# Why the "emerging Democratic majority" isn't happening **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 4, 2015, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842 "2015-02-04T22:11:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2015, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/101 "2015-02-10T20:28:18Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Here in the People’s Republic of Minnesota, we have voter registration laws that have been described a universally respected and admired authority as being “too lax”. Pretty much boils down to having some proof of residence, like a bill or an official letter, and a registered voter who will vouch for you. That’s it, you register, you vote. > > While back we had a super dooper close election. They counted and recounted, fussed and argued over absentee ballots, and the result was a win by Franken amounting to little more than a butterfly’s eyelash. And that was it, no problems, no breakdown of civil order. It might be noted that it also resulted in the election of the Hon. Kieth Ellison, who is a Mooslim! But he’s a Lutheran Mooslim and makes a mean hot dish, so its OK… > > Voter fraud level zero. \* Bupkiss\*, zip, squadoosh, nada damn thing… I don’t want this to turn into yet another voter fraud thread, but that election is precisely where there were 156 voter fraud convictions in Minnesota: > **[Good Question: Is Minnesota #1 For Voter Fraud?](https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/good-question-is-minnesota-1-for-voter-fraud/)** > > When you think of the hanging chads in Florida, or the dead people who cast ballots in Chicago, it makes a billboard along Interstate-94 south of Albertville difficult to believe. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2015, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/102 "2015-02-10T20:57:03Z")
> [@Drum\_God](#): > > Take a look at Texas’ voter ID law. There are only seven ( **SEVEN!** ) forms of photo ID that are acceptable: > [ol] > [li] **A Texas Driver’s License** [/li][li]A Texas DPS-issued ID card[/li][li]A US Military photo ID[/li][li]A Texas DPS-issued Concealed-Carry Handgun License[/li][li]A US Passport[/li][li]A certificate of citizenship bearing a photo (whatever that is)[/li][li]And my personal favorite, a Voter Photo ID Card (which – and this is great – requires a PHOTO ID to obtain!)[/li][/ol] > > You’re going to have a very hard time convincing me that that list is not specifically designed to disenfranchise poor people. All of those IDs cost money – some of them cost a lot of money. The Voter ID card is “free”, but costs money for the supporting documentation. And, as I note, the documentation required for the Voter ID requires a photo ID in order to obtain. It is clearly designed to cause people to give up in frustration. Texas is a very large state, and it’s not known for its robust public transportation systems, compared to say, NYC or Chicago. How do all these poor people get around without a driver’s license? ---
**Author:** ![Drum\_God](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drum_god/32/44_2.png) [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2015, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/103 "2015-02-10T22:32:13Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Texas is a very large state, and it’s not known for its robust public transportation systems, compared to say, NYC or Chicago. How do all these poor people get around without a driver’s license? The short answer is “they don’t.” The cities do have public transportation, though not as robust as NYC or Chicago. Dallas, Houston, and to a much lesser extent, Austin, have rail lines and a variety of bus options. The other large cities have bus systems. (Public transit isn’t just for poor people.) In rural areas, poor folks get around like they always have: they get rides from friends, neighbors, and family members. But, it’s not just that. The nearest DPS office to where I am sitting right now is thirty minutes away. (And I live in a small town in the most densely populated part of Texas.) There is no DPS office in my county. Going to get/renew a license or ID means taking off of work, finding transportation, paying the fees, and getting back. It’s an hours long ordeal (whether you’re poor or not). In addition, my county is only 960 square miles. Brewster County is 6193 square miles in area. If there is a DPS office in Alpine, it may still be a hundred miles away. (The entire State of Rhode Island is only 1212 square miles.) The voter ID law in Texas and the seven specific IDs it requires was put into place for the specific purpose of making it harder for certain people to vote. But this thread isn’t about voter ID, so I’ll leave it at that. Besides, I’ve got to go vote. (For real. There’s a special election this week.) ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2015, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/104 "2015-02-10T22:50:16Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I don’t want this to turn into yet another voter fraud thread, but that election is precisely where there were 156 voter fraud convictions in Minnesota: > > [Good Question: Is Minnesota #1 For Voter Fraud? - CBS Minnesota](http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2012/08/14/good-question-is-minnesota-1-for-voter-fraud/) Your cite does not back up your assertion. Not at all. You are wrong again. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2015, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/105 "2015-02-10T23:59:14Z")
My assertion: there were 156 voter fraud convictions: My cite: > [@](#): > > In Minnesota, the Court Information Office said they’ve convicted 156 people of being a felon and voting. That is illegal. > > But is that really voter fraud? Um, yes. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/106 "2015-02-11T00:06:33Z")
