# 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:** 275
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5481 "2014-06-13T15:30:28Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Drivel. Worse, _unoriginal_ drivel. > > The question, as you put it, “…the claims about the voting patterns of people that move between states…”. > > Just so. The reader is invited to consider the bleeding obvious, that people who move from state to state most likely are compelled by economic necessity. (Which includes, of course, people who are relocated at the behest of their employers.) A bit like comparing people who _rent_ their homes with people who _own_ their homes. > > It is a commonplace of our political and social structure that the less economically advantaged a person is, the more likely that they they favor the Democrats. People who are moving from one state to another are more likely disadvantaged than otherwise. This is an observation that bears on the question, an observation that the reader can confirm entirely on one’s own. I’m not offering evidence, I am pointing out evidence that any of us can see. You are talking to a stone wall, elucidator. Remember, “there are none so blind as he who will not see.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5482 "2014-06-13T15:38:54Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Drivel. Worse, _unoriginal_ drivel. > > The question, as you put it, “…the claims about the voting patterns of people that move between states…”. > > Just so. The reader is invited to consider the bleeding obvious, that people who move from state to state most likely are compelled by economic necessity. (Which includes, of course, people who are relocated at the behest of their employers.) A bit like comparing people who _rent_ their homes with people who _own_ their homes. > > It is a commonplace of our political and social structure that the less economically advantaged a person is, the more likely that they they favor the Democrats. People who are moving from one state to another are more likely disadvantaged than otherwise. This is an observation that bears on the question, an observation that the reader can confirm entirely on one’s own. I’m not offering evidence, I am pointing out evidence that any of us can see. > > There’s nothing remotely “anecdotal” about that. So were those exact words drivel when you posted them? How does it happen, **elucidator** that your uncited reasoning is to be accepted as “nothing anecdotal,” when you are willing to dismiss the uncited reasoning of others? People relocated at the behest of their employers are less economically advantaged? Really? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5483 "2014-06-13T15:39:55Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I don’t think you can avoid making a fool of yourself, Bricker, but I’ll save you one trip to your barrel of stupid responses: > > Drawing 24 balls from a basket of 45 balls, 28 of which are shit-colored, the chance that at least 20 of the drawn balls are shit-colored is only 00.22% _if the balls are drawn randomly_. > > I guess that reduces your lecture about the so very long list of states to mere hebephrenic noise. Got any more? I have no idea what point you think you proved. ---
**Author:** ![Parthol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/dec6dc/32.png) [@Parthol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Parthol)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5484 "2014-06-13T15:47:24Z")
_Bricker_, when you have a moment, could you offer even a brief opinion of my post #5471? Assuming you disagree, a few sentences about _why_ you disagree would be appreciated. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5485 "2014-06-13T15:54:41Z")
> [@Parthol](#): > > _Bricker_, when you have a moment, could you offer even a brief opinion of my post #5471? Assuming you disagree, a few sentences about _why_ you disagree would be appreciated. Thanks! Not to mention 5462 ---
**Author:** ![Parthol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/dec6dc/32.png) [@Parthol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Parthol)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5486 "2014-06-13T15:57:46Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have no idea what point you think you proved. I don’t think he _proved_ anything, but I think it’s clear the point he was trying to make. Earlier you said this: [QUOTE=Bricker] But not enacting a law does not mean that the law was considered and found to be undesirable. The law may not have been proposed. It may have been proposed in committee but sidelined for lack of time and interest. It may have been unfunded in a year when budgets were tight. No valid conclusion can be drawn. [/QUOTE] All of those are, essentially, random factors, that could apply to legislatures of either party. **Septimus** is noting that the chances of such random factors resulting in the actual party vs. party breakdown we have in reality, would be extremely low… low enough that a different, non-random cause for the partisan disparity is a near certainty. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5487 "2014-06-13T16:01:58Z")
But you see, it’s all those \*other \*Republicans whose motives are nefarious. His own are pure. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5488 "2014-06-13T16:26:50Z")
