DOJ Puts States on Notice About Election Law Changes - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15183349
wat0n wrote:PO provided such quote from one of the authors from the better study. If you have evidence from a large sample study stating the opposite that at least follows a basic identification strategy (DiD is not all that complicated after all) I'll be happy to read it.


And once again, you fail to provide the evidence for which I have asked.

Since you have refused or misunderstood at least four times now, this line of questioning is pointless.

Now, since we have several studies that show one thing and only one study that shows the opposite, wnd since you have not supported your claim about methodology with any specific evidence, the lgical thing is to assume that this impact exists.

When only 60% of independents trust the electoral system, then yes I'd say skepticism about the procedural aspects of it is more widespread than it should be. And it's not just among Republicans or Democrat voters, who were showing similar levels of trust in the system before the 2020 election.


Again, this does not change the fact that these laws are not going to change anyone’s minds, and so your entire argument for them falls apart.

The fact that a large percentage of people believe some dumb thing because they ignore evidence will not change with more evidence.

Maybe, under this reasoning one would claim the Democrats were actually trying to regulate political speech in their concern about Russian interference, just like Republicans may indeed be hoping to regulate the actual voting in their concern about integrity. I'd say both are indeed possible and if Trump had been reelected the Republicans would be the ones trusting the system and the Democrats claiming there was foreign (Russian) interference consisting in doing propaganda campaigns not dissimilar to those done by the US itself - just like after the 2016 election. And their voters seem to mirror this type of behavior, judging from the sudden increase in trust of the system among Democrats and a corresponding decrease in trust among Republicans (independents' trust remained basically flat after).

Thankfully in practice neither party gets to impose their preferences on everyone else, despite the feelings of their supporters, as the system of checks and balances acts to prevent either from doing so.


The Russian interference thing is irrelevant.

So this whole part can be ignored.

Back to the topic, this is an obvious ploy by Republicans to stop poor and BIPOC voters in battleground states.

It is voter suppression, and you are justifying it based on a disproved idea that this will change people’s confidence in the system.
#15183350
Pants-of-dog wrote:And once again, you fail to provide the evidence for which I have asked.

Since you have refused or misunderstood at least four times now, this line of questioning is pointless.

Now, since we have several studies that show one thing and only one study that shows the opposite, wnd since you have not supported your claim about methodology with any specific evidence, the lgical thing is to assume that this impact exists.


The "specific evidence" like what? That you don't know about causal inference? That you are in no position to understand neither of the papers we've discussed ITT?

The paper PO posted is a lot more credible than the second one you posted (can't assess the first one, since it's behind a paywall), which is (again) not unlike the pirates and global temperatures graph. In fact it's basically the same thing: Pick a subgroup, then simply plot turnout rates, registration rates or some other outcome in the Y axis, whether the states have voter ID laws or not in the X axis and show the correlation.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Again, this does not change the fact that these laws are not going to change anyone’s minds, and so your entire argument for them falls apart.


And by the same measure your argument against them falls apart as well: They also don't really seem to affect the results, turnout and registration at all. So why not make sure to shore the credibility of the system up as much as possible as other posters here have said? Why not take away from the GOP the means to whine about losing an election again?

Pants-of-dog wrote:The fact that a large percentage of people believe some dumb thing because they ignore evidence will not change with more evidence.


The more evidence you can gather against those who want to undermine the election results, the better. I don't think not doing anything will help matters at all.

Pants-of-dog wrote:The Russian interference thing is irrelevant.

So this whole part can be ignored.


For Democrats it was, hence all the drama around Mueller's report. Maybe you should tell them so they won't try to push that idea anymore, and just accept that result too.

Pants-of-dog wrote:Back to the topic, this is an obvious ploy by Republicans to stop poor and BIPOC voters in battleground states.

It is voter suppression, and you are justifying it based on a disproved idea that this will change people’s confidence in the system.


Credible research suggests that such voter suppression does not actually happen as a result of voter ID laws in reality. It seems indeed that a large percentage of people will believe some dumb thing because they ignore the new evidence.
#15183352
wat0n wrote:And by the same measure your argument against them falls apart as well: They also don't really seem to affect the results, turnout and registration at all. So why not make sure to shore the credibility of the system up as much as possible as other posters here have said? Why not take away from the GOP the means to whine about losing an election again?


