Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

[ChrisL]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

Of course they do. It;s not possible that the Dems ran a seriously flawed candidate who arrogantly expected Dem-bots to line up and vote for her just because she was the standard bearer. Someday you may get your head out of your butt but I doubt it.

And yet, she won the national popular vote. Thoughts?

Well, guess that blows the hell out of your voter suppression argument.

Don't you think that if those laws you described suppress votes, that they would suppress republican votes just as much as democrat votes? Otherwise you are implying that republicans are somehow superior to democrats with their ability to simply follow the law,

Oh, you totally got him there.

 

[SYTFE]

We'll see. Trump has to make up over 380,000 votes. It's possible.

I've just chosen Arizona to see where they're still counting in that State, they're at 79% counted.

Any Clinton votes are going to be minimal, Clinton's heaviest vote came from it seems Pima County, which the main place it says is Tucson and they're at 100% vote counted, so she can get no more votes from there, the other heavy Democratic votes came from Coconino County and they're at 100% vote counted, Apache County and they're at 100% vote counted and a smaller one Santa Cruz County and they're at 100% vote counted.

AZ is pretty red. So yes, many of those votes still coming in will likely be for Trump.

It's the same with Georgia, the State has been called for Trump, they're at 93% of the vote counted and whatever remaining Red Republican Counties are still counting he'll get most of the remaining votes adding to his tally.

The big cities vote count are all at 100%, this is De Kalb County and Fulton County which it says Atlanta is in Fulton County, De Kalb County gave Clinton her single largest vote in Georgia 281,875 to Trumps 110,372.

Then Muscogee County, it says Columbus is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted, Richmond County, it says Augusta is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted and then Chatham County, it says Savannah is the city, Clinton won that County but again they've 100% counted.

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

Yes but as I illustrated with Arizona and Georgia, you have to look at where the count is at 100%, if it's a heavily Democratic County and it's at 100% then you get no more votes, you have to look at the Internals of the State vote, the County vote, who's still counting, who's completed the count, is it a Red or Blue County etc.

You can't just look at the State and think 60% or 80% has been counted, you have to look at the Internals.

You also have to know the demographics of the state. California has a HUGE population, and it's always blue and very liberal. Washington is also very liberal, and still only at 60% in. So Hillary's still going to get a ton of votes just from those two states. Even Oregon is at 86% in.

 

[OKTexas]

Just can't accept you ran a shit candidate, can ya? She couldn't excite the base and got 6 million fewer votes than your dear leader did in 2012. That's why she lost.

Oh no. I totally accept that we didn't run the best candidate. I am furious that we didn't nominate Bernie.

I'm looking into voter counts and stuff, and it does seem like fewer people voted in some key areas.

Yeah, like PA, Ohio, MI, NC, FL.................... I could go on. Of course the State you folks said would flip for the bitch didn't, she lost TX by 9%.

I expected her to lose TX. PA is really fucking interesting to me. As is MI. FL....still interesting, though I think she could've won FL.

Over 40% of registered voters didn't vote in this election, which is absolutely disgusting in my opinion.

The numbers we discussed in another thread showed 88.1% of registered voters actually voted. Only 56% of voting age people were registered and voted.

Is there a link for that?

Had to go find the thread.

Voting Turnout Statistics - Statistic Brain

 

[SYTFE]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

Of course they do. It;s not possible that the Dems ran a seriously flawed candidate who arrogantly expected Dem-bots to line up and vote for her just because she was the standard bearer. Someday you may get your head out of your butt but I doubt it.

And yet, she won the national popular vote. Thoughts?

Well, guess that blows the hell out of your voter suppression argument.

Don't you think that if those laws you described suppress votes, that they would suppress republican votes just as much as democrat votes? Otherwise you are implying that republicans are somehow superior to democrats with their ability to simply follow the law,

No, it doesn't. Because very specific communities were affected. Can you take a guess which ones? Go ahead, take a wild guess.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

When they've completed the count in Arizona, Georgia, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin, Trump will have won the Popular Vote.