> [@Parthol](#): > > I don’t think he _proved_ anything, but I think it’s clear the point he was trying to make. > > Earlier you said this: > > All of those are, essentially, random factors, that could apply to legislatures of either party. **Septimus** is noting that the chances of such random factors resulting in the actual party vs. party breakdown we have in reality, would be extremely low… low enough that a different, non-random cause for the partisan disparity is a near certainty. Sure, I doubt that it’s completely random. But from “non-random” to “nefarious” is a fair journey, It’s clear that as a general rule, Democrats are less interested in any steps that might serve to cull voting rolls. That does not transform any steps _to_ cull voting rolls into maliciously intended plans. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5489 "2014-06-13T16:29:31Z")
> [@Parthol](#): > > Sure, yes, I understand symbolic logic. I wasn’t claiming _proof_. It’s very hard to prove political motivations in cases like these, unless you have politicians going on record, like that guy in Pennsylvania did. > > I’m claiming there’s powerful circumstantial evidence. I think if a rational person is presented with… > > a) a voter-purging law enacted almost exclusively by state legislatures of one party, and not by legislatures of another party, and > > b) that there’s plenty of evidence that legislatures of that first party have been enacting lots of other laws aimed at disenfranchisement of the other party’s voters (closing polling stations, eliminating early hours, etc.) > > …then the most sensible conclusion one can come to, absent proof one way or the other, is that the laws in question were enacted primarily to suppress the vote of the other party. > > I’m not claiming that’s proof. There are other possible explanations. But I think mine is overwhelmingly more likely than the alternatives, just using a logical examination of the real world. I’d conclude the same if the parties in question were reversed. I disagree. An equally plausible – but not, I imagine, equally palatable – explanation is that the laws were _not_ considered (or enacted) out of fear that their enactment would be a loss of Democratic votes. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5490 "2014-06-13T16:34:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have no idea what point you think you proved. Wow. We’ve always known you were a pretentious hypocrite, but, previously, my calling you “stupid” was intended as hyperbolic. Now I realize that you really are of substandard intelligence, unable to follow a simple train of thought. Let me break it down for you. I called attention to Virginia’s plan to strike hundreds of thousands of voters from their rolls, and wondered if it was the work of sinister GOP operatives. > [@Bricker](#): > > It’s very difficult to take your claims seriously, when it appears that literally any effort that results in any change is presumed to be malicious intervention by sinister GOP operatives. > … > But the legislatures in Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and Virginia don’t take them seriously either. > > And that, I think you’ll agree, matters. You declaimed that 25 other state made a similar decision and, with your typical pretentious bombast, suggested that they couldn’t mostly be sinister GOP operatives. > [@septimus](#): > > By my count, the breakdowns, where “R” = GOP controls both or only house of legislature, “D” = Demos control both, “M” = house controls split between parties, are: > > R - D - M > 28 - 17 - 5 … All 50 states > 20 - 4 - 2 … The 26 on Bricker’s list > 8 - 13 - 3 … The 24 not on Bricker’s list > … > Drawing 24 balls from a basket of 45 balls, 28 of which are shit-colored, the chance that at least 20 of the drawn balls are shit-colored is only 00.22% _if the balls are drawn randomly_. So I performed the obvious arithmetic, and concluded that the state breakdown in _ **your** _ list would have been more evenly distributed 99.78% of the time, if party alignment was by chance. > [@Bricker](#): > > I have no idea what point you think you proved. LOL. Try again, dolt? ETA: Thanks for posting the list, which helped refute your blather. I see you’ve responded, but in a way to admit your list lacked the use you made of it. ---
