North Carolina Is The Latest Battleground In The Fight For Voting Rights

[Lakhota]

You NaziCon retards should memorize post #9 by C_Clayton_Jones.

"To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem..."

Those who say such a thing only exhibit their ignorance and stupidity.

Many older African-Americans born before the advent of the Civil Rights movement simply don't have the documents needed to obtain the required state issued ID, the consequence of segregation and discrimination.

These are voters currently registered and eligible to vote, who have been voting for the last 30 to 40 years in every election, now being denied that fundamental right.

It's perfectly appropriate to require a photo ID of a new voter registering to vote for the first time; but those currently registered should be allowed to continue voting absent an ID unless there's evidence of 'fraud' specific to that voter.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

As those researching the myth of 'voter fraud' have explained, it is an article of religious faith among republicans that they're losing elections as a consequence of 'fraud,' when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

There is no evidence that the outcome of any election has been effected by 'voter fraud,' the fact is that attempting to influence the outcome of an election via 'fraud' is pointless and futile, which is why the courts have consistently invalidated 'voter ID' laws because there is no evidence in support of the notion that such laws would have the desired effect of preventing fraud.

In essence, 'voter ID' laws are a 'solution' in search of a problem.

 

[Staidhup]

Oh my god isn't it past your bed time yet?

 

[Stephanie]

You NaziCon retards should memorize post #9 by C_Clayton_Jones.

"To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem..."

Those who say such a thing only exhibit their ignorance and stupidity.

Many older African-Americans born before the advent of the Civil Rights movement simply don't have the documents needed to obtain the required state issued ID, the consequence of segregation and discrimination.

These are voters currently registered and eligible to vote, who have been voting for the last 30 to 40 years in every election, now being denied that fundamental right.

It's perfectly appropriate to require a photo ID of a new voter registering to vote for the first time; but those currently registered should be allowed to continue voting absent an ID unless there's evidence of 'fraud' specific to that voter.

why? just because you can't think for yourself and kiss Clays ass

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Fifty years after "Bloody Sunday," the fight for voting rights continues in North Carolina.

After the 2013 Supreme Court decision to strike down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, allowing jurisdictions to change voting laws without federal oversight, North Carolina passed a bill that placed new restrictions on the voting process. The law requires voters to show government-issued identification at the polls, shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and "increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility," according to the LA Times.

Despite the blow to the Voting Rights Act, the NAACP and the civil rights organization Advancement Project are taking on the "voter suppression" using portions of the act that were left intact by the Supreme Court verdict. Jasmyn Richardson, a staff attorney with the Advancement Project, joined HuffPost Live on Monday to discuss the suit.

The North Carolina law targets many "things that a lot of young people, people of color and poor people were using to get people out to vote and to register to vote"and the Advancement Project is challenging it based on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th amendments, Richardson explained to host Alyona Minkovski.

North Carolina Is The Latest Battleground In The Fight For Voting Rights

Voter Suppression 101: How Conservatives Are Conspiring to Disenfranchise Millions of Americans

To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem - what about all the other restrictions on the voting process? Such as: shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility. How can anyone honestly deny that these restrictions are designed to restrict voting rights among certain groups of voters - primarily Democrat voters?

If you can prove it only impacts dems you might have a point, if everyone is impacted equally there is nothing discriminatory about it. Same day registration has always been a bad idea, it's an open invitation for fraud.

Wrong.

It has a negative impact on voters who are currently eligible to vote but are prevented from doing so because they cannot acquire the ID necessary to vote through no fault of their own.

The state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote because it 'thinks' the voter 'might' commit 'fraud'; the burden of proof rests with the state to produce the evidence that a given voter is attempting to commit fraud, and absent that evidence the state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote.

 

[elektra]

"To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem..."

Those who say such a thing only exhibit their ignorance and stupidity.

Many older African-Americans born before the advent of the Civil Rights movement simply don't have the documents needed to obtain the required state issued ID, the consequence of segregation and discrimination.

These are voters currently registered and eligible to vote, who have been voting for the last 30 to 40 years in every election, now being denied that fundamental right.

It's perfectly appropriate to require a photo ID of a new voter registering to vote for the first time; but those currently registered should be allowed to continue voting absent an ID unless there's evidence of 'fraud' specific to that voter.

Liar

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Fifty years after "Bloody Sunday," the fight for voting rights continues in North Carolina.

After the 2013 Supreme Court decision to strike down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, allowing jurisdictions to change voting laws without federal oversight, North Carolina passed a bill that placed new restrictions on the voting process. The law requires voters to show government-issued identification at the polls, shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and "increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility," according to the LA Times.

Despite the blow to the Voting Rights Act, the NAACP and the civil rights organization Advancement Project are taking on the "voter suppression" using portions of the act that were left intact by the Supreme Court verdict. Jasmyn Richardson, a staff attorney with the Advancement Project, joined HuffPost Live on Monday to discuss the suit.

