# 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:** 66
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1301 "2012-07-12T18:09:48Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I do think the term “disenfranchise” is wrong. Firstly, because it is imprecise. To actually disenfranchise would require something more forcible than this. Would they do it if they could? Probably not, it would lose them the diaphanous negligee of legitimacy that they drape over this clapped out whore. And it would alienate everyone with any conscience, including the several dozen Republican currently so equipped. Or impaired, depending. > > More importantly, it misses the subtlety of the move, as many responses here show. No, you will not get away with forbidding blacks, hispanics, and students from voting, a bitch too far. But you _can_ get away with _impairing_ their rights, making it more difficult. adding extra hurdles. This gives cover, it allows such positions as “Well, if they are too lazy to go to the effort, if they don’t care enough about their country to make the effort, fuck 'em!” > > This works for them, it appeals to the conservative leaning mind that thinks of itself as hard-headed and realistic, not like those pie in the sky liberals. Its simplistic and crude, doesn’t demand any complex thinking. Its a winner. > > I want to correct the use of the word “disenfranchise” not because it is so very, very wrong, it isn’t really, its more of an exaggeration of a truth than a denial of truth. But it misses the subtlety of the maneuver, which is really rather clever, in a cynical sort of way. No, they would never get away with “disenfranchising” in the sense of forbidding, but if they can pretend they are deeply, deeply concerned with the issue of voter roll integrity, they can shield their intentions, and they can gain an advantage by hindering disagreeable voters. And, most importantly, get away with it. > > They might lose Republicans with a rudimentary conscience, they might both wander off and become libertarians, or somesuch. Not you, however, you have made your peace with this: yes, its is crass, cynical, and underhanded, but that is vastly outweighed by the critical importance of voter integrity, the burning issue on the minds of so many Americans! I mean, everywhere I go, that is the issue of essential importance, just about all you ever hear anyone talk about is the central matter of voter integrity. > > Its a bit like how people mistakenly use “unConstitutional” when what they really mean is “unjust” and “unfair”. Its a mistake, of course, both semantically and historically, the Constitution on many, many occasions has been the shelter and nourishment for brutally unjust law. It reflects a somewhat naive impression of the Constitution as the embodiment of all that is ideal and good about America. And there’s nothing wrong with that, except that it just ain’t so. (Was it Scalia who said something to the effect that the purpose of the Constitution was to thwart progress? Something like that?) > > But I know what they mean when they say it, and so do you, the communication is close enough, even if the actual precision is missing. The smaller variety of potato, in my estimation. > > By the way, did you ever come up with a workable rationalization for trimming back “Sunday voting” and making voter registration drives more difficult, and potentially criminal? I’ve mentioned this several times now, and it never seems to penetrate the **Bricker** filter. Any luck with that yet? Do let us know, won’t you? Because that does kind of give away the game, doesn’t it? Since certainly “Sunday voting” has nothing whatever to do with the sacred battle for voter integrity. Unless you’ve come up with something? No? Probably best to ignore it, focus instead on what an asshole **'luc** is. I hope this doesn’t come across as a back-handed compliment, because it’s not meant as such, but have you considered writing like that more often? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that much text from you where I understood exactly what you were saying and felt you were making a compelling argument. Not suggesting that you give up your preferred mode of communication completely. That would be unfair and unrealistic. Maybe just tweak the ratio a tad? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1302 "2012-07-12T18:10:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, I’d say elucidator’s presence is a net positive. > > It’s hard to think of what value Lobohan brings to any discussion he’s in. > > Seriously – when does any discussion ever spontaneously ask for Lobohan to step in and supply information? Never seen it happen. Supplying information is something that is done on your part because you specifically have a skill that is involved in a lot of political discussions. I’m not critical of your legal skill. You seem to be a competent lawyer. My skills rarely come up in political discussions because I’m a designer. You wanna talk about the Shepard Fairey “Hope” poster, I can offer detailed insight into the process he used to create it. Or like when Magiver waddled into the Birther camp, I posted [this rebuttal about his birth certificate nonsense](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14355407&postcount=211). The point being, your argument is shit. You simply looked for something you do (answer legal questions) and used it as a baton to make a feeble attack. I’m not saying I’m that valuable a poster. But I do try to point out when people argue nonsense. Like you just did. Again. