Political Roundtable - Part VII

[dobrojim]

This is much ado about nothing.

So you don't think AL republicans would try to disenfranchise minority voters?

Somehow I'm not convinced.

[nate33]

This is much ado about nothing.

So you don't think AL republicans would try to disenfranchise minority voters?

Somehow I'm not convinced.

Did you even read my well-researched post?

Alabama is obviously a poor state. To save money, they reduced the number of DMV offices. Understandably, those reductions took place in counties with the smallest populations. Some of those small-population counties were majority white, others were majority black. There is no racial bias. There is, however, and anti-rural bias. This rural bias exists everywhere because all states are likely to have a concentration of bureaucratic offices in high-population areas. Ironically, Alabama is probably one of the few states with this bias against rural areas affects both races roughly equally. In most states, it's the whites who live in rural areas and have to deal with being "disenfranchised".

Alabama also has a means of getting an voter ID (not a drivers license) via the mail. They also have a mobile registration system where vehicles move from town to town throughout the rural areas. And let's not act like a 20-mile drive to the neighboring county for a once-in-a-lifetime driver's test is some kind of onerous burden akin to a poll tax. There is nothing racial about this whatsoever. Bringing this up as if it's a real issue is laughable.

[dobrojim]

I glanced over it. Sorry I didn't take the time to look in full detail.

I'm unconvinced that there is no racial bias in how AL governs itself given it's long history of
exactly that. I'm unconvinced that this mobile registration you mention is more than a sham.
I'd read recently that AL was limiting the types of IDs that would be acceptable.

I am convinced that this is yet another example of Republicans attempting to disenfranchise
minority voters who are unlikely to vote Republican under the guise of preventing voter fraud.
Voter fraud has been exceedingly difficult to demonstrate on a scale that would come close
to justifying the means by which incumbent representatives all over the country are going to try
to prevent it. In a number of cases, Republicans have been quite clear about their motives in
enacting these laws, usually in cases where they feel they can speak openly or want to brag
to the base about what a great job they're doing in combating a non-existent problem.

[dckingsfan]

world poverty rates have been plummeting - in no small part due to the US as the world's cop.

I suggest that is wishful thinking. Iraq's economy, nor ours for that matter (except for Halliburton etal),
hasn't been helped.

Wars and/or armed conflict is only good for the economy of arms merchants and other lowlifes.

Winning 'wars' against non-1st world countries is relatively easy. Exit strategies that preserve
our goals have proven over and over again to be difficult at best. And all the harder given the animus
that remains in place as we try to exit. But it does appeal to the rednecks all over amurica
who see US military intervention as the solution to every foreign problem around the globe.

Not wishful thinking at all - more like fact. It is the lack of war that leads to a better environment for all. Poverty rates worldwide HAVE plummeted because of a stable worldwide environment.

Staying in Germany and Europe and playing the cop has greatly increased their economy. Same way with Japan. Same way with Korea. The problem is it takes a long time... you can't bail after a couple of years - you have to have a lot of spine.

But don't get me wrong - I didn't like that we got dragged into Afghanistan - but they were part of 9/11 - right? I especially didn't like that we went into Iraq. But once we got there it was wrong to leave a hole.

Going into WWII was a bummer as well - but we didn't make the same mistake as WWI and bail.

It is easy to turn our heads - and maybe we should just let the world burn. But to say that the stabilization that we brought to the world economy doesn't exist - meh.

[dobrojim]

I think I see the source of our disagreement. You feel our acting as the worlds policeman has prevented
war(s) in places like Germany and Japan. I'm unconvinced that the effect is as clear as you appear to believe,
particularly in Japan. I'm also looking at all the conflicts we actually have engaged in post WWII. It's a surprisingly
lengthy list.

[dobrojim]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/voter-id-laws-charts-maps

Between 2000 and 2010, there were:

649 million votes cast in general elections

47,000 UFO sightings

441 Americans killed by lightning

13 credible cases of in-person voter impersonation

[nate33]

I glanced over it. Sorry I didn't take the time to look in full detail.

