Democrsts Steal North Carolina

[JakeStarkey]

This means that republican voters will have to turn out twice as much to beat back the voter fraud that goes on.

No, it won't. There is no voter fraud.

 

[DGS49]

If voter fraud is essentially non-existent, then what's the problem with having to prove who you are when you vote?

It is astounding how intentionally obtuse Lefties can be, when they put their tiny little minds to it.

THERE IS NO VALID REASON ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH TO OBJECT TO VOTER ID LAWS! the only reason to object is to ensure that Dems can continue to steal close elections, as they have done for generations.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How much of this alleged voter fraud was taking place in North Carolina?

\
This is an article to debunk it, but it doesn't.....

They say names match in a lot of places.....ok...so lets look up the records and see if those people live there....also they blame others on poll worker and other "mistakes"....yeah "mistakes"
Voter fraud in North Carolina? Not so fast

Are the isolated incidents of fraud in elections? Sure, I've read about them. Is fraud so rampant that it's changing the outcome of elections? I've seen no evidence of that and the judges seem to agree

“Although the new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision, they constitute inapt remedies for the problems assertedly justifying them and, in fact, impose cures for problems that did not exist,” the 4th Circuit judges wrote.

 

[kiwiman127]

How much of this alleged voter fraud was taking place in North Carolina?

It's rampant nationwide. Will post more stories in support.

Voter suppression is a much bigger issue than voter fraud.

Myth of Voter Fraud
It is important to protect the integrity of our elections. But we must be careful not to undermine free and fair access to the ballot in the name of preventing voter fraud.

The Brennan Center’s ongoing examination of voter fraud claims reveal that voter fraud is very rare, voter impersonation is nearly non-existent, and much of the problems associated with alleged fraud in elections relates to unintentional mistakes by voters or election administrators. Our report "The Truth About Voter Fraud" reveals most allegations of fraud turn out to be baseless — and that of the few allegations remaining, most reveal election irregularities and other forms of election misconduct. Click here for additional resources on fraud.

Voter fraud is not acceptable in our elections, but we must find a balance and not impose solutions that make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to participate in our democracy.
Myth of Voter Fraud

 

[bodecea]

How much of this alleged voter fraud was taking place in North Carolina?

It's rampant nationwide. Will post more stories in support.

Link?

 

[nat4900]

As if we already did NOT know this.....

A federal court just struck down North Carolina's voter-ID law, one of the strictest in the nation. In addition to requiring residents to show identification before they can cast a ballot, the law also eliminated same-day voter registration, eliminated seven days of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. The federal court ruling reinstates these provisions, for now.

Supporters of the law, like North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, have long maintained that requirements like these were necessary to prevent voter fraud. But time and time again, scholars and legal experts have found that the type of fraud these laws are meant to combat is largely nonexistent.

One of the most comprehensive studies on the subject found only 31 individual cases of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion votes cast in the United States since the year 2000. Researchers have found that reports of voter fraud are roughly as common as reports of alien abduction.

The federal court in Richmond found that the primary purpose of North Carolina's wasn't to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters. The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision."

In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote.

So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting — particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found.

Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.

"Thus, in what comes as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see in modern times, the State’s very justification for a challenged statute hinges explicitly on race — specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to the franchise," the judges write in their decision.

This is about as clear-cut an indictment of the discriminatory underpinnings of voter-ID laws as you'll find anywhere. Studies have already shown a significant link between support for voter ID and racial discrimination, among both lawmakers and white voters in general.

"Faced with this record," the federal court concludes, "we can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent."

The ‘smoking gun’ proving North Carolina Republicans tried to disenfranchise black voters

 

[SassyIrishLass]

There are like four threads about democrats thinking black people are too lazy and stupid to get an ID

 

[nat4900]

There are like four threads about democrats thinking black people are too lazy and stupid to get an ID

Then, welcome to the FIFTH......and what the court struck down. (thanks for the bump....as always.)

 

[whitehall]

The "voter I.D. law" has been in effect in neighboring Virginia for many years with no problems and the current democrat governor doesn't seem anxious to play the race card. Does the radical left allege that (only) Black people North Carolina are too stupid to obtain something as basic as a photo I.D. in the 21st century? When are Black people going to realize that they are being insulted and used by the racist democrat party as political pawns?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

There are like four threads about democrats thinking black people are too lazy and stupid to get an ID

Then, welcome to the FIFTH......and what the court struck down. (thanks for the bump....as always.)

Will you begin your whining and name calling anytime soon?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

The "voter I.D. law" has been in effect in neighboring Virginia for many years with no problems and the current democrat governor doesn't seem anxious to play the race card. Does the radical left allege that (only) Black people North Carolina are too stupid to obtain something as basic as a photo I.D. in the 21st century? When are Black people going to realize that they are being insulted and used by the racist democrat party as political pawns?