Well, yes and no. This stuff was dragged out around here, and I heard a lot of it. Here’s what I remember. The stuff about felons voting is largely due to confusion about the terms of probation. In MN, so long as you are still on probation as part of a sentence, you cannot vote. Probation, as most of you already know, requires reporting to a probation worker, checks up on you, drug tests, shit like that. Minnesota also has a policy to lighten the workload on probation officers. If an ex-offender has done well in his probation, he may get a small break, he is called “off paper”, which is to say he need not report on a regular basis, so long as he stays clear. Quite a few ex-felons were under the mistaken belief that being “off paper” was the same as completing probation, but it is not. And in Minnesota, voting rights are restored when probation is complete, which is to say, when the sentence is complete. Anyway, they\* thought\* they were permitted to vote, so they did. Pretty much it. I suppose it is possible to commit voter fraud inadvertently. For the most part, an eagerness to rejoin the normal world and a lack of information. Mistakes were made but they were genuine. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/107 "2015-02-11T01:05:35Z")
I don’t think there would be a conviction if it was inadvertant, and if that is possible, it would certainly behoove officials to make sure felons don’t vote in the first place. There seems to be a remarkable lack of curiosity on the part of government officials about how many people are “mistakenly” voting when they can’t. If they can’t keep felons from voting, they can’t keep illegals with DLs from voting. ---
**Author:** ![Drum\_God](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drum_god/32/44_2.png) [@Drum\_God](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drum_God)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/108 "2015-02-11T14:09:13Z")
**Adaher** , does this crime really make sense to you? In MN, there were 156 people who were ineligible to vote due to being on probation yet they voted anyway. Let’s look at this dispassionately. You’ve got 156 people who have already had issues with the law. They are on their way rejoining society and cleaning up their lives. So, in this mindset, they decide to throw away all the progress they have made by committing a crime for which there is no personal payoff. Seriously? I can see their throwing away their progress to rob a liquor store or score some drugs or something. Those crimes have a personal payoff, even if the payoff is less than the benefit of staying out of trouble. Fraudulent voting has no direct benefit for the person committing the crime. It’s a stupid crime to commit. Convictions for in-person voter fraud are astonishingly small because there is so little benefit to committing the crime. One fraudulent vote is rarely enough to swing an election. Rounding up enough people to fraudulently vote your way is a fool’s errand: you cannot be sure they actually voted for your guy. Stuffing the ballot box with fraudulent absentee ballots is a lot easier and more effective. It only takes one person to commit that crime and he/she can be sure the crime was committed properly. Besides, in the Minnesota example, how would photo ID have prevented the crime? The voters were not misrepresenting their identities. Photo ID laws are stupid. Their only purpose is disenfranchise voters. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/109 "2015-02-11T15:38:19Z")
That’s not their only purpose, but I do agree that they are pointless. The real illegal voting, whether intentional or not, is felons, non-citizens, and people voting in places they aren’t entitled to vote due to residency confusion. The proper way to clean up the system is at the registration level. Rather than putting people in jail, since you’re probably right that intent to commit vote fraud is rare, the election system should be run like any other government agency: you apply to vote, they check you against their databases, and if you aren’t eligible they deny you, while giving you the opportunity to send in new documentation or appeal. And if you register in the wrong state or district, they can be helpful and automatically register you in the right place. If you are registered in two places, they can delete the old entry. If Democrats feel that makes registration too restrictive, we can compromise. If we’re going to go to the trouble of automatically moving people who register to the correct district, why not just automatically register every eligible citizen over 18 and mail them voting cards? We have the IT infrastructure to pull that off nowadays. We know when people die, we know when they are born, we know when they have a criminal record, we know when they become citizens, we usually know when they move. If people don’t get their cards or need to get one for a new address that the government for whatever reason didn’t know about, they can apply and go through the process of getting checked out. So universal registration in exchange for a tight registration process. Is that the makings of a reasonable compromise? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/110 "2015-02-11T16:18:34Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > So universal registration in exchange for a tight registration process. Is that the makings of a reasonable compromise? Throw in vote by mail and liberal early voting, and we have a deal. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/111 "2015-02-11T16:20:47Z")