I'm unconvinced that there is no racial bias in how AL governs itself given it's long history of
exactly that. I'm unconvinced that this mobile registration you mention is more than a sham.
I'd read recently that AL was limiting the types of IDs that would be acceptable.

I am convinced that this is yet another example of Republicans attempting to disenfranchise
minority voters who are unlikely to vote Republican under the guise of preventing voter fraud.
Voter fraud has been exceedingly difficult to demonstrate on a scale that would come close
to justifying the means by which incumbent representatives all over the country are going to try
to prevent it. In a number of cases, Republicans have been quite clear about their motives in
enacting these laws, usually in cases where they feel they can speak openly or want to brag
to the base about what a great job they're doing in combating a non-existent problem.

Your words are meaningless without any evidence or proof. Basically, you are saying that Republicans in Alabama are racists by definition, so therefore blacks must be being disenfranchised. I'm unimpressed with your logic.

[dobrojim]

I could just as well say I'm equally unimpressed with your knowledge of history.

Tell me again you don't think AL has any partisan or racial motive, conscious or unconscious, in the combination of
their enacting voter ID laws and the choices they made as to where to close DMV offices.

Tell us about George Zimmerman again...

[dckingsfan]

I think I see the source of our disagreement. You feel our acting as the worlds policeman has prevented
war(s) in places like Germany and Japan. I'm unconvinced that the effect is as clear as you appear to believe,
particularly in Japan. I'm also looking at all the conflicts we actually have engaged in post WWII. It's a surprisingly
lengthy list.

It is a surprisingly messy world - and hence the numerous conflicts. During the US' reign as the world cop world-wide poverty has fallen.

Sorry you are unconvinced that our presence in Europe didn't provide stability and sustained growth. I am glad we had leadership after WWII (unlike after WWI) where we stayed and took care of business.

Again, I don't like that we got involved in Iraq - but once you go in - don't make the mistake of WWI and leave a gaping hole - it usually doesn't get filled by the folks you want.

[nate33]

I could just as well say I'm equally unimpressed with your knowledge of history.

Tell me again you don't think AL has any partisan or racial motive, conscious or unconscious, in the combination of
their enacting voter ID laws and the choices they made as to where to close DMV offices.

Tell us about George Zimmerman again...

I'm telling you again that the move to eliminate DMV offices in low population counties does not constitute voter suppression. There isn't even any statistical evidence to suggest that the actual effects, whether conscious or unconscious, serve to affect blacks proportionately. Shouldn't that first be examined before you conclude that racist Republicans are disenfranchising blacks?

[TheSecretWeapon]

I can't recall any case where nate has seen even a possibility of discrimination or racism, but the Official explanation of what's going on in Alabama is at least plausible. Alabama is a poor state, and it doesn't seem egregious to close DMV offices in less populated areas to reduce spending.

That said, the voter ID laws are much more of a pain in the ass for poor people than they are for those even a little more affluent. According to an NYU study, about 25% of blacks and 16% of Hispanics don't have photo ID, compared to 9% of whites. Wild guess, but this probably tracks pretty well with income differential. Why don't blacks and Hispanics and poor whites have photo ID? Well, if you can't afford a car, maybe you don't get a license. If you're going to travel abroad, odds are you're not going to the trouble of getting a passport.

Sure, these folks without photo ID could gather up the necessary documentation and trek down to the DMV (or wherever) and get an ID. It's difficult to imagine folks going to all that effort strictly for the sake of voting, however.

It's interesting that the laws are being implemented where Republicans control state legislatures. It's interesting that the Pennsylvania majority leader said that the state's new voting laws would have allowed Romney to win the state, and that Phyllis Schlafly wrote that new voting laws are intended to reduce the Democrat vote. It's interesting that these laws are being passed to fix a problem which hasn't been proven to even exist. It's interesting that few of the states with ID requirements at the polls have a similar requirement for absentee voters, who are usually older and white.

While the decision to close specific DMV locations in Alabama may not have been primarily racial in intent, it's pretty clear to me that the Republican-backed voter laws are designed to make it more difficult for students, blacks, Hispanics and poor people to vote. Maybe that could be the GOP's new slogan: If you can't persuade 'em, exclude 'em.