The North Carolina law targets many "things that a lot of young people, people of color and poor people were using to get people out to vote and to register to vote"and the Advancement Project is challenging it based on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th amendments, Richardson explained to host Alyona Minkovski.

North Carolina Is The Latest Battleground In The Fight For Voting Rights

Voter Suppression 101: How Conservatives Are Conspiring to Disenfranchise Millions of Americans

To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem - what about all the other restrictions on the voting process? Such as: shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility. How can anyone honestly deny that these restrictions are designed to restrict voting rights among certain groups of voters - primarily Democrat voters?

If you can prove it only impacts dems you might have a point, if everyone is impacted equally there is nothing discriminatory about it. Same day registration has always been a bad idea, it's an open invitation for fraud.

Wrong.

It has a negative impact on voters who are currently eligible to vote but are prevented from doing so because they cannot acquire the ID necessary to vote through no fault of their own.

The state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote because it 'thinks' the voter 'might' commit 'fraud'; the burden of proof rests with the state to produce the evidence that a given voter is attempting to commit fraud, and absent that evidence the state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote.

Wrong one MUST prove they are registered to vote in order to exercise the right.

 

[OKTexas]

Why is it that it's always democrats who claim that Black people are too stupid to obtain a photo I.D.? When will Black people get tired of the democrat party plantation?

When will you realize that voting came before photo ID?

If you idiots would stop voting illegally there wouldn't be a need for voter id. If you can legally vote an id is not a problem.

There is no need for voter ID but it keeps the darkies from voting which helps the GOP.

Prove the laws only effects blacks, you say it keeps them form voting, whites don't have different rules wouldn't it do the same to them?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why is it that it's always democrats who claim that Black people are too stupid to obtain a photo I.D.? When will Black people get tired of the democrat party plantation?

When will you realize that voting came before photo ID?

If you idiots would stop voting illegally there wouldn't be a need for voter id. If you can legally vote an id is not a problem.

There is no need for voter ID but it keeps the darkies from voting which helps the GOP.

Prove the laws only effects blacks, you say it keeps them form voting, whites don't have different rules wouldn't it do the same to them?

Darkies are who it affects, poor people of color who vote for Dems. You wouldn't want these laws otherwise as they'd do you no good. And that's not only my opinion, the courts and GOP folks have said the same.

 

[OKTexas]

As those researching the myth of 'voter fraud' have explained, it is an article of religious faith among republicans that they're losing elections as a consequence of 'fraud,' when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

There is no evidence that the outcome of any election has been effected by 'voter fraud,' the fact is that attempting to influence the outcome of an election via 'fraud' is pointless and futile, which is why the courts have consistently invalidated 'voter ID' laws because there is no evidence in support of the notion that such laws would have the desired effect of preventing fraud.

In essence, 'voter ID' laws are a 'solution' in search of a problem.

Really?

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

Supreme Court upholds voter ID law - politics NBC News

 

[OKTexas]

You NaziCon retards should memorize post #9 by C_Clayton_Jones.

"To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem..."

Those who say such a thing only exhibit their ignorance and stupidity.

Many older African-Americans born before the advent of the Civil Rights movement simply don't have the documents needed to obtain the required state issued ID, the consequence of segregation and discrimination.

These are voters currently registered and eligible to vote, who have been voting for the last 30 to 40 years in every election, now being denied that fundamental right.

It's perfectly appropriate to require a photo ID of a new voter registering to vote for the first time; but those currently registered should be allowed to continue voting absent an ID unless there's evidence of 'fraud' specific to that voter.

How about you post my reply to his lunatic ravings?

You know the one he didn't respond to because he knew he couldn't refute it.

 

[Stephanie]

As those researching the myth of 'voter fraud' have explained, it is an article of religious faith among republicans that they're losing elections as a consequence of 'fraud,' when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

There is no evidence that the outcome of any election has been effected by 'voter fraud,' the fact is that attempting to influence the outcome of an election via 'fraud' is pointless and futile, which is why the courts have consistently invalidated 'voter ID' laws because there is no evidence in support of the notion that such laws would have the desired effect of preventing fraud.

In essence, 'voter ID' laws are a 'solution' in search of a problem.

Really?

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

Supreme Court upholds voter ID law - politics NBC News

that doesn't fit their agenda. They are so out of ideas and can't run on their records so it's back to same ole same ole BULLSHIT...it's pathetic and one reason their party was kicked out Congress. Hey lit them hang themselves until 2016 rolls around..the hell with them and dirty politics

 

[OKTexas]

Fifty years after "Bloody Sunday," the fight for voting rights continues in North Carolina.

