Pants-of-dog wrote:I have already addressed all of this and this contains no new information or argument. Please refer to my previous posts. Thank you.
There is no evidence that these laws promote public confidence in the system. The paper you vociferously defend disproves this argument of yours. The fact that you continue to make that argument while defending the paper that disproves your argument is illogical.
There is also no credible research suggesting they affect elections in any other way, that you continue to parrot those ideas is illogical.
Pants-of-dog wrote:I expect there will be continued legal disputes as these laws are taken to court by the DOJ and others.
Even if there is no evidence that these laws promote public confidence in the system, Republicans will no doubt continue to use this argument to rationalise their attempts to effectively disenfranchise legal voters.
If poor and BIPOC voters voted Republican, none of these voting restrictions would be taking place.
If these laws don't affect results, turnout and registration then the challenges will likely fail either way. You have not shown these laws "effectively disenfranchise legal voters".
I don't think anyone has claimed that in all countries that have voter ID laws either. This includes much of Western Europe and most of Latin America.
Pants-of-dog wrote:Also, support for anti-democratic measures in the Republican party right now is associated with signs of “ethnic antagonism”. (https://www.pnas.org/content/117/37/22752) In other words, the easiest ways to predict who supports these types of voter restrictions, look for racist people like Marjorie Taylor Greene.
I guess then that 60% of Democrats are like Marjorie Taylor Greene. That's the support for voter ID laws among Democrats according to the MIT Election Lab's Survey of the Performance of American Elections. Are you done with this illogical guilt by association standard?