Because it disenfranchises legal voters.

That is the intent and the impact.

The more evidence you can gather against those who want to undermine the election results, the better. I don't think not doing anything will help matters at all.

For Democrats it was, hence all the drama around Mueller's report. Maybe you should tell them so they won't try to push that idea anymore, and just accept that result too.

Credible research suggests that such voter suppression does not actually happen as a result of voter ID laws in reality. It seems indeed that a large percentage of people will believe some dumb thing because they ignore the new evidence.


None of this has any intelligent argument that has not already been addressed.
#15183357
Pants-of-dog wrote:Because it disenfranchises legal voters.

That is the intent and the impact.


I'm still waiting for you to provide research that credibly shows that is actually the case. You claim to understand what parameter identification is about, if so you understand why the second paper you posted is crap and proves nothing.

But I guess you'll keep peddling that trash, just as you did with unconscious biases - despite all scientific evidence against that nonsensical myth.

Pants-of-dog wrote:None of this has any intelligent argument that has not already been addressed.


Much like your posts ITT
#15183367
@wat0n

None of that addresses my points and has already been discussed too many times.

Please let me know if you have nay new arguments or rebuttals. Until then, please know that I understand why you think disenfranchisement is justified.

I simply think you are factually wrong about your justification and the level of disenfranchisement.
#15183368
The former president is a piss bitch baby who is emotionally incapable of admitting he lost and claims the election was fraudulent.

Because a significant portion of the American public believes and worships a straight queen from New York we must now enact draconian measures to ensure election integrity to appease the dumb babies.

This is basically what I'm hearing from the voter fraud morons in this thread. Let's do everything we can to make the authoritarian morons happy. Their dumb feelings are very important, and they will call everyone baby blood drinking Satan worshipers while we bend over backwards for them, but let's do everything we can to make the dumb babies happy.
#15183372
JUST ANOTHER GENTLE AND FRIENDLY REMINDER THAT EVERYONE IS WAITING ON THE EDGE OF THEIR SEAT FOR @JUIN TO TELL US WHY HE OPPOSES GIVING WATER TO VOTERS WAITING IN LINE AND WHO AND WHERE HE THINKS THIS WONDERFUL LEGISLATION THAT SERVES THE GEORGIAN ELECTORATE WILL BE ENFORCED UPON

WE DON'T WANT TO THINK YOU'RE A PUSSY COWARD WHO CAN'T EXPLAIN HIS BELIEFS, I'M SURE YOU'RE JUST BUSY
#15183375
Pants-of-dog wrote:@wat0n

None of that addresses my points and has already been discussed too many times.

Please let me know if you have nay new arguments or rebuttals. Until then, please know that I understand why you think disenfranchisement is justified.

I simply think you are factually wrong about your justification and the level of disenfranchisement.


And I think, with a stronger claim, that you are wrong about your claims about disenfranchisement. And it's stronger because the papers you provided have a poor methodology, while the paper that suggests voter ID laws have no discernible effects (in pretty much anything, including disenfranchisement) has a much better one (and better data as well).

It seems that, just as it happened with implicit bias, you seem unable to accept papers done with methodological improvements when their results disagree with your preconceived beliefs.
#15183379
wat0n wrote:
It seems that, just as it happened with implicit bias, you seem unable to accept papers done with methodological improvements when their results disagree with your preconceived beliefs.



Project much?

This has been going on since the 1800s, it's a hydra with many heads, and it's well documented.

Check the several hundred pages of documentation in the re-authorisation of the VRA.

And then go to a university library, ask the research librarian for help.
#15183408
late wrote:Project much?

This has been going on since the 1800s, it's a hydra with many heads, and it's well documented.

Check the several hundred pages of documentation in the re-authorisation of the VRA.

And then go to a university library, ask the research librarian for help.