[dobrojim]

so if you can build a mildly plausible case, ignore decades (centuries?) of history and
just say, nah, they're not being discriminatory (better word than racist), they're just
trying to save a few bucks the best way they can (when dealing with a problem that
isn't actually a problem).

I can't recall any case where nate has seen even a possibility of discrimination or racism,

So I'm not the only one who has noticed there seems to be a pattern. Of course this isn't proof of anything.
I think it's important to make that clear.

[nate33]

I can't recall any case where nate has seen even a possibility of discrimination or racism

I'm just providing the facts and actual evidence to respond to the never-ending (and rarely factually supported) complaints that racism is around every corner and behind every tree. Call me an anti-anti-racist.

[dckingsfan]

I know that we have an innocent until proven theory in our legal system. But I think that in politics guilty until proven innocent is often the prudent thought. When Putin does something - I am almost always thinking that he is doing something wrong. I think with the politics in AL, having a guilty until proven innocent outlook is reasonable.

So, if we take that view it is hard to look at AL without thinking something fishy is going on. And where there is smoke there is often smoked fish (or something like that).

[montestewart]

I can't recall any case where nate has seen even a possibility of discrimination or racism, but the Official explanation of what's going on in Alabama is at least plausible. Alabama is a poor state, and it doesn't seem egregious to close DMV offices in less populated areas to reduce spending.

That said, the voter ID laws are much more of a pain in the ass for poor people than they are for those even a little more affluent. According to an NYU study, about 25% of blacks and 16% of Hispanics don't have photo ID, compared to 9% of whites. Wild guess, but this probably tracks pretty well with income differential. Why don't blacks and Hispanics and poor whites have photo ID? Well, if you can't afford a car, maybe you don't get a license. If you're going to travel abroad, odds are you're not going to the trouble of getting a passport.

Sure, these folks without photo ID could gather up the necessary documentation and trek down to the DMV (or wherever) and get an ID. It's difficult to imagine folks going to all that effort strictly for the sake of voting, however.

It's interesting that the laws are being implemented where Republicans control state legislatures. It's interesting that the Pennsylvania majority leader said that the state's new voting laws would have allowed Romney to win the state, and that Phyllis Schlafly wrote that new voting laws are intended to reduce the Democrat vote. It's interesting that these laws are being passed to fix a problem which hasn't been proven to even exist. It's interesting that few of the states with ID requirements at the polls have a similar requirement for absentee voters, who are usually older and white.

While the decision to close specific DMV locations in Alabama may not have been primarily racial in intent, it's pretty clear to me that the Republican-backed voter laws are designed to make it more difficult for students, blacks, Hispanics and poor people to vote. Maybe that could be the GOP's new slogan: If you can't persuade 'em, exclude 'em.

50 years ago, Alabama school textbooks portrayed the Klan in heroic terms, Buford Pusser-like sheriffs billy clubbed black grandmothers in the streets, paramilitary goons terrorized law abiding black citizens while local and state authorities turned a blind eye, black school children were burned alive . . . It's nothing short of a miracle that white Alabamans have made such a drastic turnaround that racial prejudice has been virtually eliminated, with the current generation fully rejecting and condemning the vicious racism of their parents and grandparents. You could hear a pin drop at Thanksgiving dinner.

[nate33]

That said, the voter ID laws are much more of a pain in the ass for poor people than they are for those even a little more affluent. According to an NYU study, about 25% of blacks and 16% of Hispanics don't have photo ID, compared to 9% of whites. Wild guess, but this probably tracks pretty well with income differential. Why don't blacks and Hispanics and poor whites have photo ID? Well, if you can't afford a car, maybe you don't get a license. If you're going to travel abroad, odds are you're not going to the trouble of getting a passport.

Of course, blacks actually voted in a higher percentage than whites in the last presidential election. It would appear that, despite the protests to the contrary, the black vote has not been suppressed.



What's interesting is that blacks are more likely to vote than whites despite the fact that whites have a higher income, higher age, and a higher education level (all of which correlate strongly with voting likelihood).




The only conclusion is that blacks are WAY more likely to vote than whites in the same income class, age cohort, and educational cohort. Clearly, there is no serious effort to suppress the black vote, or if there is, it is woefully inadequate.

