanded Service Locations in Wisconsin

 

Are you telling me that Dems have never done anything to change rules to favor their side?

 

First bolded - doesn't matter what reason was given. What matters is the real reason, and that's painfully obvious.

 

Second bolded - don't you just hate the "they do it too" excuse?

Let me ask you this, I asked it in another thread of someone else but didn't get a response.

 

It's the cry of the opponents of voter laws that there is no need. I think a number of 13 voter fraud cases have gone to court. However I think it's been shown really how easy it is to have voter fraud so...how many cases of voter fraud do we need before it's ok to do something? If there is a threat of voter fraud, loop holes in the process so to speak, shouldn't things be done to tighten it up?

 

Would it benefit the R's...it could. Woudl it hurt the D's...maybe, maybe not. There are several states that have voter ID laws. How were those affected when the law went into effect?

 

It will, and it will. Otherwise we wouldn't see these laws in these states at this time.

The cry of "we're trying to fix voter fraud" is a red herring. Any voter fraud that is out there is not new. Why now with the flurry of states passing new legislation? Seems obvious as to the intent.

Falls into the "they do it too" catagory. Are you saying that it shouldn't be fixed because it's not new?

First bolded - doesn't matter what reason was given. What matters is the real reason, and that's painfully obvious.

 

Second bolded - don't you just hate the "they do it too" excuse?

Actually it does matter if it's a sound reason. I'll take facts over your guess.

It will, and it will. Otherwise we wouldn't see these laws in these states at this time.

Again, where is your proof? There are plenty of states with voter id laws in place, Indiana for example. Who won Indiana in 2008?

Falls into the "they do it too" catagory. Are you saying that it shouldn't be fixed because it's not new?

 

It does fall into that category. IMO had there not been such a turnout in 2008 of minorities and students then we wouldn't be hearing anything about new laws.

 

Why have a law that impacts black churches and their members more than any other? Were they somehow shown to be voting fraudulently?

 

Why reduce the # of days for early voting when that group favored President Obama? Was there fraud shown to be occurring with early voting?

 

The individual laws are the issue as they impact "the other side" more than the side making the law. That should be unacceptable to everyone.

 

Timing and intent are obvious here.

It does fall into that category. IMO had there not been such a turnout in 2008 of minorities and students then we wouldn't be hearing anything about new laws.

 

Why have a law that impacts black churches and their members more than any other? Were they somehow shown to be voting fraudulently?

 

Why reduce the # of days for early voting when that group favored President Obama? Was there fraud shown to be occurring with early voting?

 

The individual laws are the issue as they impact "the other side" more than the side making the law. That should be unacceptable to everyone.

 

Timing and intent are obvious here.

According to Wiki there were 11 states to implement voter id prior to 2008 and 12 after. Click on the link and go to the Timeline section.

Voter ID laws - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Again, please provide links to support the rest of what you're stating.

It does fall into that category. IMO had there not been such a turnout in 2008 of minorities and students then we wouldn't be hearing anything about new laws.

 

Why have a law that impacts black churches and their members more than any other? Were they somehow shown to be voting fraudulently?

 

Why reduce the # of days for early voting when that group favored President Obama? Was there fraud shown to be occurring with early voting?

 

The individual laws are the issue as they impact "the other side" more than the side making the law. That should be unacceptable to everyone.

 

Timing and intent are obvious here.

Again, there are plenty of states that have these laws in place, how were they affected. With out hard evidence it's speculation on everyone's part.

Actually it does matter if it's a sound reason. I'll take facts over your guess.

 

Consider me Spock in the following exchange from "Star Trek IV":

 

Kirk: Mr. Spock, have you accounted for the variable mass of whales and water in your time re-entry program?

 

Spock: Mr. Scott cannot give me exact figures, Admiral, so... I will make a guess.

 

Kirk: A guess? You, Spock? That's extraordinary.

 

Spock: [to Dr. McCoy] I don't think he understands.

 

McCoy: No, Spock. He means that he feels safer about your guesses than most other people's facts.