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1303 "2012-07-12T18:13:28Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > By the way, did you ever come up with a workable rationalization for trimming back “Sunday voting” and making voter registration drives more difficult, and potentially criminal? I’ve mentioned this several times now, and it never seems to penetrate the **Bricker** filter. I said I didn’t know, offered a guess that the reason might have been to save money by reducing the number of days voting was available, and asked if the people making the changes offer any rationale for the change? You knew that. You acknowledged that comment here: > [@elucidator](#): > > Why, yes, yes you did. You offered the speculation that perhaps they couldn’t afford it. How can you say it’s never penetrated my filter? Isn’t that your previous acknowledgement of my answer? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1304 "2012-07-12T18:13:28Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I hope this doesn’t come across as a back-handed compliment, because it’s not meant as such, but have you considered writing like that more often? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that much text from you where I understood exactly what you were saying and felt you were making a compelling argument. > > Not suggesting that you give up your preferred mode of communication completely. That would be unfair and unrealistic. Maybe just tweak the ratio a tad? Genius is pain, **John**. Well, _you_ understand, I’m sure… ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1305 "2012-07-12T18:17:26Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Why, yes, as a matter of fact, I do think the term “disenfranchise” is wrong. Firstly, because it is imprecise. To actually disenfranchise would require something more forcible than this. Would they do it if they could? Probably not, it would lose them the diaphanous negligee of legitimacy that they drape over this clapped out whore. And it would alienate everyone with any conscience, including the several dozen Republican currently so equipped. Or impaired, depending. > > More importantly, it misses the subtlety of the move, as many responses here show. No, you will not get away with forbidding blacks, hispanics, and students from voting, a bitch too far. But you _can_ get away with _impairing_ their rights, making it more difficult. adding extra hurdles. This gives cover, it allows such positions as “Well, if they are too lazy to go to the effort, if they don’t care enough about their country to make the effort, fuck 'em!” > > This works for them, it appeals to the conservative leaning mind that thinks of itself as hard-headed and realistic, not like those pie in the sky liberals. Its simplistic and crude, doesn’t demand any complex thinking. Its a winner. > > I want to correct the use of the word “disenfranchise” not because it is so very, very wrong, it isn’t really, its more of an exaggeration of a truth than a denial of truth. But it misses the subtlety of the maneuver, which is really rather clever, in a cynical sort of way. No, they would never get away with “disenfranchising” in the sense of forbidding, but if they can pretend they are deeply, deeply concerned with the issue of voter roll integrity, they can shield their intentions, and they can gain an advantage by hindering disagreeable voters. And, most importantly, get away with it. > > They might lose Republicans with a rudimentary conscience, they might both wander off and become libertarians, or somesuch. Not you, however, you have made your peace with this: yes, its is crass, cynical, and underhanded, but that is vastly outweighed by the critical importance of voter integrity, the burning issue on the minds of so many Americans! I mean, everywhere I go, that is the issue of essential importance, just about all you ever hear anyone talk about is the central matter of voter integrity. > > Its a bit like how people mistakenly use “unConstitutional” when what they really mean is “unjust” and “unfair”. Its a mistake, of course, both semantically and historically, the Constitution on many, many occasions has been the shelter and nourishment for brutally unjust law. It reflects a somewhat naive impression of the Constitution as the embodiment of all that is ideal and good about America. And there’s nothing wrong with that, except that it just ain’t so. (Was it Scalia who said something to the effect that the purpose of the Constitution was to thwart progress? Something like that?) > > But I know what they mean when they say it, and so do you, the communication is close enough, even if the actual precision is missing. The smaller variety of potato, in my estimation. Now, a word about the rest of this post. Holy shit. This is a damn fine post. I don’t agree with all of it, but I have absolutely no problem identifying precisely what point you are making, how you are supporting it, and almost unwillingly nodding in agreement as you lay out your argument. I criticize you for impenetrable prose a lot, but I need to acknowledge when you eschew it. This post is a model of clarity and is, in my view, both informative and persuasive. Even the potato at the end makes sense, because of the building blocks that led to it. ETA: it also thwarts my expectations of how you’d respond; I was wrong about that, and acknowledge my error here. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1306 "2012-07-12T18:18:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I said I didn’t know, offered a guess that the reason might have been to save money by reducing the number of days voting was available, and asked if the people making the changes offer any rationale for the change? > > You knew that. You acknowledged that comment here: > > How can you say it’s never penetrated my filter? Isn’t that your previous acknowledgement of my answer? My bad! That answer was so perfectly absurd and crapulous, i assumed you had abandoned it like a animal shelter kitten you’re done experimenting upon. As for me seeking out their rationale for this, why is that burden mine? And if that’s their “rationale”, will you be joining me in pointing and laughing? Because its perfectly transparent and ridiculous, as I’m sure you know. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1307 "2012-07-12T18:18:26Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Genius is pain, **John**. Well, _you_ understand, I’m sure… I’d like to second the sentiment that your previous post was some very high-kung-fu. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1308 "2012-07-12T18:21:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now, a word about the rest of this post. > > Holy shit. > > This is a damn fine post. I don’t agree with all of it, but I have absolutely no problem identifying precisely what point you are making, how you are supporting it, and almost unwillingly nodding in agreement as you lay out your argument. > > I criticize you for impenetrable prose a lot, but I need to acknowledge when you eschew it. This post is a model of clarity and is, in my view, both informative and persuasive. Even the potato at the end makes sense, because of the building blocks that led to it. Its a trap. Gotta be a trap. I’ll give you just two hours to _cut that out_! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1309 "2012-07-12T18:23:12Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > My bad! That answer was so perfectly absurd and crapulous, i assumed you had abandoned it like a animal shelter kitten you’re done experimenting upon. > > As for me seeking out their rationale for this, why is that burden mine? And if that’s their “rationale”, will you be joining me in pointing and laughing? Because its perfectly transparent and ridiculous, as I’m sure you know. I don’t know. I have no idea what their rationale was. The idea that paying workers on a Sunday often involves double-time, or a bigger multiplier, occurred to me. So I don’t see why it’s a crazy supposition, but I admit it’s just that. I have no evidence in support of either financial motives or evil schemes. The burden is yours because you’re the one making the argument. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1310 "2012-07-12T18:33:56Z")
Oh, my God, the evil fiends are being nice to me! Its like Kryptonite, snark reserves draining away, I’m melting, melting! What a world, what a world… _AAAAAaaaaarrrgh!_ ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1311 "2012-07-12T18:34:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Genius is pain, **John**. Well, _you_ understand, I’m sure… I do. Someone explained it to me once, in a “Genius for Dummies” sort or way. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1312 "2012-07-12T19:10:37Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t know. I have no idea what their rationale was. The idea that paying workers on a Sunday often involves double-time, or a bigger multiplier, occurred to me. So I don’t see why it’s a crazy supposition, but I admit it’s just that. I have no evidence in support of either financial motives or evil schemes. > > The burden is yours because you’re the one making the argument. Well, the double pay thing can’t work, because the whole thing they do is to go to church and get together, then go vote, so clearly they aren’t working that day. Funny thing is, I don’t know why they didn’t steal the idea and exploit it, get white evangelicals to do the same thing. Probably figure there isn’t any more to get from them, so if they thwart some of the black vote, its a win. Don’t much like to try and figure out how Republicans think, its like taking the brown acid. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1313 "2012-07-12T19:14:00Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, the double pay thing can’t work, because the whole thing they do is to go to church and get together, then go vote, so clearly they aren’t working that day. Poll workers. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1314 "2012-07-12T19:16:07Z")