After the 2013 Supreme Court decision to strike down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, allowing jurisdictions to change voting laws without federal oversight, North Carolina passed a bill that placed new restrictions on the voting process. The law requires voters to show government-issued identification at the polls, shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and "increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility," according to the LA Times.

Despite the blow to the Voting Rights Act, the NAACP and the civil rights organization Advancement Project are taking on the "voter suppression" using portions of the act that were left intact by the Supreme Court verdict. Jasmyn Richardson, a staff attorney with the Advancement Project, joined HuffPost Live on Monday to discuss the suit.

The North Carolina law targets many "things that a lot of young people, people of color and poor people were using to get people out to vote and to register to vote"and the Advancement Project is challenging it based on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th amendments, Richardson explained to host Alyona Minkovski.

North Carolina Is The Latest Battleground In The Fight For Voting Rights

Voter Suppression 101: How Conservatives Are Conspiring to Disenfranchise Millions of Americans

To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem - what about all the other restrictions on the voting process? Such as: shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility. How can anyone honestly deny that these restrictions are designed to restrict voting rights among certain groups of voters - primarily Democrat voters?

If you can prove it only impacts dems you might have a point, if everyone is impacted equally there is nothing discriminatory about it. Same day registration has always been a bad idea, it's an open invitation for fraud.

Wrong.

It has a negative impact on voters who are currently eligible to vote but are prevented from doing so because they cannot acquire the ID necessary to vote through no fault of their own.

The state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote because it 'thinks' the voter 'might' commit 'fraud'; the burden of proof rests with the state to produce the evidence that a given voter is attempting to commit fraud, and absent that evidence the state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote.

What are the reasons they can't get voter ID, be specific.

 

[OKTexas]

Why is it that it's always democrats who claim that Black people are too stupid to obtain a photo I.D.? When will Black people get tired of the democrat party plantation?

When will you realize that voting came before photo ID?

If you idiots would stop voting illegally there wouldn't be a need for voter id. If you can legally vote an id is not a problem.

There is no need for voter ID but it keeps the darkies from voting which helps the GOP.

Prove the laws only effects blacks, you say it keeps them form voting, whites don't have different rules wouldn't it do the same to them?

Darkies are who it affects, poor people of color who vote for Dems. You wouldn't want these laws otherwise as they'd do you no good. And that's not only my opinion, the courts and GOP folks have said the same.

Bullshit, there are many more poor whites than blacks, your assertions don't hold water.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

When will you realize that voting came before photo ID?

If you idiots would stop voting illegally there wouldn't be a need for voter id. If you can legally vote an id is not a problem.

There is no need for voter ID but it keeps the darkies from voting which helps the GOP.

Prove the laws only effects blacks, you say it keeps them form voting, whites don't have different rules wouldn't it do the same to them?

Darkies are who it affects, poor people of color who vote for Dems. You wouldn't want these laws otherwise as they'd do you no good. And that's not only my opinion, the courts and GOP folks have said the same.

Bullshit, there are many more poor whites than blacks, your assertions don't hold water.

Whitey mostly has papers, darkies, not so much. Read the court decisions.

And this fix is easy, issue everyone here an ID. Then you know who is supposed to be here and who isn't, so, what's stopping you?

 

[OKTexas]

As those researching the myth of 'voter fraud' have explained, it is an article of religious faith among republicans that they're losing elections as a consequence of 'fraud,' when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

There is no evidence that the outcome of any election has been effected by 'voter fraud,' the fact is that attempting to influence the outcome of an election via 'fraud' is pointless and futile, which is why the courts have consistently invalidated 'voter ID' laws because there is no evidence in support of the notion that such laws would have the desired effect of preventing fraud.

In essence, 'voter ID' laws are a 'solution' in search of a problem.

Really?

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.

Supreme Court upholds voter ID law - politics NBC News

that doesn't fit their agenda. They are so out of ideas and can't run on their records so it's back to same ole same ole BULLSHIT...it's pathetic and one reason their party was kicked out Congress. Hey lit them hang themselves until 2016 rolls around..the hell with them and dirty politics

Yep and any state that has their law stricken will rewrite their laws to conform to the ones the supreme court upheld.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Fifty years after "Bloody Sunday," the fight for voting rights continues in North Carolina.

After the 2013 Supreme Court decision to strike down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, allowing jurisdictions to change voting laws without federal oversight, North Carolina passed a bill that placed new restrictions on the voting process. The law requires voters to show government-issued identification at the polls, shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and "increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility," according to the LA Times.

Despite the blow to the Voting Rights Act, the NAACP and the civil rights organization Advancement Project are taking on the "voter suppression" using portions of the act that were left intact by the Supreme Court verdict. Jasmyn Richardson, a staff attorney with the Advancement Project, joined HuffPost Live on Monday to discuss the suit.

