# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 12, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943 "2012-06-12T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 241
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4801 "2014-05-27T16:32:22Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Nothing, NOTHING in that has anything to do with in-person voter fraud at all. Nothing in the list you wrote has anything to do with in-person voter fraud? Yes, that’s true. But since you wrote the list, it seems obvious that you could choose not to include it. So my question to you is: how many of those votes were cast by persons not legally qualified to vote? > [@](#): > > Your position on this has always been a bit weird. Is your objective to (1) make sure that future close elections as accurately as possible reflect the will of the people? or (2) future close elections have results which, even if they do not reflect the will of the people, at least are nice and definitive and don’t leave everyone hanging? Because your support of voter ID laws seems to give a tiny boost to (2) in exchange for a potentially large hit to (1)… and that large hit to (1) itself translates to a potentially large hit to (2), meaning you’re worse off in all ways than you started, and, more importantly, you’re not at all addressing any of the real issues that showed up in Florida 2000 at all. In fact, I’d argue that anything which weakens (1) effectively weakens (2). If there’s a state in which there are a bunch of voter role purges and weird ID restrictions and reports of immigrants with funny names not being able to register and we think that was done on purpose, and then there’s an election which is super close, and the side doing the “suppressing” wins by a tiny number of votes, there is going to be a TON if distrust and unrest, even if the actual verification of who voted and who they voted for was done by God himself. Both (1) and (2). However, since I contend that the people remain free to express their will by voting, and no Voter ID law creates a substantial impediment to that, the adoption of Voter ID laws don’t create any meaningful conflict between (1) and (2). Now, I agree that voter roll purges conducted with nugatory criteria do create a conflict with goal (1). Therefore, I do not support such purges. If there exists a systematic effort to prevent immigrants who are U.S. citizens from registering or voting because they have funny names, then this, too, threatens (2) and I do not support such efforts. I do, however, support Voter ID. That’s all. That does not translate into support of any other programs, plans, schemes, designs, or motives. > [@](#): > > And yet another specious comparison. A cop giving someone a speeding ticket is a professional law enforcement officer interacting at some length with a specific individual, at most maybe 30 or 40 in a day, compared with someone sitting at a table watching people line up to vote and checking their names off in a book, who sees thousands of people in a day without any specific interaction. Furthermore, there’s all the extra paperwork and car registration and so forth, so it would take an extremely unlikely situation for the entire speeding conviction to rest solely on one officer’s sworn testimony that that guy is the same guy I saw four months ago. 30 or 40 Monday, 30 or 40 Tuesday, 30 or 40 Wednesday, 30 for 40 Thursday, 30 or 40 Friday. And then the next week, and the next, and the next, and after several months, the trial for the eighth guy he pulled over on the first Wednesday. And his testimony is still legally sufficient to convict the guy for speeding. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4802 "2014-05-27T16:53:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > So my view trumps yours because my view was the basis for the actual laws enacted. > > Except in some states, where your view evidently trumped mine and no such laws were enacted. So you agree that the statement that lack of confidence being more real that lack of confidence due to the barriers put up to prevent people from voting is just a matter of opinion and carries no empirical weight. In fact looking back at it, I actually agree with your original statement … > [@Bricker](#): > > I’d say there is a huge difference between the more generic “lack of confidence” that arises from the implementation of Voter ID and the more specific lack of confidence that arises from a close election in which it is clear that a small number of illegal votes may turn the result. > . Yes there is a huge difference between the two. The difference being that one is real cause for concern that has a non vanishing probability of actually turning an election, while the other is just paranoid fantasy. As far as your weather example the difference is that one is the direct result of political manipulation while the other is the result of an unavoidable act of nature. If someone created a weather control machine and specifically turned it on to rain on Election day, I would be upset with them as well. Or as a more extreme example, we still prosecute murder even though the person could have just as easily died from a heart attack. > [@Bricker](#): > > Can you remind me of a few of those provocateur cases? Because I agree that a person trying to register and vote in a non-Voter-ID state would have a near 100% success rate, assuming they wished to remain anonymous and not