**Author:** ![Parthol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/dec6dc/32.png) [@Parthol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Parthol)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5491 "2014-06-13T18:25:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I disagree. An equally plausible – but not, I imagine, equally palatable – explanation is that the laws were _not_ considered (or enacted) out of fear that their enactment would be a loss of Democratic votes. Ah. So we have two possible sides of the same coin: 1. Culling transient voters is a neutrally valid thing to do, and Republic legislatures do it for benign reasons, while Democratic legislatures fail to do it because it would hurt them. or 1. Culling transient voters is a partisan-motivated thing to do, and Republic legislatures do it to gain unfair advantage, while Democratic legislatures forbear because of its unbalanced effect. And yet, despite the fact that Republican legislatures, in many of the very states you list, have engaged in numerous other patently partisan efforts to suppress opposition vote (curtailing early voting, closing polling stations, etc.) – despite that fact, which you have even admitted, you believe that (1) above is more likely than (2)? Do you see how a neutral observer might scratch their head at that? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5492 "2014-06-13T20:24:13Z")
> [@Parthol](#): > > Ah. So we have two possible sides of the same coin: > > 1. Culling transient voters is a neutrally valid thing to do, and Republic legislatures do it for benign reasons, while Democratic legislatures fail to do it because it would hurt them. > > or > > 1. Culling transient voters is a partisan-motivated thing to do, and Republic legislatures do it to gain unfair advantage, while Democratic legislatures forbear because of its unbalanced effect. > > And yet, despite the fact that Republican legislatures, in many of the very states you list, have engaged in numerous other patently partisan efforts to suppress opposition vote (curtailing early voting, closing polling stations, etc.) – despite that fact, which you have even admitted, you believe that (1) above is more likely than (2)? > > Do you see how a neutral observer might scratch their head at that? The problem with the argument above is that you have tied provable, or at least probable, statements to less provable or probable ones. How about: (1)(a) Culling transient voters is a neutrally valid thing to do (1)(b) Republic legislatures do it for benign reasons (1)(c) Democratic legislatures fail to do it because it would hurt them Now I can respond to each proposition, in stead of being forced into the false dilemma that there is one answer for the string of propositions you have tied together. (1)(a) : Yes (1)(b) : Probably not (1)(c) : Probably so And for 2: (2)(a) Culling transient voters is a partisan-motivated thing to do (2)(b) Republic legislatures do it to gain unfair advantage (2)(c) Democratic legislatures forbear because of its unbalanced effect Answers: (2)(a) : No (2)(b) : Probably so (2)(c) : Probably not ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2014, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5493 "2014-06-13T23:28:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > (2)(b) Republic legislatures do it to gain unfair advantage > (2)(b) : Probably so Here’s another way to look at it: The U.S. is facing grave problems: [ul][li]Continued reckless and behavior by too-big-to-fail banks, without public benefit.[/li][li] Malfeasance by other big players, e.g. polluting Koch Industries.[/li][li] Rising health costs; need for something like ACA.[/li][li] Wars in Iraq, Crimea, Syria, and elsewhere.[/li][li] Need for immigration solutions[/li][li] A working-class that has fallen back to relative prosperity of pre-New Frontier levels.[/li][li] Mounting debts and deficits[/li][li] Irrational under-funding of important government agencies, e.g. VA[/li][li] Continued pollution and CO2 emission[/li][li] Increasingly irrational , gridlocked government[/li][li] et cetera[/li][li] et cetera[/li][/ul] If I were a legislator of the rational ilk, I would hardly know where to start against this morass of problems. GOP legislators have no such dilemma. Despite all the grave problems rationalists want to address, the GOP’s highest priority is electoral advantage, whether fraudulent or not. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5494 "2014-06-14T00:49:39Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Here’s another way to look at it: > > If I were a legislator of the rational ilk, I would hardly know where to start against this morass of problems. > > GOP legislators have no such dilemma. Despite all the grave problems rationalists want to address, the GOP’s highest priority is electoral advantage, whether fraudulent or not. Trouble is, you can use that argument on ANYTHING. If the GOP actions are unethical and antidemocratic, then they’re unethical and antidemocratic regardless of how important the issue is, and if they’re not, well, then they’re not. I think there’s a more subtle argument you could make along the same lines, which is that if the GOP motivation was what they claimed it was, then it would be such a trivial issue that we would expect them not to actually be spending time on it; but if their true motivation were “scuzzy”, then it would not surprise us that they would address this issue. Trouble is, Bricker already admits that many of the GOP legislators had scuzzy motivations, so arguing logically that they did so doesn’t really get us anywhere, at least as far as arguing against Bricker is concerned. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 9:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5495 "2014-06-14T09:11:13Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > I think there’s a more subtle argument you could make along the same lines, which is that if the GOP motivation was what they claimed it was, then it would be such a trivial issue that we would expect them not to actually be spending time on it; but if their true motivation were “scuzzy”, then it would not surprise us that they would address this issue. Trouble is, Bricker already admits that many of the GOP legislators had scuzzy motivations, so arguing logically that they did so doesn’t really get us anywhere, at least as far as arguing against Bricker is concerned. That was precisely the argument I intended, not knowing it was “more subtle.” I often neglect to fully connect the dots in my posts (leaving me at a loss against a pedant like Bricker since he will seize on any missing dot, or misused word, and feel he’s “refuted” a post, while ignoring its intent.) Anyway, it seems all of us (including Bricker) are in agreement: Much of the GOP’s motives are “scuzzy” but Bricker supports them anyway. Sort of like the getaway driver for an armed-robbery gang, proudly asserting that he didn’t tell his friends to pull the trigger, but eager to keep their company as they continue their crime spree. (And watch the hyper-literalist Brickbat repeat the truism that GOP legislators, however scuzzy or evil, are not “criminal” until convicted of a crime. I’m _still_ waiting for him to denounce Karl Rove, if he can.) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5496 "2014-06-14T13:02:01Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Here’s another way to look at it: > > The U.S. is facing grave problems: > [ul] > [li]Continued reckless and behavior by too-big-to-fail banks, without public benefit.[/li][li] Malfeasance by other big players, e.g. polluting Koch Industries.[/li][li] Rising health costs; need for something like ACA.[/li][li] Wars in Iraq, Crimea, Syria, and elsewhere.[/li][li] Need for immigration solutions[/li][li] A working-class that has fallen back to relative prosperity of pre-New Frontier levels.[/li][li] Mounting debts and deficits[/li][li] Irrational under-funding of important government agencies, e.g. VA[/li][li] Continued pollution and CO2 emission[/li][li] Increasingly irrational , gridlocked government[/li][li] et cetera[/li][li] et cetera[/li][/ul] > > If I were a legislator of the rational ilk, I would hardly know where to start against this morass of problems. > > GOP legislators have no such dilemma. Despite all the grave problems rationalists want to address, the GOP’s highest priority is electoral advantage, whether fraudulent or not. Not a true claim at all. Although I certainly don’t accept your list as either properly prioritized, nor all of your items as problems (i.e. need for an ACA), you’re wrong to claim that the “GOP’s highest priority is electoral advantage.” Most of the issues you identify are federal. The Voter ID laws are creatures of the local states. And in neither in the US Congress nor any of the states can you make the case that the highest priority was passing any such laws…because they passed other laws first. And if that’s not the objective measure of highest priority – you tell me what that measure is, and how you determined it. Please let’s avoid vague answers along the lines that you can just sense it. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5497 "2014-06-14T13:28:08Z")
I’m sure a list of more urgent and compelling issues could be compiled for any state now implementing or contemplating modifications to voter rules. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5498 "2014-06-14T13:52:07Z")
About Oregon: 1. The last time a Republican won a state-wide vote was 2002. 2. We have vote-by-mail, ID’s are never checked at the post office. 3. Either we have, or are working on, a policy of NOT checking immigration status for driver’s licenses. 4. It’s beautiful here, come visit often, just leave the U-Hauls at home. Just wanted to clarify. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5499 "2014-06-14T14:53:38Z")
How’s your voter confidence level? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2014, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/5500 "2014-06-14T15:06:37Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’m sure a list of more urgent and compelling issues could be compiled for any state now implementing or contemplating modifications to voter rules. Of course. But Bryan – surely that statement is true for _any_ major legislative body? I’m not aware of any single state, provincial, or national government that wouldn’t fall victim to the same criticism: why are you working on **E** when more urgent issues **A** , **B** , **C** , and **D** exist? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=274) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=276)