The North Carolina law targets many "things that a lot of young people, people of color and poor people were using to get people out to vote and to register to vote"and the Advancement Project is challenging it based on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th amendments, Richardson explained to host Alyona Minkovski.

North Carolina Is The Latest Battleground In The Fight For Voting Rights

Voter Suppression 101: How Conservatives Are Conspiring to Disenfranchise Millions of Americans

To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem - what about all the other restrictions on the voting process? Such as: shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility. How can anyone honestly deny that these restrictions are designed to restrict voting rights among certain groups of voters - primarily Democrat voters?

If you can prove it only impacts dems you might have a point, if everyone is impacted equally there is nothing discriminatory about it. Same day registration has always been a bad idea, it's an open invitation for fraud.

Wrong.

It has a negative impact on voters who are currently eligible to vote but are prevented from doing so because they cannot acquire the ID necessary to vote through no fault of their own.

The state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote because it 'thinks' the voter 'might' commit 'fraud'; the burden of proof rests with the state to produce the evidence that a given voter is attempting to commit fraud, and absent that evidence the state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote.

What are the reasons they can't get voter ID, be specific.

No papers, no money to get them, and no easy access to where they issue IDs.

 

[OKTexas]

If you idiots would stop voting illegally there wouldn't be a need for voter id. If you can legally vote an id is not a problem.

There is no need for voter ID but it keeps the darkies from voting which helps the GOP.

Prove the laws only effects blacks, you say it keeps them form voting, whites don't have different rules wouldn't it do the same to them?

Darkies are who it affects, poor people of color who vote for Dems. You wouldn't want these laws otherwise as they'd do you no good. And that's not only my opinion, the courts and GOP folks have said the same.

Bullshit, there are many more poor whites than blacks, your assertions don't hold water.

Whitey mostly has papers, darkies, not so much. Read the court decisions.

And this fix is easy, issue everyone here an ID. Then you know who is supposed to be here and who isn't, so, what's stopping you?

How about you read about the one I posted in post #30.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

There is no need for voter ID but it keeps the darkies from voting which helps the GOP.

Prove the laws only effects blacks, you say it keeps them form voting, whites don't have different rules wouldn't it do the same to them?

Darkies are who it affects, poor people of color who vote for Dems. You wouldn't want these laws otherwise as they'd do you no good. And that's not only my opinion, the courts and GOP folks have said the same.

Bullshit, there are many more poor whites than blacks, your assertions don't hold water.

Whitey mostly has papers, darkies, not so much. Read the court decisions.

And this fix is easy, issue everyone here an ID. Then you know who is supposed to be here and who isn't, so, what's stopping you?

How about you read about the one I posted in post #30.

Read it, the court likes to see how fucked up things get first. Nothing new.

 

[OKTexas]

Fifty years after "Bloody Sunday," the fight for voting rights continues in North Carolina.

After the 2013 Supreme Court decision to strike down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, allowing jurisdictions to change voting laws without federal oversight, North Carolina passed a bill that placed new restrictions on the voting process. The law requires voters to show government-issued identification at the polls, shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and "increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility," according to the LA Times.

Despite the blow to the Voting Rights Act, the NAACP and the civil rights organization Advancement Project are taking on the "voter suppression" using portions of the act that were left intact by the Supreme Court verdict. Jasmyn Richardson, a staff attorney with the Advancement Project, joined HuffPost Live on Monday to discuss the suit.

The North Carolina law targets many "things that a lot of young people, people of color and poor people were using to get people out to vote and to register to vote"and the Advancement Project is challenging it based on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and the 14th and 15th amendments, Richardson explained to host Alyona Minkovski.

North Carolina Is The Latest Battleground In The Fight For Voting Rights

Voter Suppression 101: How Conservatives Are Conspiring to Disenfranchise Millions of Americans

To those who say requiring government-issued identification should not be a problem - what about all the other restrictions on the voting process? Such as: shortens early voting, ends same-day registration and increases the number of poll observers who can challenge a voter’s eligibility. How can anyone honestly deny that these restrictions are designed to restrict voting rights among certain groups of voters - primarily Democrat voters?

If you can prove it only impacts dems you might have a point, if everyone is impacted equally there is nothing discriminatory about it. Same day registration has always been a bad idea, it's an open invitation for fraud.

Wrong.

It has a negative impact on voters who are currently eligible to vote but are prevented from doing so because they cannot acquire the ID necessary to vote through no fault of their own.

The state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote because it 'thinks' the voter 'might' commit 'fraud'; the burden of proof rests with the state to produce the evidence that a given voter is attempting to commit fraud, and absent that evidence the state cannot deny a citizen his right to vote.

What are the reasons they can't get voter ID, be specific.

No papers, no money to get them, and no easy access to where they issue IDs.

If they have the money for cigarettes, cell phones, cable TV and liquor they can afford their needed paperwork. It's all about priorities.