They’re volunteers, aren’t they? They get paid? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1315 "2012-07-12T19:17:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > They’re volunteers, aren’t they? They get paid? Only lefty workers volunteer. The righties demand pay. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1316 "2012-07-12T19:19:51Z")
[http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Election\_reform/ERIPBrief19\_final.pdf](http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Election_reform/ERIPBrief19_final.pdf) > [@](#): > > …They work days that typically exceed 12 hours and receive minimum wage or only slightly higher in most of the country… A .pdf, if that matters any more… ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1317 "2012-07-12T20:39:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > [http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Election\_reform/ERIPBrief19\_final.pdf](http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Election_reform/ERIPBrief19_final.pdf) > > A .pdf, if that matters any more… The point is that if they budget $X, and have to pay 2X for Sunday work, that could be a problem. Again, I don’t know, but nothing I’m seeing contradicts it. Certainly your theory about unpaid volunteers is not …er… on the money. Poll workers do get paid. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1318 "2012-07-12T20:48:12Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Sometimes you do the right thing even if (and I’m not saying they don’t) the numbers don’t add up. But this is a case where if the numbers don’t add up, it isn’t the right thing. If it disenfranchises more voters, convinces more voters not to come, or outright makes it impossible for more voters to vote than it prevents cases of fraud, then the law has failed the purpose of making democracy more representative, and that is the only purpose it will fulfill (unless you want to admit that it has the purposes that people like **Luci** are insinuating, and doing a complete bang-up job at)! I don’t really understand how this isn’t clicking. > [@](#): > > You don’t think that this will help voter confidence. I do. The only evidence I can produce is that other countries have voter ID and higher voter turnout. I think that voter confidence is, much like voter fraud, a fake issue. At the very least, it’s considerably less of an issue than the clear elephant in the room – the thing that both south park and “America: The Book” touched on, the reason why voter fraud will _never_ become a major issue in this country, the reason why almost everyone I know who isn’t voting isn’t going out to vote: your vote is insignificant. [I’m having trouble finding great sources, but from what I see, “I don’t think the election will follow the will of the people” doesn’t even fucking rank](http://aalegal.org/2010/10/28/tackling-voter-apathy/)! That’s at least among asians… [PBS cites, again, “my vote doesn’t matter”, and “politics sucks no matter what”, but not “my vote won’t get counted” or “the elections are rigged”](http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/july-dec00/brokensystem.html). And honestly? Your evidence isn’t good enough. You haven’t set up a correlation (which countries?), and even if that exists, causation seems strongly to be placed elsewhere. > [@](#): > > But that may be just a coincidence. Or it could be one of the reasons why they do have higher turnouts. People think the government takes voting seriously, so they do as well. Dunno. You know what the solution would be to this problem, though? _Education_. If voter ID laws make the system _less_ representative of the will of the people, then the only way that they could _ever_ improve turnouts by “helping voter confidence” is by _lying to people_. Which is exactly what happens. There are a lot of people _absolutely convinced_ that voter fraud is this huge problem… When it isn’t. A massive investigation over 10 years in numerous districts, ordered from the top down, proved absolutely fruitless. At that point, absence of evidence pretty much is evidence of absence. Where are they getting this info from, then? Hmm… Well, I’ll let you figure that one out. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1319 "2012-07-12T21:09:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The point is that if they budget $X, and have to pay 2X for Sunday work, that could be a problem. Again, I don’t know, but nothing I’m seeing contradicts it. Certainly your theory about unpaid volunteers is not …er… on the money. Poll workers do get paid. Can’t do it justice. My snark toxicity index is down to .045 millihicks, between a Mr. Rodgers greeting and a Garrison Keillor monologue. I’m ruined. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1320 "2012-07-12T21:41:57Z")
Well, golly everyone. It’s ' **luci**! He’s lost his irony. Quick, everyone start clapping so we can bring him back. Let’s go! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=65) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=67)