Felon Disenfranchisement

[JustWinBaby]

(04-20-2018, 09:44 AM)fredtoast Wrote: 1 million white voters and 200K black voters.

Remove 300K white voters and 200K black voters.

What is left?

Sorry to bump an old, old thread....but this is a very important teaching lesson.

I'm sure Fred didn't understand the math, but as he constructed this "what is left" is +100k Democratic votes....that's assuming you're a racist bigot and believe all white people vote Republican.

 
This gets dismissed again and again.  And if I can make broad strokes, a lot of policies that are deemed racist hurt more whites than blacks.  That's just the reality that whites outnumber blacks almost 5 to 1.   It disproportionately hurts blacks, but elections (except for POTUS) are not proportionate, they are based on the absolute number of votes.  So a lot of policies that are called "racist" by the Democratic Media actually hurt more whites, and would lose elections.  But propaganda has nothing to do with reality.

[Dill]

(12-05-2019, 07:18 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Sorry to bump an old, old thread....but this is a very important teaching lesson.

I'm sure Fred didn't understand the math, but as he constructed this "what is left" is +100k Democratic votes....that's assuming you're a racist bigot and believe all white people vote Republican.

 
This gets dismissed again and again.  And if I can make broad strokes, a lot of policies that are deemed racist hurt more whites than blacks.  That's just the reality that whites outnumber blacks almost 5 to 1.   It disproportionately hurts blacks, but elections (except for POTUS) are not proportionate, they are based on the absolute number of votes.  So a lot of policies that are called "racist" by the Democratic Media actually hurt more whites, and would lose elections.  But propaganda has nothing to do with reality.

Can you make that dismissed "reality" a bit more specific? Can you name TWO specific federal or state policies deemed "racist" by the Democratic media that actually hurt more whites than blacks?

To continue with your teaching lesson--If I am a Republican gaming the vote in a southern state, and my party can pass a voting law which suppresses 150,000 ex con white votes and 100,000 ex con black votes, then by your standard, that law could not be racist because it "hurts more whites than blacks" in that bloc of 250,000 suppressed votes.

But as you say, not all whites vote Republican. If I am gaming the vote, the only numbers that count are the numbers that win elections for Republicans.

If my state law suppresses 100,000 Republican votes from the aforementioned 150,000 white votes and 10,000 from the black, but effectively suppresses the remaining 140,000 Dem votes out of the total 250,000 suppressed, then what is the net gain for the Republican vote total statewide? Those are the numbers I would be interested in. If they tip the election in favor of my party, which will pass further laws targeting black voters, then the "reality" would be that your "policies deemed racist that hurt more whites" nevertheless deliver power to the party that maintains a racist status quo.

You seem to think that just could not be the case if "more whites are affected."

[fredtoast]

(12-05-2019, 07:18 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Sorry to bump an old, old thread....but this is a very important teaching lesson.

I'm sure Fred didn't understand the math, but as he constructed this "what is left" is +100k Democratic votes....that's assuming you're a racist bigot and believe all white people vote Republican.

I understand math just fine.  But I don't understand your answer here.

if you are going to make this a teaching moment then please show your work.

[BmorePat87]

(12-05-2019, 07:18 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Sorry to bump an old, old thread....but this is a very important teaching lesson.

I'm sure Fred didn't understand the math, but as he constructed this "what is left" is +100k Democratic votes....that's assuming you're a racist bigot and believe all white people vote Republican.

 
This gets dismissed again and again.  And if I can make broad strokes, a lot of policies that are deemed racist hurt more whites than blacks.  That's just the reality that whites outnumber blacks almost 5 to 1.   It disproportionately hurts blacks, but elections (except for POTUS) are not proportionate, they are based on the absolute number of votes.  So a lot of policies that are called "racist" by the Democratic Media actually hurt more whites, and would lose elections.  But propaganda has nothing to do with reality.

You could have quoted my post where I presented the fact that there are 3.5m ineligible white voters and 3.2m ineligible black voters which, using 2016 voting data, suggests that only 2.3 million of those 6.7 disenfranchised felons would be GOP voters. 

Wait, you did quote it last year, but you purposefully removed that part of my post and then accused me of not providing numbers 

You're a terrible troll

[JustWinBaby]

(12-05-2019, 01:13 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I understand math just fine.  But I don't understand your answer here.

if you are going to make this a teaching moment then please show your work.

65% of people living below the poverty line are white.  17 states have laws requiring a photo id, while a similar number require a non-photo ID.