2016 election results: State maps, live updates

Those above States are not at 100% vote counted if you notice, when they're all at 100% Trump will have won the Popular Vote as well as the Electoral College vote.

We'll see. Trump has to make up over 380,000 votes. It's possible.

I've just chosen Arizona to see where they're still counting in that State, they're at 79% counted.

Any Clinton votes are going to be minimal, Clinton's heaviest vote came from it seems Pima County, which the main place it says is Tucson and they're at 100% vote counted, so she can get no more votes from there, the other heavy Democratic votes came from Coconino County and they're at 100% vote counted, Apache County and they're at 100% vote counted and a smaller one Santa Cruz County and they're at 100% vote counted.

AZ is pretty red. So yes, many of those votes still coming in will likely be for Trump.

It's the same with Georgia, the State has been called for Trump, they're at 93% of the vote counted and whatever remaining Red Republican Counties are still counting he'll get most of the remaining votes adding to his tally.

The big cities vote count are all at 100%, this is De Kalb County and Fulton County which it says Atlanta is in Fulton County, De Kalb County gave Clinton her single largest vote in Georgia 281,875 to Trumps 110,372.

Then Muscogee County, it says Columbus is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted, Richmond County, it says Augusta is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted and then Chatham County, it says Savannah is the city, Clinton won that County but again they've 100% counted.

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

I have looked at California, the big cities are all in, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento, so those Counties that they're in are fully Blue and at 100% counted, San Bernardino County is fully Blue and at 100% counted.

 

[OKTexas]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

“When we look back, we will find that voter suppression figured prominently in the story surrounding the 2016 presidential election,” said Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Fourteen states had restrictive new voting laws on the books for the first time in a presidential election this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The laws included a mix of photo ID requirements for voters, cuts to early voting opportunities and curbs on voter registration activity.

Read rest of article here:
Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

Yeah right, Skippy!!! It was amazingly complex here in Texas, so no wonder minorities were intimidated!!! I actually had to present my voter registration card, pull out my wallet and present my driver's license, and then wait while the evil oppressors looked me up on the County registration list!!! Then , horror of horrors, I HAD TO SIGN THE VOTER ROLL BY MY NAME!!!!!!! OMG OMG OMG!!!!!!! It was all so terrifying!!!! A COUPLE OF PEOPLE LOOKED AT ME, TOO!!!!!

I just gave them my drivers license. They scanned it, the machine pulled up my info, I verified the information, they printed the label, gave me the pin for the voting machine and I voted. Took 15 min start to finish.

 

[JoeMoma]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

Of course they do. It;s not possible that the Dems ran a seriously flawed candidate who arrogantly expected Dem-bots to line up and vote for her just because she was the standard bearer. Someday you may get your head out of your butt but I doubt it.

And yet, she won the national popular vote. Thoughts?

Well, guess that blows the hell out of your voter suppression argument.

Don't you think that if those laws you described suppress votes, that they would suppress republican votes just as much as democrat votes? Otherwise you are implying that republicans are somehow superior to democrats with their ability to simply follow the law,

No, it doesn't. Because very specific communities were affected. Can you take a guess which ones? Go ahead, take a wild guess.

No, you can simply explain why they are inferior to those that vote republican. Everyone is equal under the law.

 

[JoeMoma]

We'll see. Trump has to make up over 380,000 votes. It's possible.

I've just chosen Arizona to see where they're still counting in that State, they're at 79% counted.

Any Clinton votes are going to be minimal, Clinton's heaviest vote came from it seems Pima County, which the main place it says is Tucson and they're at 100% vote counted, so she can get no more votes from there, the other heavy Democratic votes came from Coconino County and they're at 100% vote counted, Apache County and they're at 100% vote counted and a smaller one Santa Cruz County and they're at 100% vote counted.

AZ is pretty red. So yes, many of those votes still coming in will likely be for Trump.

