Federal judge puts Florida on 10-year probation after ruling voting law disenfranchises Black voters

[LittleDixie]

It's all statistical. RWs can no longer get away with blocking any individual from voting through poll taxes, literacy tests, etc. So they erect barriers that they know -- and they do it for no other purpose, certainly not "election integrity" -- will statistically deter more poor and POC voters than anyone else -- which might be enough to swing a close election their way.

Here's the thing, though. If they move the drop boxes 100 feet from their current locations, or close a polling station 10 minutes earlier, that will affect some people, too. Anything that they do (even minor changes) will affect the number of people who will vote. The low voter turnout rates in the US shows that there are a lot of people who just filling out their vote on an absentee ballot and mailing it on time is too much of a hassle. Anything you do is likely to cause some people to decide that it is too much trouble.

But, no one is being prohibited from voting. We are talking about the people who are barely motivated to vote, and who will say "fuck it" if there isn't a drop box within walking distance. We aren't talking about the drop boxes being put in a maze or people having to go through an obstacle course to get to them. We're talking about changes that at the worst are inconveniences. Anyone who wants to vote can vote. The real problem is that the electorate you all are fighting for are the voters who don't care and won't expend much effort to vote in the first place.

There are lots of ways to vote. Easy ways. Anyone who is able to vote can vote. Even if they take all of the drop boxes away, or have one less day of voting or whatever. If you want to vote, you can vote with a minimum of fuss. Just because poll workers aren't going door to door and personally processing your vote in your living room while you lay on your couch eating cereal in your boxer shorts does not mean you are being prevented from voting.

 

[ll74]

Here's the thing, though. If they move the drop boxes 100 feet from their current locations, or close a polling station 10 minutes earlier, that will affect some people, too. Anything that they do (even minor changes) will affect the number of people who will vote. The low voter turnout rates in the US shows that there are a lot of people who just filling out their vote on an absentee ballot and mailing it on time is too much of a hassle. Anything you do is likely to cause some people to decide that it is too much trouble.

But, no one is being prohibited from voting. We are talking about the people who are barely motivated to vote, and who will say "fuck it" if there isn't a drop box within walking distance. We aren't talking about the drop boxes being put in a maze or people having to go through an obstacle course to get to them. We're talking about changes that at the worst are inconveniences. Anyone who wants to vote can vote. The real problem is that the electorate you all are fighting for are the voters who don't care and won't expend much effort to vote in the first place.

There are lots of ways to vote. Easy ways. Anyone who is able to vote can vote. Even if they take all of the drop boxes away, or have one less day of voting or whatever. If you want to vote, you can vote with a minimum of fuss. Just because poll workers aren't going door to door and personally processing your vote in your living room while you lay on your couch eating cereal in your boxer shorts does not mean you are being prevented from voting.

They don't have to be prohibited from voting. They just need to demonstrate an indie burden placed on the voter. So evidence of someone needing to wait in line for four or five or six hours would be sufficient That's just one example.

You can skim the ruling and find the word in quite a few places. I'd provide the source for ya, but it was already provided to you earlier and you've already said you're not interested. I'm sure you will continue to use your irrelevant argument either way.

 

[LittleDixie]

They don't have to be prohibited from voting. They just need to demonstrate an indie burden placed on the voter. So evidence of someone needing to wait in line for four or five or six hours would be sufficient That's just one example.

You can skim the ruling and find the word in quite a few places. I'd provide the source for ya, but it was already provided to you earlier and you've already said you're not interested. I'm sure you will continue to use your irrelevant argument either way.

You request an absentee ballot, it comes to your house, you fill it you and mail it back.

Is that really onerous?

Voting in any way in any jurisdiction in the United States is easier by far than doing your taxes.

Yet, we expect everyone to do their taxes or face legal action.

Let's just face facts. This is all about Democrats trying to get more votes. They know that the black population is on their plantation and they've sprinkled the seeds that Democrats are now the Saviors of the Black Race, so they expect that votes will grow from that. They just want to make sure that all of the black people they've programmed can cast their votes for Dems, even if they are lazy and unmotivated. That's what this is all about. I honestly can't see any Dem fighting for a heavily Republican demographic to have expanded voting availability.

 

[ll74]

You request an absentee ballot, it comes to your house, you fill it you and mail it back.

Is that really onerous?

Voting in any way in any jurisdiction in the United States is easier by far than doing your taxes.

Yet, we expect everyone to do their taxes or face legal action.

Let's just face facts. This is all about Democrats trying to get more votes. They know that the black population is on their plantation and they've sprinkled the seeds that Democrats are now the Saviors of the Black Race, so they expect that votes will grow from that. They just want to make sure that all of the black people they've programmed can cast their votes for Dems, even if they are lazy and unmotivated. That's what this is all about. I honestly can't see any Dem fighting for a heavily Republican demographic to have expanded voting availability.

You refuse to address the ruling and instead whine about the same drivel.

Undue burden.

What is a burden to you is not a burden to others and vice versa.

Certainly you believe you would be able to handle the burden that the court has said is above the threshold of proof. I doubt you've waited longer than 30 mins to vote or risked losing your job for taking time or left kids at home by themselves....etc...etc.