Indiana has it and no problems...and I don't understand how NC's can be struck down while SCOTUS upheld Indiana's

 

[occupied]

Blatant voter disenfranchisement is one the "traditional American values" they want to bring back to "Make America great again".

 

[occupied]

The "voter I.D. law" has been in effect in neighboring Virginia for many years with no problems and the current democrat governor doesn't seem anxious to play the race card. Does the radical left allege that (only) Black people North Carolina are too stupid to obtain something as basic as a photo I.D. in the 21st century? When are Black people going to realize that they are being insulted and used by the racist democrat party as political pawns?

Indiana has it and no problems...and I don't understand how NC's can be struck down while SCOTUS upheld Indiana's

They fucked up and tried to do it in one go without really trying to hide their intent.

 

[Kondor3]

North Carolinians, like so many others before them, screwed up, with respect to the details...

Want to insist upon a voter ID law?

Fine...

Grand idea...

Just make sure that you have sufficient provisions and mechanisms in-place to ward-off the inevitable Liberal whine-fest in front of the courts...

For example...

Make provision for free assistance for those who need it, in applying-for or meeting the administrative qualifications for or the fees required for or the physical obtaining of an ID...

If you are disabled, or poor, then the screening or vetting process for such free assistance will readily identify you as eligible for such assistance...

Make it a State-wide, State-standards, County-level assistance program...

Minimal County-level employees, staffed primarily with volunteers and those sentenced to community service, occasional auditing by State overseers...

With a stable of temps on stand-by, as the supply of warm bodies and worker-bees fluctuates...

When crafting such laws, the idiots in these State Houses need to proactively anticipate potential legal and procedural and ethical objections, then legislate around these...

Delivering voter ID laws that the frigging Liberal judicial activists can't touch, from a Constitutional perspective...

That'll get the poor and oppressed little darlings off their asses, with no defense against the ID requirement; for those who actually want to vote, anyway...

And it'll keep the truly lazy, shiftless riff-raff off the scope...

Hell, once some competent and imaginative State manages to pull that off...

Clone the damned thing for the other 49...

 

[pillars]

There are like four threads about democrats thinking black people are too lazy and stupid to get an ID

I live in NC. The Republicans also disproportionately staff DMV offices. In heavily black areas, it can take 4-5 hours to get an ID. In majority white ones, it takes about an hour.

I've seen it at firsthand.

It is also difficult for blacks to get a driver's license in NC. In order to get a learner's permit in NC, you must take and pass driver's ed, and you must be an enrolled student with passing grades. Driver's ed classes are no longer funded by the state, so parents have to pay $100 for driver's ed. In order to take a driver's ed class in school, you must be enrolled in a normal high school. They aren't offered to youth in alternative schools or to people in GED programs or at the college level. If you are not a student in a normal public high school setting, a driver's ed class can cost $500+. Even if you are a student in a high school, the driver's ed classes fill up fast and there are never enough spots for everyone who wants to take one of those classes. You also have to show proof of car insurance, whether or not you own a vehicle. So, poor people who typically can't afford driver's ed or car insurance and don't own a car, typically wait until they are 18 or even older to get a driver's license. NC politicians knew this, and that's why they used the DMV issued ID as the standard.

My son actually ran into this issue because when we moved up here, transferring from Florida to NC put him behind in credits required for graduation because the credit structure was entirely different. He opted to get his GED and go to community college during what would have been his senior year, versus spending an extra semester in high school. As a result, he wasn't eligible for high school driver's ed. He didn't get his license until he was 18 because I wasn't willing to pay for a $500 driver training class.

Further, getting the documentation together that is required for an ID can be expensive. A lot of the kids I work with don't have copies of important documents like social security cards and birth certificates. Getting a copy of a birth certificate can cost upwards of $50 (it cost $75 recently to replace my son's birth certificate which he apparently lost while registering for college). The state ID costs $35. It's the equivalent of a poll tax.

Here's an article about why this requirement disenfranchises poor voters: Well Actually, It’s Pretty Hard for Some People to Get a Photo ID So They Can Vote #ABLC

 

[OldLady]

As if we already did NOT know this.....

A federal court just struck down North Carolina's voter-ID law, one of the strictest in the nation. In addition to requiring residents to show identification before they can cast a ballot, the law also eliminated same-day voter registration, eliminated seven days of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. The federal court ruling reinstates these provisions, for now.

Supporters of the law, like North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, have long maintained that requirements like these were necessary to prevent voter fraud. But time and time again, scholars and legal experts have found that the type of fraud these laws are meant to combat is largely nonexistent.