Recent research suggests voter ID laws don't do that. Although it was an open question in the literature as well, judging from how all papers mention the evidence is mixed (including the shitty ones).
#15183412
wat0n wrote:
Recent research suggests voter ID laws don't do that.



That's one head of the hydra, there are several others.

Jim Crow is coming back. It's possible that Biden can get enough out of the Senate to block it, but with the help of the Supreme Court, it's definitely on it's way.
#15183415
JUST ANOTHER GENTLE AND FRIENDLY REMINDER THAT EVERYONE IS WAITING ON THE EDGE OF THEIR SEAT FOR @JUIN TO TELL US WHY HE OPPOSES GIVING WATER TO VOTERS WAITING IN LINE AND WHO AND WHERE HE THINKS THIS WONDERFUL LEGISLATION THAT SERVES THE GEORGIAN ELECTORATE WILL BE ENFORCED UPON

ANSWER US, YOU WEAK LITTLE BITCH. TELL US WHY IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL TO GIVE PEOPLE WAITING IN LINE TO VOTE WATER, YOU FUCKING STUPID PIECE OF SHIT






















































































ANSWER THE QUESTION, YOU WEAK LITTLE COWARDLY BITCH. YOU LOVE THE GEORGIAN STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE WORK THEY DO, TELL US WHY YOU LOVE IT. YOU LITTLE PUSSY BITCHMADE COWARD. TELL US WHY YOU THINK GIVING SOMEONE A CUP OF WATER SHOULD EVER BE ILLEGAL, YOU WEAK BITCH. TELL US. NOW

BUCK BUCK BUCK B'CAW, BITCH. STOP BEING A SCARED LITTLE CHICKEN. BE A FUCKING MAN AND TELL US WHY YOU BELIEVE IN THIS SHIT, YOU COWARD PUSSY

I AM GOING TO FUCK YOUR WIFE AND MAKE YOU WATCH AND IT WILL BE THE BEST SEX YOUR WIFE HAS EVER HAD BECAUSE IT WILL THE FIRST TIME IN DECADES THAT YOUR WIFE HAS FUCKED A MAN WHO BELIEVES WHAT HE SAYS AND HAS HAD EVEN THE BAREST CONVICTIONS OF HIS BELIEFS, YOU SMALL DICKED BITCH WITH NO CONCRETE BELIEFS
Image
Last edited by SpecialOlympian on 01 Aug 2021 16:12, edited 2 times in total.
#15183421
late wrote:That's one head of the hydra, there are several others.

Jim Crow is coming back. It's possible that Biden can get enough out of the Senate to block it, but with the help of the Supreme Court, it's definitely on it's way.


Maybe it is, but I'm referring to that one. Each of these measures should be analyzed on their merits, or else the same standard would be applied to e.g. attempts to regulate social media to "avoid a repeat of 2016", don't you think?

At least voter ID laws don't seem to disenfranchise voters in practice, but that doesn't mean others laws don't. The ban on giving water to voters who wait for example doesn't seem to have anything meaningful to do with election integrity and I can't see those accomplishing anything except encouraging people to refrain from voting face to face - but I'm willing to hear out any other possible reasons for them. And even among voter ID laws, not all of them are equal and details matter, e.g. GA's is absurdly strict as a mismatch in the print name between two different gov't issued documents (the ID card and the voter registration) bars people from voting, even if the ID/social security numbers match - I can't see how this accomplishes anything but to limit people from voting, and over things that are not necessarily their fault (it's possible the government itself messed up), but again I'm willing to let the GA Republicans to make their case.
#15183429
wat0n wrote:
Maybe it is, but I'm referring to that one. Each of these measures should be analyzed on their merits, or else the same standard would be applied to e.g. attempts to regulate social media to "avoid a repeat of 2016", don't you think?



It's a scam.

It's also part of Jim Crow... You create enough obstacles that Dems can't win. This shit is over a century old, and anyone with a couple of brain cells to rub together can see it for what it is.

Oh, and if they get away with it, next year they'll be back with more, it's how those aholes work. Like I said, look at the documentation in the VRA. There's several HUNDRED pages, and it's depressing. Racists are compulsive and not quite sane. Back when the VRA actually worked, the courts were constantly knocking down this sort of thing.
#15183430
SpecialOlympian wrote:It does, retard. That's why the GOP keeps whining about it. How are you this dense?