It's the same with Georgia, the State has been called for Trump, they're at 93% of the vote counted and whatever remaining Red Republican Counties are still counting he'll get most of the remaining votes adding to his tally.

The big cities vote count are all at 100%, this is De Kalb County and Fulton County which it says Atlanta is in Fulton County, De Kalb County gave Clinton her single largest vote in Georgia 281,875 to Trumps 110,372.

Then Muscogee County, it says Columbus is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted, Richmond County, it says Augusta is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted and then Chatham County, it says Savannah is the city, Clinton won that County but again they've 100% counted.

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

I have looked at California, the big cities are all in, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento, so those Counties that they're in are fully Blue and at 100% counted, San Bernardino County is fully Blue and at 100% counted.

Outside of the big cities, California is as red as the rest of the nation.

 

[ChrisL]

Liberals are just desperately grasping at ANY story to help them make it through these dark, dark days. Lol.

 

[Picaro]

Skippy ain't too bright, and mostly illiterate, which is why the GOP pays him to be a Democrat on the innernetz.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

I've just chosen Arizona to see where they're still counting in that State, they're at 79% counted.

Any Clinton votes are going to be minimal, Clinton's heaviest vote came from it seems Pima County, which the main place it says is Tucson and they're at 100% vote counted, so she can get no more votes from there, the other heavy Democratic votes came from Coconino County and they're at 100% vote counted, Apache County and they're at 100% vote counted and a smaller one Santa Cruz County and they're at 100% vote counted.

AZ is pretty red. So yes, many of those votes still coming in will likely be for Trump.

It's the same with Georgia, the State has been called for Trump, they're at 93% of the vote counted and whatever remaining Red Republican Counties are still counting he'll get most of the remaining votes adding to his tally.

The big cities vote count are all at 100%, this is De Kalb County and Fulton County which it says Atlanta is in Fulton County, De Kalb County gave Clinton her single largest vote in Georgia 281,875 to Trumps 110,372.

Then Muscogee County, it says Columbus is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted, Richmond County, it says Augusta is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted and then Chatham County, it says Savannah is the city, Clinton won that County but again they've 100% counted.

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

I have looked at California, the big cities are all in, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento, so those Counties that they're in are fully Blue and at 100% counted, San Bernardino County is fully Blue and at 100% counted.

Outside of the big cities, California is as red as the rest of the nation.

This is what I've just noticed, it's a sea of red with these random pockets of blue up and down that State and those random pockets of blue are Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento.

 

[SYTFE]

AZ is pretty red. So yes, many of those votes still coming in will likely be for Trump.

It's the same with Georgia, the State has been called for Trump, they're at 93% of the vote counted and whatever remaining Red Republican Counties are still counting he'll get most of the remaining votes adding to his tally.

The big cities vote count are all at 100%, this is De Kalb County and Fulton County which it says Atlanta is in Fulton County, De Kalb County gave Clinton her single largest vote in Georgia 281,875 to Trumps 110,372.

Then Muscogee County, it says Columbus is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted, Richmond County, it says Augusta is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted and then Chatham County, it says Savannah is the city, Clinton won that County but again they've 100% counted.

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

I have looked at California, the big cities are all in, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento, so those Counties that they're in are fully Blue and at 100% counted, San Bernardino County is fully Blue and at 100% counted.

Outside of the big cities, California is as red as the rest of the nation.

This is what I've just noticed, it's a sea of red with these random pockets of blue up and down that State and those random pockets of blue are Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento.

All rural areas are red (generally). But the population in the major cities dwarfs those areas.

By the way, it says all counties are 100% in for CA, yet at the top it says 69% in. Not sure what's going on with that.

Clinton also took Orange County, which is historically a red pocket.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

It's the same with Georgia, the State has been called for Trump, they're at 93% of the vote counted and whatever remaining Red Republican Counties are still counting he'll get most of the remaining votes adding to his tally.

The big cities vote count are all at 100%, this is De Kalb County and Fulton County which it says Atlanta is in Fulton County, De Kalb County gave Clinton her single largest vote in Georgia 281,875 to Trumps 110,372.

