- 31 Jul 2021 18:24
#15183241
Yes, other studies do show a clear impact. Here is one: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10 ... 1420966620
The study to which you allude also disproves your claim that these laws influence fence sitters. So we know your support for these laws is not based on facts.
No. Not unless you can show that these laws would help.
If you cannot show that these laws would create more benefit than the obvious negative impacts, there is no logical reason to keep supporting them.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...
wat0n wrote:It seems according to recent research cited by @Politics_Observer that this is not really the case. Those laws did not affect results, turnout or registration even when looking at them by demographic variables like race/ethnicity, age, gender, voter fraud itself (makes sense, since it is already non-existent), etc.
If you have other literature to cite, please do so.
Yes, other studies do show a clear impact. Here is one: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10 ... 1420966620
The study to which you allude also disproves your claim that these laws influence fence sitters. So we know your support for these laws is not based on facts.
It seems only around 60% of all US adults trusted electoral results before the 2020 election, including 60% of independents, as per the link included above. Care to explain why shouldn't this be concerning?
No. Not unless you can show that these laws would help.
If you cannot show that these laws would create more benefit than the obvious negative impacts, there is no logical reason to keep supporting them.
There is a crack in everything,
That's how the light gets in...