subsequently expose themselves to criminal prosecution by admitting an act that could not, but for their admission, be proved. I may have to withdraw the claim of multiple cases of conviction. Some of the cases I only remember vaguely and so can’t provide cites, [One of the cases](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/28/roxanne-rubin_n_2566297.html) I remembered was actually an instance of voting twice, rather than impersonation. The second, was the [O’Keefe](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/11/402756/james-o-keefe-voter-fraud/) situation where one out of multiple attempts were caught, but the perpetrator left before he could be captured by police. So I guess the proper calculation would be to find what percentage of people attempting to vote, are challenged regarding their identity but flee the premises before being caught. Multiply this percentage by the number of attempts Okeefe made, and that is approximately your voter fraud percentage. Or if we imagine that there is say only 5% chance that a person who has been unmasked can be aprehended, multiple the number of people arrested on the spot for in person voter fraud, by the number of attempts O’Keeffe made times 20, and there is your total number of cases of voter fraud. ---
**Author:** ![Cyros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a698b9/32.png) [@Cyros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cyros)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4803 "2014-05-27T17:01:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. > > First let me note the irony. Previous arguments against the requirement of valid photo ID in order to vote have inveighed against the difficulty of obtaining such ID. Are you now arguing that obtaining fake IDs _of such quality as to be indistunguishable from real ID_ to be of “relative ease?” > > Really? Relative to what? Not irony, we are speaking of different populations. A ne’er do well college student with friends with cars and certain forms of ID can cross provincial borders and present themselves to the liquor commission as Bobby Rex, a 19 year old resident and receive a liquor ID to be used throughout the school year with ease as compared to a guy in the same small town without access to a car and who works 2 jobs and has no time or method to get to said liquor commission. And are you saying that identity theft is not a common place crime? Sure, it is normally for your credit but if someone wanted to vote illegally why would the se methods not work just as well for obtaining the requisite ID. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4804 "2014-05-27T17:12:27Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > So I guess the proper calculation would be to find what percentage of people attempting to vote, are challenged regarding their identity but flee the premises before being caught. Multiply this percentage by the number of attempts Okeefe made, and that is approximately your voter fraud percentage. I’ve never heard of even a single instance of the first thing happening, have you? Surely it would if it were real, there are so many people depending on the problem being real in order to prop up their arguments. But, zero times anything equals … ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4805 "2014-05-27T17:16:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > 30 or 40 Monday, 30 or 40 Tuesday, 30 or 40 Wednesday, 30 for 40 Thursday, 30 or 40 Friday. And then the next week, and the next, and the next, and after several months, the trial for the eighth guy he pulled over on the first Wednesday. > > And his testimony is still legally sufficient to convict the guy for speeding. IIRC, cops frequently refresh their memory by looking at their notes. If they had to pick the driver out of a line-up months after the fact, they couldn’t do it. It is only possible because of the contemporaneous that the driver loses. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4806 "2014-05-27T17:44:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why did you immediately challenge my claim – one I was able to at least provide some evidence for by pointing out that my posting history here was free of any examples supporting the **septimus** claim – and leave unchallenged the **septimus** claim itself, for which the evidence was “… a study with experimental confirmation that people like Bricker are purely partisan…” The quick and basically correct answer is because I read your posts in this thread and skim over everyone else’s, because in general you’re the person I’m arguing with. I suppose I could stop and find every incidence in this thread when a poster on the left goes into hyperbole or outright falsehood when describing your position or character and argue with them about it, but that would basically leave me no time to do anything else in my life. Furthermore, while I hope I generally debate you respectfully, politely and honestly, you should not forget that I find at least parts of your position and attitude on this issue to be basically reprehensible, which doesn’t really put me in the greatest mood to be also constantly leaping to your defense. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4807 "2014-05-27T17:47:03Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Yes there is a huge difference between the two. The difference being that one is real cause for concern that has a non vanishing probability of actually turning an election, while the other is just paranoid fantasy. Yes, as the Georgia example shows, the claims that imposing Voter ID will lessen minority turnout are paranoid fantasy. But the real cause for concern is that another Florida 2000 situation may arise, and the electorate will wonder if the votes that made up the margin of victory came from illegal voters. > [@](#): > > I may have to withdraw the claim of multiple cases of conviction. Some of the cases I only remember vaguely and so can’t provide cites, [One of the cases](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/28/roxanne-rubin_n_2566297.html) I remembered was actually an instance of voting twice, rather than impersonation. From a [slightly more in-depth story on this incident:](http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2013/01/24/plea-deal-in-voter-fraud-case/) > [@](#): > > Rubin insisted outside court that she never intended to actually vote twice. She voted once Oct. 29 near her Henderson home and **was stopped at a second early voting polling place in Las Vegas after shouting to her husband that poll workers hadn’t checked her photo ID**. You valorize this as showing that the system worked? Can you explain what mechanism would have stopped her if she had remained quiet, not drawn attention to herself, and cast another ballot? > [@](#): > > The second, was the [O’Keefe](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/11/402756/james-o-keefe-voter-fraud/) situation where one out of multiple attempts were caught, but the perpetrator left before he could be captured by police. Right - presumably the other attempts would have been successful. > [@](#): > > So I guess the proper calculation would be to find what percentage of people attempting to vote, are challenged regarding their identity but flee the premises before being caught. Multiply this percentage by the number of attempts Okeefe made, and that is approximately your voter fraud percentage. Or if we imagine that there is say only 5% chance that a person who has been unmasked can be aprehended, multiple the number of people arrested on the spot for in person voter fraud, by the number of attempts O’Keeffe made times 20, and there is your total number of cases of voter fraud. No - just of voter fraud based on using the name of someone who is dead: literal voter impersonation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4808 "2014-05-27T17:56:54Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > The quick and basically correct answer is because I read your posts in this thread and skim over everyone else’s, because in general you’re the person I’m arguing with. I suppose I could stop and find every incidence in this thread when a poster on the left goes into hyperbole or outright falsehood when describing your position or character and argue with them about it, but that would basically leave me no time to do anything else in my life. Furthermore, while I hope I generally debate you respectfully, politely and honestly, you should not forget that I find at least parts of your position and attitude on this issue to be basically reprehensible, which doesn’t really put me in the greatest mood to be also constantly leaping to your defense. You do generally debate me honestly, respectfully, and politely. But it puts me in the position I’ve complained of many times before: weak arguments from me are scrutinized; weak arguments from other are ignored unless I scrutinize them. I’m the bacteria in the penicillin; my opponents are the bacteria in the petri dish. I’m suggesting to you that Richard Feynman had something to say about that approach: > [@](#): > > We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which we now know not to be quite right. It’s a little bit off, because he had the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It’s interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of the electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bigger than Millikan’s, and the next one’s a little bit bigger than that, and the next one’s a little bit bigger than that, until finally they settle down to a number which is higher. > > Why didn’t they discover that the new number was higher right away? It’s a thing that scientists are ashamed of–this history–because it’s apparent that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high above Millikan’s, they thought something must be wrong–and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number closer to Millikan’s value they didn’t look so hard. And so they eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like that. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4809 "2014-05-27T17:58:31Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > IIRC, cops frequently refresh their memory by looking at their notes. If they had to pick the driver out of a line-up months after the fact, they couldn’t do it. It is only possible because of the contemporaneous that the driver loses. Their notes don’t include pictures. Their testimony is still legally sufficient to convict. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4810 "2014-05-27T18:12:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, as the Georgia example shows, the claims that imposing Voter ID will lessen minority turnout are paranoid fantasy… It does? So, you dismiss out of hand the possibility that the wretched plan simply backfired? Can you substantiate that? Or are we simply to accept it based on your spotless record for honesty and candor? > [@](#): > > …But the real cause for concern is that another Florida 2000 situation may arise, and the electorate will wonder if the votes that made up the margin of victory came from illegal voters… Happened right here in Baja Canada, Franken-Coleman, Franken wins by the eyelash of a butterfly, exhaustive recount ensues. All on the record, Counselor. I live amongst them, and have yet to see any hue and cry over illegal voters tipping the election. Why not? Even though, as you say, the voter id laws here are too “lax”? I’ll go way out on a limb and suggest its because there wasn’t any. You have a better explanation, I’m sure, and I await with bated breath. (By the by, your declaration that you “do not support” sordid schemes for electoral advantage…might want to tone it down a bit. I know I have remarked on your rather placid response to such skulduggery, but “do not support”? Lets not fly off the handle, here. Mustn’t overdo it. That would be bad.) ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4811 "2014-05-27T18:17:46Z")
He only supports the effects, not the motives. Be fair. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4812 "2014-05-27T18:41:05Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > Yes, as the Georgia example shows, the claims that imposing Voter ID will lessen minority turnout are paranoid fantasy… > > It does? So, you dismiss out of hand the possibility that the wretched plan simply backfired? Can you substantiate that? Or are we simply to accept it based on your spotless record for honesty and candor? Substantiation: [http://www.ajc.com/news/news/despite-voter-id-law-minority-turnout-up-in-georgi/nR2bx/](http://www.ajc.com/news/news/despite-voter-id-law-minority-turnout-up-in-georgi/nR2bx/) > [@Atlanta Journal Constitution](#): > > Turnout among black and Hispanic voters increased from 2006 to 2010, dramatically outpacing population growth for those groups over the same period. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4813 "2014-05-27T18:45:00Z")
Hmm, what else could have happened in African-American life between 2006-2010 that might account for an increase in voter turnout? I have no idea, do you? ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4814 "2014-05-27T19:06:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, that’s true. But since you wrote the list, it seems obvious that you could choose not to include it. There’s a simple reason I chose not to include it, because it is one of hundreds of hypothetical things that COULD have been problems, but which I have no evidence to think WERE problems, so why clutter up ACTUAL problems by including mention of hypothetical possible problems? > [@](#): > > and no Voter ID law creates a substantial impediment to that, This may be the key issue. At one point I believe you agreed that a poorly implemented voter ID law in fact could prevent a substantial impediment to voting. Do you in fact agree with that? If so, what’s your evidence that of all the various voter ID laws passed around the country, none are poorly implemented? Particularly given that you seem to agree that in at least some of those cases the people writing those laws have incentive to deliberately craft them poorly? > [@](#): > > And his testimony is still legally sufficient to convict the guy for speeding. This is an exceptionally stupid tangent, even for this thread, so I will just say this: suppose it’s 1960 and I have a friend with a truck who didn’t look much like me. I borrow his truck. I’m driving around. I get pulled over for speeding. The officer asks me for ID. I produce my friend’s registration and claim to be my friend. He writes down a bunch of info in his logbook, which records that on (date) he pulled over (my friend’s name) for speeding, looked at (some list of documents). Then 3 months later my friend gets a summons to appear in court. He does. He says “this is bullshit, I was never pulled over for speeding”. They summon the cop into the courtroom. The cop is a hard working and diligent guy but not possessed of superhuman memory. The cop reviews his log book, and swears under oath that it was in my fact my friend who got pulled over for speeding. My friend has to pay a fine (and probably ceases to be my friend, assuming he remembers that it was me who borrowed his truck that day). I can’t see anything that would stop that from happening, and I would in no way hold it against the cop if he honestly got that wrong in that type of situation. Fortunately, however, that’s a situation in which the cost to society if that happens fairly rarely is that the wrong person (who already has to be in a fairly specifically contrived situation) has to pay a speeding fine. That’s much less serious than democracy being subverted. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4815 "2014-05-27T19:19:22Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > This may be the key issue. At one point I believe you agreed that a poorly implemented voter ID law in fact could prevent a substantial impediment to voting. Do you in fact agree with that? If so, what’s your evidence that of all the various voter ID laws passed around the country, none are poorly implemented? Particularly given that you seem to agree that in at least some of those cases the people writing those laws have incentive to deliberately craft them poorly? I do agree that a poorly implemented voter ID law in fact could constitute a substantial impediment to voting. (Not what you said, but your context makes me think you mistyped). You ask for my evidence? I haven’t heard of any. Until I hear of any, I can hardly know of them. Isn’t it for you to identify an implementation you claim is poor? > [@](#): > > This is an exceptionally stupid tangent, even for this thread, so I will just say this: suppose it’s 1960 and I have a friend with a truck who didn’t look much like me. I borrow his truck. I’m driving around. I get pulled over for speeding. The officer asks me for ID. I produce my friend’s registration and claim to be my friend. He writes down a bunch of info in his logbook, which records that on (date) he pulled over (my friend’s name) for speeding, looked at (some list of documents). > > Then 3 months later my friend gets a summons to appear in court. He does. He says “this is bullshit, I was never pulled over for speeding”. They summon the cop into the courtroom. The cop is a hard working and diligent guy but not possessed of superhuman memory. The cop reviews his log book, and swears under oath that it was in my fact my friend who got pulled over for speeding. My friend has to pay a fine (and probably ceases to be my friend, assuming he remembers that it was me who borrowed his truck that day). > > I can’t see anything that would stop that from happening, and I would in no way hold it against the cop if he honestly got that wrong in that type of situation. OK, then you accept my point. > [@](#): > > Fortunately, however, that’s a situation in which the cost to society if that happens fairly rarely is that the wrong person (who already has to be in a fairly specifically contrived situation) has to pay a speeding fine. That’s much less serious than democracy being subverted. Who cares? I said that the evidence is legally sufficient. You appear to agree that the evidence is legally sufficient. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4816 "2014-05-27T19:26:07Z")
On your high school debate team, were you coached to keep up the stream of bullshit until the referee blows the whistle, or something? This was over long ago. You ain’t there no more anyway. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4817 "2014-05-27T20:31:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Substantiation: [http://www.ajc.com/news/news/despite-voter-id-law-minority-turnout-up-in-georgi/nR2bx/](http://www.ajc.com/news/news/despite-voter-id-law-minority-turnout-up-in-georgi/nR2bx/) Why, bless your heart, that simply won’t do. If you say the sun rose this morning because Og willed it so, and I ask for some proof of that, and you give me the news report “Sunrise: 6:23 am”, you have not “substantiated” your claim. Pretty sure you know that. You must have seen that in college, they call it a “non-squirter”. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4818 "2014-05-27T20:32:49Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > . . . I love how this question gets met with evasion, throat clearing, and a return to “But…but Republicans are EVIL!” Only because they’re the ones who crawled into bed with this proposal. Old-time Chicago Democrats were EVIL too, when they engaged in inflating the voting lists by registering dead people. And both parties are EVIL for engaging is outrageous Gerrymandering. It’s only a partisan issue because one party decided to act EVIL in this way at this time. Is it your intention to defend EVIL because opposition to it appears to be partisan? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4819 "2014-05-27T20:41:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > . . . it puts me in the position I’ve complained of many times before: weak arguments from me are scrutinized; weak arguments from other are ignored unless I scrutinize them. I’m the bacteria in the penicillin; my opponents are the bacteria in the petri dish. . . . You want proportionality review of the exposure of logical fallacies? You want an Affirmative Action quota? For every time we expose one of your errors, we’re obliged to expose a certain number from people we happen to agree with? What if you actually make more errors than any other group of people, calculated per capita? Say, every time **adaher** misstates a fact, we have to find elucidator misstating a fact? What if the error ratio of the two persons varies highly? Another problem: you’re pretty much alone here. If you had some significant support from others who held the same view, you could divide the duty, and all take turns pointing out the errors made by your collective opposition. It isn’t our duty to police ourselves. That’s your job. Our job is to say what we believe, and why, and then to rebut the rebuttals. It’s absurd for you to demand that we all argue both sides of the point. If you insist on that game, you’ll have to participate in it also. You’ll have to point out all the errors you, yourself, make! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2014, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4820 "2014-05-27T20:42:48Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Watch this space,\*\* Bricker\*\* is just about to credit the Republican Party for increasing minority participation. Clearly, this was the plan all along. Did I call it, or what? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=240) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=242)