Isn’t that exactly what Indiana did when they enacted SEA 483?
Yes, it is. Of course, “…for no good reason…” is only your view. Obviously, the people of Indiana disagreed. But that’s exactly what happened, and the law was upheld, and it exist today in glorious splendor. (It does not apply in Raratonga, though – tickets available!)
A transparent and flimsy evasion of my points. Sure, so long as voter id is valid, neutral and justifiable, no prob.
But the GAO report offers firm evidence that, at the very least, these laws are not being applied in a neutral fashion, but are having a specific and verifiable partisan effect.
You have repeatedly dismissed the malicious motivation of “some” partisan Republicans as being irrelevant so long as “valid neutral justification” is applicable. The GAO report offers firm evidence that this is not the case. So, your reference to Crawford is an evasion. And the malicious intent is revealed to have malicious consequences.
And if you have some court decision that legitimizes laws that “stack the deck” in favor of a particular party, you have yet to offer them. I remain hopeful that you would find such legislation repugnant and unjust.
Do I misunderstand? Seems your position was Crawford declares voter id laws to be legitimate so long as they are based upon valid neutral justification. Are we to understand that the ruling declares voter id laws valid regardless?
Even *Crawford *doesn’t say that, only that the “justification” should not be disregarded. Bricker’s lying.
In his defense, let it be noted that he isn’t very good at it.
No, it doesn’t.
No, it isn’t.
And the laws continue in effect.
Oh, no doubt many, many Indianans, proud scions of one of the Klan’s hottest hotbeds, thought the reason was very good indeed. And so did the judges, products themselves of the same environment, who shared their fears.
You missed this? You could google “GAO report voter id” and find an avalanche of analysis of the report. Think you can find any that supports your position, or are you content to make sweeping and grand statements without support? Are you offering a faith-based position, such that no evidence is required?
Oh, wait! Is the GAO report a lie, based on liberal hypocrisy? Can you say anything you are capable of proving, beyond stamping your foot and declaring “Nunh-uh!” Setting aside the question of “valid”, it most definitely is not “neutral”. You deny that? Your evidence being…well, what, exactly?
ETA: Sorry, did not notice your declaration of “neener-neener”. Which is as solid an argument as any you’ve made lately. My apologies, clearly the issue is settled. Silly, silly GAO! They should have checked with you, saved all that time and effort!
Yeah, that’s your job.
Does it even pass through your mind that if you have to be disingenuous in order to defend a point, maybe it’s not something you should defend?
Voter ID is a concept. The carrying out of that concept is what’s in question. If there was a poll that 67% support feeding the hungry, that wouldn’t mean that 67% of people support forcibly restraining and tube feeding the hungry without asking.
Think hard about this, you’re stupid and a liar, but I know you can get this:
Supporting feeding the hungry doesn’t mean you support it as a means to brutalize poor people.
Wait, that means that people can support Voter ID, while at the same time, not want it implemented in such a way as to deny poor people the vote.
Gosh, I bet even you can understand that, right?
No, these laws exist because the GOP saw an opportunity to provide a small push to themselves at the polls.
My advice is for you to stop pretending you’re a Christian. Because your hatred of poor people is completely out of line with it. Jesus, in the way you picture Him never existed. But if He did, He’d overturn your table.
Also, I already live on an island, so I’ve got better weather than the muggy hellhole you’re living in. 
That’s what it was! Bricker is such a pussy, he stayed out of this thread until Texas reinstated its voter ID law. He knew without gloating smugly, he had no play whatsoever.
Ha, you fucking fringe!
Same time as the Texas anti-abortion law getting stayed, and all those clinics reopening, though. Bittersweet.
That’s a link to a long document. Cite the part you contend says that valid neutral justification does not exist.
No one wants that. Voter ID laws don’t do that. That’s why everyone likes Voter ID laws.
Yay laws!
When did you stop even trying?
Yes, and I can mofify my view if I’m presented with evidence that I should, because I am intellectually honest.
Got any? Evidence, that is. The evidence that convinced the people of Indiana might be a good place to start.
GOP officials want that. Voter ID laws do do that. That’s why people who are informed, and also are not dishonest twats don’t like the laws as implemented.
So, attend any good abortions recently?
The whole report is about how it isn’t neutral. We can dispense with the valid and justification parts, since you’ll never recognize that they aren’t true either. More troubling is your continued lie that something you can pretend is a “valid neutral justification” is still not controlling, according to the very ruling you so highly cherish.
Do you think you’re winning a game of some kind here?
Or executions, for that matter. I don’t recall any time that Bricker expressed his dislike of abortion or capital punishment that anyone said he was obviously opposed to democracy or should leave America.
On reflection, it’s not inconceivable that I said something like that. If so, I hope I had enough maturity to not take such a lame attempt at humour and repeat it within the same thread.
Sure. SEA 483.
Is that the law or the evidence the law is a good idea?
It’s evidence that the people of Indiana thought Voter ID was a dandy idea.