So how are voter ID laws racist?  Actual data , much less common sense, says they aren't.


So if you screw 5 white people to screw 1 black person, then you're a REALLY BAD racist.  Common sense...embrace it.

[JustWinBaby]

(12-05-2019, 04:48 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You could have quoted my post where I presented the fact that there are 3.5m ineligible white voters and 3.2m ineligible black voters which, using 2016 voting data, suggests that only 2.3 million of those 6.7 disenfranchised felons would be GOP voters. 

Wait, you did quote it last year, but you purposefully removed that part of my post and then accused me of not providing numbers 

You're a terrible troll

You're moving the bar.  Of course they're trying to block Dem votes, but that's not proof of racism.  And studies show turnout wasn't suppressed.  But that was never the original point - the point was voter ID laws were racist - that is factually wrong and logically wrong.

Maybe you need to start looking for better facts.

[JustWinBaby]

(12-05-2019, 01:09 PM)Dill Wrote: Can you make that dismissed "reality" a bit more specific? Can you name TWO specific federal or state policies deemed "racist" by the Democratic media that actually hurt more whites than blacks?

Are you for real?  The entire point of this sidebar was that Voter ID laws were racist. There's no debate here if you thought otherwise.  I mean, WOW, how is it not bannable to be called on your bullshit and then pretend you were adamantly against what you clearly believed?!?

And I'm not going to waste my time trying to defend anything already confirmed by the courts and the electorate.

[BmorePat87]

(12-11-2019, 04:06 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: You're moving the bar.  Of course they're trying to block Dem votes, but that's not proof of racism.  And studies show turnout wasn't suppressed.  But that was never the original point - the point was voter ID laws were racist - that is factually wrong and logically wrong.

Maybe you need to start looking for better facts.

You're accusing me of moving the bar and then you immediately say you were actually talking about Voter ID laws in a felon disenfranchisement thread despite no one mentioning voter ID laws before this post.

Terrible trolling. 

[fredtoast]

(12-11-2019, 04:04 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: 65% of people living below the poverty line are white.  17 states have laws requiring a photo id, while a similar number require a non-photo ID.

So how are voter ID laws racist?  Actual data , much less common sense, says they aren't.

It has to do with proportionate impact.

The poverty rate among African Americans (20.8%) is over twice as high as among whites (10.1%).  So any issue that affects people in poverty will have twice as big of an impact on the African American population as for white people. 

[Dill]

(12-11-2019, 04:15 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Dill Wrote: Can you make that dismissed "reality" a bit more specific? Can you name TWO specific federal or state policies deemed "racist" by the Democratic media that actually hurt more whites than blacks?

Are you for real?  The entire point of this sidebar was that Voter ID laws were racist. There's no debate here if you thought otherwise.  I mean, WOW, how is it not bannable to be called on your bullshit and then pretend you were adamantly against what you clearly believed?!?

And I'm not going to waste my time trying to defend anything already confirmed by the courts and the electorate.

1. Just say "No! I CANNOT name TWO specific federal or state policies deemed "racist" by the Democratic media. I don't really have any factual/independent evidence to support my contentions here. But I am going to continue referring to 'actual data' without linking to any, and to 'common sense,' which is my name for 'unsupported opinion.'"

2. ??? What am I now "adamantly against" that I clearly believed before?

3. LOL You're happy to waste everyone's time throwing out unsupported claims, but won't waste your own time defending them with links or the "actual data" to which you demand others pay attention.

4. By the way, here is an example of what has been "confirmed by the courts."

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/2017-04-10_Order_Intent.pdf
After enbanc review of the record in this case, the Fifth Circuit majority held that there was sufficient evidence to sustain a conclusion that the Texas voter photo identification bill, SB 14,1was passed with a discriminatory purpose, despite its proponents’ assertions that it was necessary to combat voter fraud.

5. And here is an example of "actual data":

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/688343
Abstract: The proliferation of increasingly strict voter identification laws around the country has raised concerns about voter suppression. Although there are many reasons to suspect that these laws could harm groups like racial minorities and the poor, existing studies have been limited, with most occurring before states enacted strict identification requirements, and they have uncovered few effects. By using validated voting data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study for several recent elections, we are able to offer a more definitive testThe analysis shows that strict identification laws have a differentially negative impact on the turnout of racial and ethnic minorities in primaries and general elections. We also find that voter ID laws skew democracy toward those on the political right.