Too bad decent recent academic research on the matter doesn't quite agree, huh?

Maybe they believe it does. Or maybe it's a way for them to push the narrative fraud was a thing in the 2020 election, as it would be odd for them to cry fraud and not do anything about it in their own home states.

Either way, it doesn't matter. What matters if what do these laws actually do, not what you believe they do - and they don't seem to do much one way or another.

late wrote:It's a scam.

It's also part of Jim Crow... You create enough obstacles that Dems can't win. This shit is over a century old, and anyone with a couple of brain cells to rub together can see it for what it is.


But Dems can in fact win. They actually won in GA for starters, and the state GOP was the one who stood by the result and which exposed Trump's attempts to pressure them to commit actual fraud. This may be "over a century old" yet it just doesn't work as intended if Dems still win regardless.
#15183432
wat0n wrote:Too bad decent recent academic research on the matter doesn't quite agree, huh?

Maybe they believe it does. Or maybe it's a way for them to push the narrative fraud was a thing in the 2020 election, as it would be odd for them to cry fraud and not do anything about it in their own home states.


There was no fraud, idiot Review the court transcriptions where it say [Rudy Giuliani farted] if you care that hard. You stupid, stupid man.

Either way, it doesn't matter. What matters if what do these laws actually do, not what you believe they do - and they don't seem to do much one way or another.


The laws were upheld and that's why Trump's clown car of lawyers kept losing cases. You stupid, stupid man.


But Dems can in fact win. They actually won in GA for starters, and the state GOP was the one who stood by the result and which exposed Trump's attempts to pressure them to commit actual fraud. This may be "over a century old" yet it just doesn't work as intended if Dems still win regardless.

What the fuck is your point? Do you just like being embarrassed?
#15183435
wat0n wrote:


But Dems can in fact win. They actually won in GA for starters, and the state GOP was the one who stood by the result and which exposed Trump's attempts to pressure them to commit actual fraud. This may be "over a century old" yet it just doesn't work as intended if Dems still win regardless.



You might want to start paying attention to what goes on, if you live here.

You also might want to learn something about this, I can't spend all day correcting your mistakes...

So are you trolling or just slow.
#15183443
SpecialOlympian wrote:There was no fraud, idiot Review the court transcriptions where it say [Rudy Giuliani farted] if you care that hard. You stupid, stupid man.


I didn't say they are right. But if they claim so, it's entirely consistent for them to start pushing for laws dealing with election integrity. It would be odd for them to cry fraud and then not do anything about it. In fact, not doing anything would lead people to claim they are bullshitting.

SpecialOlympian wrote:The laws were upheld and that's why Trump's clown car of lawyers kept losing cases. You stupid, stupid man.


Sure, which is why I don't believe the GOP's allegations. And by letting them have those voter ID laws, the next time they whine upon losing an election it will be easy to tell them that they are the ones who set up the anti fraud system they wanted so they have no reason to whine about it now.

By the way, how do you explain courts ruled against the GOP here? I mean, weren't you the one claiming the court system is racist based on cases like the Trayvon Martin affair a few months ago? Why didn't the courts uphold Trump's election?

SpecialOlympian wrote:What the fuck is your point? Do you just like being embarrassed?


@late

The point is that those laws don't work as you both say they do if Dems still win. All it takes is for Democrats voters to head out and vote. That's it. Same holds for Republicans in Blue states.

So how about the US starts having election procedures more like those in other western democracies?
#15183449
wat0n wrote:




@late

The point is that those laws don't work as you both say they do if Dems still win.



Definitely troll.

Actually the fix is childishly simple, and some states already have automatic registration. Australia has mandatory voting, and that would just plain kill this.

Guess what.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 9

There is no redemption for suicides taking down e[…]

The SPD in Germany is a center-left party. Die Li[…]

Speaking of dishonesty, please quote an argumen[…]

Universal Basic Income is a scam.

Feel free to show that I am wrong by providing evi[…]