Can burdens be overcome? Absolutely. Should we expect effort to overcome them? Absolutely. But there is a certain point where the state is unduly adding burden.....hence the ruling...it's subjective and the court is the one who decides....not you.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Here's the thing, though. If they move the drop boxes 100 feet from their current locations, or close a polling station 10 minutes earlier, that will affect some people, too. Anything that they do (even minor changes) will affect the number of people who will vote. The low voter turnout rates in the US shows that there are a lot of people who just filling out their vote on an absentee ballot and mailing it on time is too much of a hassle. Anything you do is likely to cause some people to decide that it is too much trouble.

But, no one is being prohibited from voting. We are talking about the people who are barely motivated to vote, and who will say "fuck it" if there isn't a drop box within walking distance. We aren't talking about the drop boxes being put in a maze or people having to go through an obstacle course to get to them. We're talking about changes that at the worst are inconveniences. Anyone who wants to vote can vote. The real problem is that the electorate you all are fighting for are the voters who don't care and won't expend much effort to vote in the first place.

There are lots of ways to vote. Easy ways. Anyone who is able to vote can vote. Even if they take all of the drop boxes away, or have one less day of voting or whatever. If you want to vote, you can vote with a minimum of fuss. Just because poll workers aren't going door to door and personally processing your vote in your living room while you lay on your couch eating cereal in your boxer shorts does not mean you are being prevented from voting.

That’s the same argument made to keep minorities from voting in the 60’s.

 

[pecksniff]

Here's the thing, though. If they move the drop boxes 100 feet from their current locations, or close a polling station 10 minutes earlier, that will affect some people, too. Anything that they do (even minor changes) will affect the number of people who will vote. The low voter turnout rates in the US shows that there are a lot of people who just filling out their vote on an absentee ballot and mailing it on time is too much of a hassle. Anything you do is likely to cause some people to decide that it is too much trouble.

To the contrary -- you can also do things that cause people to decide it is less trouble.

 

[pecksniff]

Let's just face facts. This is all about Democrats trying to get more votes.

No, this is all about Republicans trying to prevent that.

 

[pecksniff]

They know that the black population is on their plantation

You are an idiot.

 

[BluesDriver66]

You are an idiot.

View attachment 2139700

 

[LittleDixie]

No, this is all about Republicans trying to prevent that.

Both are true. But the Democrats are also making a mountain out of a molehill.

"Republicans removed a mailbox from this neighborhood that no one uses... VOTER SUPPRESSIONZZ!!!!!!"

 

[jason28053]

Both are true. But the Democrats are also making a mountain out of a molehill.

"Republicans removed a mailbox from this neighborhood that no one uses... VOTER SUPPRESSIONZZ!!!!!!"

The problem is they’re removing Ballot boxes where there is a lot of use

 

[pecksniff]

Both are true.

But it's not a symmetrical picture. Maximization of voter turnout is always a legitimate and praiseworthy goal on nonpartisan civic grounds. Voter suppression is nothing but cheating.

 

[BluesDriver66]

Love how these pro-segregation racists try to hide their 1950's style hold over racist voting schemes with the fig leaf of concerns for the tradition of personal responsibility. Nobody is fooled by that shit. It's pathetic that they even try.

 

[LittleDixie]

But it's not a symmetrical picture. Maximization of voter turnout is always a legitimate and praiseworthy goal on nonpartisan civic grounds. Voter suppression is nothing but cheating.

The Democrats want all the votes they can get because they know that the more people who vote, the more votes Democrats get.

It seems that the people least motivated to participate in democracy are Democrat voters, and so the democrats ultimate goal would be to have a poll worker visit every house to get everyone's vote in their own home as they sit on the couch.

The lease informed, least motivated people vote Democrat, so any minor inconvenience is likely going to keep them from putting in the minimum effort to vote.

**least

 

[Champakian]

Gee, are they just as hard on Latino voting?

Asians? Native Americans? Gays?

Women? Illegals? Children?

The deceased???

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

The Democrats want all the votes they can get because they know that the more people who vote, the more votes Democrats get.

It seems that the people least motivated to participate in democracy are Democrat voters, and so the democrats ultimate goal would be to have a poll worker visit every house to get everyone's vote in their own home as they sit on the couch.

The lease informed, least motivated people vote Democrat, so any minor inconvenience is likely going to keep them from putting in the minimum effort to vote.

This is also the argument racists used to keep minorities from voting 60-70 years ago.

 

[pecksniff]

The lease informed, least motivated people vote Democrat

You are an idiot.

 

[LittleDixie]

You are an idiot.

cool story!

 

[ll74]

The ratio of voters to voter access (drop boxes, precincts, workers, mechanisms) should be the same across the entire state. That is why these laws piss me off ....because they reduce this access to solve imaginary problems.

Every district in a state must be required to prepare for their entire population to vote with the same amount of access.

If Jim in district A waits five mins and Janet in district F waits three hours, that is visibly a problem that should be addressed. That can be addressed by education about early voting or by adding another voting location in Janet's district

 

[Veroe]

The lease informed, least motivated people vote Democrat, so any minor inconvenience is likely going to keep them from putting in the minimum effort to vote.

Untrue. I come from a very red state and a very red family so it was expected I would vote for republicans, and never needed to be informed on the issues at all. Until Trump was elected in 2016, and my interest in politics was piqued. I started paying attention and researching things. And I can tell you now that the more informed I get the less likely I am to ever vote for a republican again.

It's not that I'm a democrat fanboy. They suck ass. It's just that of the two terrible choices I have in political parties in this country I find them less objectionable.