You are still pretending that the “real” argument is about the validity or efficacy of voter id laws. Not so. The issue is using such legitimacy as a lever to boost the electoral prospects of a particular political party. There are all kinds of ways to foster voter id laws without such an impact. For instance, we could easily have a pro-active outreach program, one that gets out there and registers the unregistered while providing an easy and cost-free access to the necessary documentation. We could bring many, many more voters into the voting rolls. Oodles and gobs of new voters! It would be like a sequel, _The Return of the Revenge of the Son of ACORN!_ Trouble is, that is precisely the nightmare scenario for Republicans, the last thing they want is scads of new voters. They’ve already got theirs. Shit, Republicans could propose such a plan tomorrow, and would be greeted with full-on bipartisan enthusiasm. Could have done it yesterday, but they didn’t. They didn’t for the same reason they won’t do it tomorrow. Because they don’t want to. Because they would lose. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/112 "2015-02-11T16:34:26Z")
N.B.: Voter-ID laws will have no effect on whether a new Democratic majority emerges or does not emerge; all they’re good for is swinging the **really close** elections the Pubs’ way, and, if a new Dem majority emerges, such laws will be insufficient to keep Dems out of power. So will all other voter-suppression measures such as curtailing early/Sunday voting, etc. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/113 "2015-02-11T17:01:59Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > So will all other voter-suppression measures such as curtailing early/Sunday voting, etc. Where does the idea come from that early/Sunday voting is some kind of holy writ? Until recently, my state had no early voting at all. Were my rights being violated only a few years ago? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/114 "2015-02-11T17:16:53Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Where does the idea come from that early/Sunday voting is some kind of holy writ? Until recently, my state had no early voting at all. Were my rights being violated only a few years ago? The point is that rolling back such things has no conceivable purpose but to benefit the Pubs. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/115 "2015-02-11T17:29:38Z")
We can solve all these problems by simply awarding all elections too close to give a sure winner to the challenging party. Recount three times and you’ll get three different counts. Call it a tie and tie goes to the challenger. Then none of this stuff matters. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/116 "2015-02-11T17:31:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > The point is that rolling back such things has no conceivable purpose but to benefit the Pubs. And the point of putting those things into place was to solve a Democratic problem: unmotivated voters. Democrats have always favored getting people to vote, but things like motor voter and early voting and mail in voting and same day registration were instituted because Democrats were having trouble turning their voters out. And they still are, so I just can’t wait for the next idea. Which will of course be framed as a matter of civil rights and anyone who opposes it just want to suppress the vote. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/117 "2015-02-11T17:33:30Z")
John Judis, co-author of [_The Emerging Democratic Majority_](http://www.amazon.com/Emerging-Democratic-Majority-John-Judis/dp/0743254783) (2004), now writes about [“The Emerging Republican Advantage.”](http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-emerging-republican-advantage-20150130) Interview [here](http://www.salon.com/2015/02/11/it%e2%80%99s_going_to_take_a_crisis_why_republicans_have_a_stranglehold_on_u_s_politics/). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/118 "2015-02-11T17:36:34Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > And the point of putting those things into place was to solve a Democratic problem: unmotivated voters. Democrats have always favored getting people to vote, but things like motor voter and early voting and mail in voting and same day registration were instituted because Democrats were having trouble turning their voters out. > > And they still are, so I just can’t wait for the next idea. Which will of course be framed as a matter of civil rights and anyone who opposes it just want to suppress the vote. But, there is a difference: GOTV is **also** defensible in nonpartisan civic terms, and anything tending to erode or limit or curtail it is not. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/119 "2015-02-11T17:47:45Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > We can solve all these problems by simply awarding all elections too close to give a sure winner to the challenging party. What constitutes a “sure winner”? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2015, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842/120 "2015-02-11T17:52:37Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > John Judis, co-author of [_The Emerging Democratic Majority_](http://www.amazon.com/Emerging-Democratic-Majority-John-Judis/dp/0743254783) (2004), now writes about [“The Emerging Republican Advantage.”](http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-emerging-republican-advantage-20150130) Interview [here](http://www.salon.com/2015/02/11/it%e2%80%99s_going_to_take_a_crisis_why_republicans_have_a_stranglehold_on_u_s_politics/). Meanwhile, [the other author, Ruy Teixeira, writing in November 2012, feels vindicared](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/the-emerging-democratic-majority-turns-10/265005/). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-emerging-democratic-majority-isnt-happening/711842.md?page=7)