Another oft-repeated racism accusation is proven to be a myth...

[montestewart]

That said, the voter ID laws are much more of a pain in the ass for poor people than they are for those even a little more affluent. According to an NYU study, about 25% of blacks and 16% of Hispanics don't have photo ID, compared to 9% of whites. Wild guess, but this probably tracks pretty well with income differential. Why don't blacks and Hispanics and poor whites have photo ID? Well, if you can't afford a car, maybe you don't get a license. If you're going to travel abroad, odds are you're not going to the trouble of getting a passport.

Of course, blacks actually voted in a higher percentage than whites in the last presidential election. It would appear that, despite the protests to the contrary, the black vote has not been suppressed.



What's interesting is that blacks are more likely to vote than whites despite the fact that whites have a higher income, higher age, and a higher education level (all of which correlate strongly with voting likelihood).




The only conclusion is that blacks are WAY more likely to vote than whites in the same income class, age cohort, and educational cohort. Clearly, there is no serious effort to suppress the black vote, or if there is, it is woefully inadequate.

Another oft-repeated racism accusation is proven to be a myth…

That's a man-sized post, but I don't see it really addressing anything other than some vaguely defined strawman. Black vote being up nationwide wouldn't disprove individual allegations of voter suppression any more than murder rates being down nationwide would disprove that an individual murder was committed. Maybe Democratic get-out-the-vote measures are just more effective than Republican voter suppression strategies.

[gesa2]

And maybe the historic election and re-election of a country's first black president had an effect. Black turnout has been way lower than white in every election until the last two.

[nate33]

And maybe the historic election and re-election of a country's first black president had an effect. Black turnout has been way lower than white in every election until the last two.

But by a considerably smaller margin than what one would expect based on age/education/income differences. The point is, blacks are the most organized and energetic voting base in the country. They vote. A lot. It's really hard to look at the numbers and conclude that the U.S. is systematically keeping the black vote down.

Let's review:

• Wizardspride posted an article implying that Alabama was intentionally suppressing the black vote by closing DMV offices in black counties.
• I posted that they weren't closing DMV offices in black counties, they were closing them in low-population counties in a manner which appears to have impacted rural blacks and rural whites at about the same rate. This was not racist by design nor by end result.
• dobrojim responds by saying the facts don't matter. We all know Alabama Republicans are racists so they must be doing something racist down there.
• I respond by pointing out that dobrojim had no facts to support his assertion and that until he had facts. I have no reason to believe his theory that Alabama Republicans are evil racists who want to suppress the black vote.
• TSW chimes in with a mild jab at my credibility on the issue and then goes on to point out the difficulty that minorities have in voting because of voter ID laws.
• I respond that things must not be so difficult because blacks actually vote considerably more than whites of the same age, income class and educational achievement. Evil Whitey's attempt to keep the black man down is either non-existent, highly ineffective, or actively counter-productive.
• Montestewart calls it a strawman argument.

Far from being full of strawman arguments, I think my presence in this debate provided some critical information to the issue. Did anybody else point out that the DMV closings were in low population counties? I think not. I'm sure you all nodded your head in silent agreement that those evil Alabama Republicans are at it again. Did anyone else here know the voting numbers? That blacks voted more than whites in the last election and just as much as whites in the prior election? And that blacks vote way more than whites when adjusted for age and income?

It looks like my job here is to continue to challenge the Narrative. I'm going to keep posting facts to counter many of the emotional and unsupported assertions on race that keep getting thrown out here. I hope, maybe someday, it'll force some of you to reconsider what you think you know about some of these issues. So far, it hasn't seemed to have worked. When the data and facts contradict the assertions of this board (like crime data, or police shooting data, or the Michael Wilson forensic evidence), everyone chooses to ignore the data and continue to believe their unsupported dogma. It's probably a futile effort, but at least it's entertaining.

[Induveca]

Nate, not futile at all. Those stirring the pot and trumpeting "racism" at every turn need to be countered with exactly your approach.

Fact-checking media racism claims with your approach would make for an interesting site. Sadly, the owners themselves would be declared racist if most claims were shot down instead of upheld.