Who defeated Trump? Low-income voters

[pecksniff]

New study.

Calling into question widespread perceptions of lower-income Americans and their level of political engagement, a new study released Friday detailed the high turnout among poor voters in the November 2020 elections—particularly in battleground states which helped deliver victories for President Joe Biden and Democrats in the Senate and House—following a concerted effort by campaigners to engage with low-income communities regarding the issues that mattered to them in the election.

Released by the Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival (PPC:NCMR); the Kairos Center for Religions, Rights, and Social Justice; and Repairers of the Breach, the study shows that of the 168 million Americans who cast ballots last year, 59 million, or 35%, had an estimated annual household income of less than $50,000, classifying them as poor or low-income.

According to the report, titled "Waking the Sleeping Giant: Low-Income Voters and the 2020 Elections" and written by Kairos Center policy director Shailly Gupta Barnes, those voters were among the Americans that the Poor People's Campaign reached out to last year when it held a non-partisan voter outreach drive across 16 states including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin.

The organization reached over 2.1 million voters, with campaigners speaking with them about "an agenda that includes living wages, healthcare, strong anti-poverty programs, voting rights, and policies that fully address injustices of systemic racism, poverty, ecological devastation, and the war economy," according to the report.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Is the study broken down by race? In the United States race is a better predictor of voting behavior than income.

 

[pecksniff]

Is the study broken down by race? In the United States race is a better predictor of voting behavior than income.

But, except when an unusual factor like Obama is in play, voting behavior by race probably varies less from one election to the next than by income.

 

[pecksniff]

The important thing here is that the Trumpist movement can no longer rely on WWC votes. They have begun to figure out that it is not in their best interests.

 

[rae121452]

i still have the 'black votes matter' sign on my front porch and i intend to have it there permanently.

 

[pecksniff]

i still have the 'black votes matter' sign on my front porch and i intend to have it there permanently.

I'm sure few of them voted for Trump in 2016 or 2020.

 

[bellisarius]

This is a surprise to who?

 

[pecksniff]

This is a surprise to who?

Trump, probably -- he thought he had the "poorly educated" vote sewn up.

 

[rae121452]

and what's more important is that people of color are encouraged to vote, hopefully it will always be for the other guy.

 

[pecksniff]

and what's more important is that people of color are encouraged to vote, hopefully it will always be for the other guy.

Which is why the Pubs are doing everything they can think of to stop them.

 

[CornusKousa]

Which is why the Pubs are doing everything they can think of to stop them.

The pubs haven't done anything to stop them.

 

[pecksniff]

The pubs haven't done anything to stop them.

You know that's a lie. All their voter-suppression measures are calculated to target POC.

 

[CornusKousa]

You know that's a lie. All their voter-suppression measures are calculated to target POC.

You can't show a single one that targets POC.

The leftist race bait is not the rights motives.

 

[pecksniff]

You can't show a single one that targets POC.

The leftist race bait is not the rights motives.

Shutting down polling stations in black neighborhoods . . . cutting early-voting hours so "Souls to the Polls" no longer works . . . all targets POC.

 

[bellisarius]

You know that's a lie. All their voter-suppression measures are calculated to target POC.

You are so full of shit. Identity and eligibility requirements are NOT suppression.

Myth vs reality

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You are so full of shit. Identity and eligibility requirements are NOT suppression.

Myth vs reality

Judges have ruled that they are.

 

[bellisarius]

Judges have ruled that they are.

SOME judges have ruled so. It'll get to SCOTUS eventually. Can't wait to hear those arguments.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

SOME judges have ruled so. It'll get to SCOTUS eventually. Can't wait to hear those arguments.

I'm not surprised you want to hear someone say American citizens shouldn't vote because of the color of their skin.

 

[bellisarius]

I'm not surprised you want to hear someone say American citizens shouldn't vote because of the color of their skin.

I'm waiting for the crowd that argues that it's suppression because the color of some peoples skin makes them too stupid to know where the DMV is, or how to use the internet. I can see Justice Thomas sitting there going, "Amen brother, amen."

 

[Dribble]

I'm waiting for the crowd that argues that it's suppression because the color of some peoples skin makes them too stupid to know where the DMV is, or how to use the internet. I can see Justice Thomas sitting there going, "Amen brother, amen."

What does this have to do with shutting the polls down in black neighborhoods? Exactly....nothing.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I'm waiting for the crowd that argues that it's suppression because the color of some peoples skin makes them too stupid to know where the DMV is, or how to use the internet. I can see Justice Thomas sitting there going, "Amen brother, amen."

You’ll be waiting a long time since no one has ever made that argument.

 

[bellisarius]

What does this have to do with shutting the polls down in black neighborhoods? Exactly....nothing.

That is a completely different discussion and you know it. Perhaps worthy of it's own thread. I've read through more than a few of the studies on that and they're filled with "may", "might", "can possibly lead to", etc. Some people propose a 'vote by mail' system but the ACLU opposes that because "it marginalizes illiterate voters." For every argument there's a counter-argument and many within each parties factions. Bottom line, no matter what is done someone is going to be unhappy about it. And the problem still remains, budget crunches, crunches that are going to be even worse this coming election cycle.

 

[Dribble]

That is a completely different discussion and you know it. Perhaps worthy of it's own thread. I've read through more than a few of the studies on that and they're filled with "may", "might", "can possibly lead to", etc. Some people propose a 'vote by mail' system but the ACLU opposes that because "it marginalizes illiterate voters." For every argument there's a counter-argument and many within each parties factions. Bottom line, no matter what is done someone is going to be unhappy about it. And the problem still remains, budget crunches, crunches that are going to be even worse this coming election cycle.

It isn't a different discussion even if you want to make it one. This has nothing to do with "budgets". It has everything to do with suppression of a voting block Republicans do not like.

As for what the ACLU thinks....let's go to THEIR WEBSITE

https://www.aclu.org/news/voting-rights/why-we-want-to-vote-by-mail/

 

[bellisarius]

And then there's this;

One way to shield certain groups from being targeted by discriminatory policies, such as closing polling locations, is to harness a vote-by-mail system, as is done in Colorado, Oregon and Washington, said Nina Kohn, a law professor at Syracuse University. It insulates voters from location biases so they can more accurately cast their ballot.

But that sort of system, said Young of the ACLU, favors voters who are highly literate.

“If you mess up your ballot,” she said, “it’s not counted.”

Source

I'm not opposed to vote by mail as long as an absolute chain of custody can be established.

 

[Dribble]

And then there's this;



Source

I'm not opposed to vote by mail as long as an absolute chain of custody can be established.

You cite something that argues against your view? How fucking stupid are you? Read your article again