 

Spock: Then you're saying,

 

[pause]

 

It is a compliment?

 

McCoy: It is.

Again, there are plenty of states that have these laws in place, how were they affected. With out hard evidence it's speculation on everyone's part.

 

You're ignoring two key aspects of this issue: timing and intent. I don't see how you can argue around that .

 

Before I respond to the IMO irrelevant question about other states I'll ask you give me your thoughts on the specific questions I posed in #21.

 

I posted links to the articles earlier.

Again, there are plenty of states that have these laws in place, how were they affected. With out hard evidence it's speculation on everyone's part.

 

You're ignoring two key aspects of this issue: timing and intent. I don't see how you can argue around that .

 

Before I respond to the IMO irrelevant question about other states I'll ask you give me your thoughts on the specific questions I posed in #21.

 

I posted links to the articles earlier.

It does fall into that category. IMO had there not been such a turnout in 2008 of minorities and students then we wouldn't be hearing anything about new laws.

 

Why have a law that impacts black churches and their members more than any other? Were they somehow shown to be voting fraudulently?

 

Why reduce the # of days for early voting when that group favored President Obama? Was there fraud shown to be occurring with early voting?

 

The individual laws are the issue as they impact "the other side" more than the side making the law. That should be unacceptable to everyone.

 

Timing and intent are obvious here.

 

You're ignoring two key aspects of this issue: timing and intent. I don't see how you can argue around that .

 

Before I respond to the IMO irrelevant question about other states I'll ask you give me your thoughts on the specific questions I posed in #21.

 

I posted links to the articles earlier.

Apparently you ignored my multiple requests for links or additional information to back up what you posted/were asking.

 

I will take a shot anyways. To the Sunday & early voting law (I'm combining because from what I can gather they are part of the same law), you say it will affect black voters more, why? How do you know? Let me ask you this, early voting was put in place after the 2000 election. Can we assume this the dems effort to in FL? Also, the new law reduced the number of days from 15 to 10. Is 5 days going to make a difference? That's way I asked for the reason given for the law change.

Consider me Spock in the following exchange from "Star Trek IV":

 

Kirk: Mr. Spock, have you accounted for the variable mass of whales and water in your time re-entry program?

 

Spock: Mr. Scott cannot give me exact figures, Admiral, so... I will make a guess.

 

Kirk: A guess? You, Spock? That's extraordinary.

 

Spock: [to Dr. McCoy] I don't think he understands.

 

McCoy: No, Spock. He means that he feels safer about your guesses than most other people's facts.

 

Spock: Then you're saying,

 

[pause]

 

It is a compliment?

 

McCoy: It is.

Sorry but you're not Spock and I don't feel safer in your guesses than facts.

Apparently you ignored my multiple requests for links or additional information to back up what you posted/were asking.

 

.

 

 

7, 8, and 11 show links on my screen.

Apparently you ignored my multiple requests for links or additional information to back up what you posted/were asking.

 

I will take a shot anyways. To the Sunday & early voting law (I'm combining because from what I can gather they are part of the same law), you say it will affect black voters more, why? How do you know? Let me ask you this, early voting was put in place after the 2000 election. Can we assume this the dems effort to in FL? Also, the new law reduced the number of days from 15 to 10. Is 5 days going to make a difference? That's way I asked for the reason given for the law change.

 

How can we assume? Well, the black churches are much more unified in their efforts as far as getting the flock to the polls. Seems pretty straight forward. Days: One more attempt to make it harder for a a group that the President won in 2008. I'm not sure of the reason given. I can't imagine a logical one .

 

As to the "will it make a difference" question the obvious response is why did they feel the need to change it NOW?

 

If you don't see that it's an attempt to make it more difficult and it is in response to 2008 then I don't know if there's much more I can say to change your mind.

 

Again, while we can say all have to live by the same voting rules and use that as our basis for saying there is no underlying intent I would argue that's being naive since these new laws are not fixing any known issue.