Then Muscogee County, it says Columbus is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted, Richmond County, it says Augusta is the city, Clinton won that County but they've 100% counted and then Chatham County, it says Savannah is the city, Clinton won that County but again they've 100% counted.

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

I have looked at California, the big cities are all in, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento, so those Counties that they're in are fully Blue and at 100% counted, San Bernardino County is fully Blue and at 100% counted.

Outside of the big cities, California is as red as the rest of the nation.

This is what I've just noticed, it's a sea of red with these random pockets of blue up and down that State and those random pockets of blue are Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento.

All rural areas are red. But the population in the major cities dwarfs those areas.

By the way, it says all counties are 100% in for CA, yet at the top it says 69% in. Not sure what's going on with that.

Clinton also took Orange County, which is historically red.

All Counties have been 100% counted in California yes.

2016 General Election Results | California Secretary of State

"County elections officials will continue counting ballots (vote-by-mail, provisional, etc.) during the 30-day post-election canvass period."

The above situation won't gain mega amounts of more votes for either Clinton or Trump, the big votes have now been all counted.

2016 General Election Results | California Secretary of State

 

[Treeshepherd]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

“When we look back, we will find that voter suppression figured prominently in the story surrounding the 2016 presidential election,” said Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Fourteen states had restrictive new voting laws on the books for the first time in a presidential election this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The laws included a mix of photo ID requirements for voters, cuts to early voting opportunities and curbs on voter registration activity.

Read rest of article here:
Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

In a society where you need an ID to do anything it isn't unreasonable to require an ID to vote. Seriously, who doesn't have an ID?
There's no excuse for 2 hour lines waiting to vote. That has never been the case at my voting precinct, but I see long lines on TV in other states. I sure wouldn't stand in line for two hours to vote. Honestly, I don't know what the cause for this is.

I don't think it helped Hillary's cause when Obama encouraged illegals to vote. If anything, that backlashed against Hillary.

 

[SYTFE]

Keep in mind that California is still only 69% in.

I have looked at California, the big cities are all in, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose and Sacramento, so those Counties that they're in are fully Blue and at 100% counted, San Bernardino County is fully Blue and at 100% counted.

Outside of the big cities, California is as red as the rest of the nation.

This is what I've just noticed, it's a sea of red with these random pockets of blue up and down that State and those random pockets of blue are Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento.

All rural areas are red. But the population in the major cities dwarfs those areas.

By the way, it says all counties are 100% in for CA, yet at the top it says 69% in. Not sure what's going on with that.

Clinton also took Orange County, which is historically red.

All Counties have been 100% counted in California yes.

2016 General Election Results | California Secretary of State

"County elections officials will continue counting ballots (vote-by-mail, provisional, etc.) during the 30-day post-election canvass period."

The above situation won't gain mega amounts of more votes for either Clinton or Trump, the big votes have now been all counted.

2016 General Election Results | California Secretary of State

Looks like there's 4,362,087 total unprocessed ballots, which doesn't even include San Diego and Imperial county.

http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/statewide-elections/2016-general/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf

 

[SYTFE]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

“When we look back, we will find that voter suppression figured prominently in the story surrounding the 2016 presidential election,” said Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Fourteen states had restrictive new voting laws on the books for the first time in a presidential election this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The laws included a mix of photo ID requirements for voters, cuts to early voting opportunities and curbs on voter registration activity.

Read rest of article here:
Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

In a society where you need an ID to do anything it isn't unreasonable to require an ID to vote. Seriously, who doesn't have an ID?
There's no excuse for 2 hour lines waiting to vote. That has never been the case at my voting precinct, but I see long lines on TV in other states. I sure wouldn't stand in line for two hours to vote. Honestly, I don't know what the cause for this is.

I don't think it helped Hillary's cause when Obama encouraged illegals to vote. If anything, that backlashed against Hillary.

Obama never encouraged illegals to vote. That was a bullshit lie that has been debunked already.

 

[toomuchtime_]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

“When we look back, we will find that voter suppression figured prominently in the story surrounding the 2016 presidential election,” said Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Fourteen states had restrictive new voting laws on the books for the first time in a presidential election this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The laws included a mix of photo ID requirements for voters, cuts to early voting opportunities and curbs on voter registration activity.

Read rest of article here:
Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

In a society where you need an ID to do anything it isn't unreasonable to require an ID to vote. Seriously, who doesn't have an ID?
There's no excuse for 2 hour lines waiting to vote. That has never been the case at my voting precinct, but I see long lines on TV in other states. I sure wouldn't stand in line for two hours to vote. Honestly, I don't know what the cause for this is.

I don't think it helped Hillary's cause when Obama encouraged illegals to vote. If anything, that backlashed against Hillary.

Obama never encouraged illegals to vote. That was a bullshit lie that has been debunked already.

Not so, in response to a question of whether an illegal will get into trouble if she voted, Obama clearly says, no.

 

[SYTFE]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

“When we look back, we will find that voter suppression figured prominently in the story surrounding the 2016 presidential election,” said Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Fourteen states had restrictive new voting laws on the books for the first time in a presidential election this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The laws included a mix of photo ID requirements for voters, cuts to early voting opportunities and curbs on voter registration activity.

Read rest of article here:
Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

In a society where you need an ID to do anything it isn't unreasonable to require an ID to vote. Seriously, who doesn't have an ID?
There's no excuse for 2 hour lines waiting to vote. That has never been the case at my voting precinct, but I see long lines on TV in other states. I sure wouldn't stand in line for two hours to vote. Honestly, I don't know what the cause for this is.

I don't think it helped Hillary's cause when Obama encouraged illegals to vote. If anything, that backlashed against Hillary.

Obama never encouraged illegals to vote. That was a bullshit lie that has been debunked already.

Not so, in response to a question of whether an illegal will get into trouble if she voted, Obama clearly says, no.

Oh FFS.

FALSE: Obama Encouraged 'Illegal Aliens' to Vote

 

[Darkwind]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

Of course they do. It;s not possible that the Dems ran a seriously flawed candidate who arrogantly expected Dem-bots to line up and vote for her just because she was the standard bearer. Someday you may get your head out of your butt but I doubt it.

And yet, she won the national popular vote. Thoughts?

Popular vote does not elect presidents. There is already a chamber of government that supports majority support of elected officials. It is called the Peoples House or the House of Representatives.

We do not elect presidents based upon mob rule.

 

[Treeshepherd]

WASHINGTON -- Civil rights groups say a tangle of Republican-backed “voter suppression” laws enacted since 2010 probably helped tip the scale for Republican nominee Donald Trump in some closely contested states on election night.

“When we look back, we will find that voter suppression figured prominently in the story surrounding the 2016 presidential election,” said Kristen Clarke, the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Fourteen states had restrictive new voting laws on the books for the first time in a presidential election this year, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law: Alabama, Arizona, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The laws included a mix of photo ID requirements for voters, cuts to early voting opportunities and curbs on voter registration activity.

Read rest of article here:
Voter suppression laws likely tipped the scales for Trump, civil rights groups say

In a society where you need an ID to do anything it isn't unreasonable to require an ID to vote. Seriously, who doesn't have an ID?
There's no excuse for 2 hour lines waiting to vote. That has never been the case at my voting precinct, but I see long lines on TV in other states. I sure wouldn't stand in line for two hours to vote. Honestly, I don't know what the cause for this is.

I don't think it helped Hillary's cause when Obama encouraged illegals to vote. If anything, that backlashed against Hillary.

Obama never encouraged illegals to vote. That was a bullshit lie that has been debunked already.

He was asked the question, "Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens — and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country — are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?”

Instead of saying that you need to be a documented citizen to vote, he simply said that nobody would be investigated if they voted. Maybe " encouraged" is the wrong word, technically, but that was easily construed and I don't think he did Hillary any favors in that regard.