One of the most comprehensive studies on the subject found only 31 individual cases of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion votes cast in the United States since the year 2000. Researchers have found that reports of voter fraud are roughly as common as reports of alien abduction.

The federal court in Richmond found that the primary purpose of North Carolina's wasn't to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters. The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision."

In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote.

So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting — particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found.

Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.

"Thus, in what comes as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see in modern times, the State’s very justification for a challenged statute hinges explicitly on race — specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to the franchise," the judges write in their decision.

This is about as clear-cut an indictment of the discriminatory underpinnings of voter-ID laws as you'll find anywhere. Studies have already shown a significant link between support for voter ID and racial discrimination, among both lawmakers and white voters in general.

"Faced with this record," the federal court concludes, "we can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent."

The ‘smoking gun’ proving North Carolina Republicans tried to disenfranchise black voters

Why can't black people get a photo ID from DMV? At least in our state, it's cheap.

 

[OldLady]

There are like four threads about democrats thinking black people are too lazy and stupid to get an ID

I live in NC. The Republicans also disproportionately staff DMV offices. In heavily black areas, it can take 4-5 hours to get an ID. In majority white ones, it takes about an hour.

I've seen it at firsthand.

Are you saying Republicans are a little slow? LOL

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why can't black people get a photo ID from DMV? At least in our state, it's cheap.

Because it has nothing to do with black people. Using black people (as Democrats constantly do) is one way to get sympathy from the public. But black people don't even understand the Democrats are insulting their race, so they never rebel.

 

[pillars]

As if we already did NOT know this.....

A federal court just struck down North Carolina's voter-ID law, one of the strictest in the nation. In addition to requiring residents to show identification before they can cast a ballot, the law also eliminated same-day voter registration, eliminated seven days of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. The federal court ruling reinstates these provisions, for now.

Supporters of the law, like North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, have long maintained that requirements like these were necessary to prevent voter fraud. But time and time again, scholars and legal experts have found that the type of fraud these laws are meant to combat is largely nonexistent.

One of the most comprehensive studies on the subject found only 31 individual cases of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion votes cast in the United States since the year 2000. Researchers have found that reports of voter fraud are roughly as common as reports of alien abduction.

The federal court in Richmond found that the primary purpose of North Carolina's wasn't to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters. The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision."

In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote.

So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting — particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found.

Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.

"Thus, in what comes as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see in modern times, the State’s very justification for a challenged statute hinges explicitly on race — specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to the franchise," the judges write in their decision.

This is about as clear-cut an indictment of the discriminatory underpinnings of voter-ID laws as you'll find anywhere. Studies have already shown a significant link between support for voter ID and racial discrimination, among both lawmakers and white voters in general.

"Faced with this record," the federal court concludes, "we can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent."

The ‘smoking gun’ proving North Carolina Republicans tried to disenfranchise black voters

Why can't black people get a photo ID from DMV? At least in our state, it's cheap.

The ‘smoking gun’ proving NC Repubs. tried to disenfranchise black voters

 

[Tresha91203]

As if we already did NOT know this.....

A federal court just struck down North Carolina's voter-ID law, one of the strictest in the nation. In addition to requiring residents to show identification before they can cast a ballot, the law also eliminated same-day voter registration, eliminated seven days of early voting and put an end to out-of-precinct voting. The federal court ruling reinstates these provisions, for now.

Supporters of the law, like North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory, have long maintained that requirements like these were necessary to prevent voter fraud. But time and time again, scholars and legal experts have found that the type of fraud these laws are meant to combat is largely nonexistent.

One of the most comprehensive studies on the subject found only 31 individual cases of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion votes cast in the United States since the year 2000. Researchers have found that reports of voter fraud are roughly as common as reports of alien abduction.

The federal court in Richmond found that the primary purpose of North Carolina's wasn't to stop voter fraud, but rather to disenfranchise minority voters. The judges found that the provisions "target African Americans with almost surgical precision."

In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote.

So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting — particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found.

Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.

"Thus, in what comes as close to a smoking gun as we are likely to see in modern times, the State’s very justification for a challenged statute hinges explicitly on race — specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to the franchise," the judges write in their decision.

This is about as clear-cut an indictment of the discriminatory underpinnings of voter-ID laws as you'll find anywhere. Studies have already shown a significant link between support for voter ID and racial discrimination, among both lawmakers and white voters in general.

"Faced with this record," the federal court concludes, "we can only conclude that the North Carolina General Assembly enacted the challenged provisions of the law with discriminatory intent."

The ‘smoking gun’ proving North Carolina Republicans tried to disenfranchise black voters

Sickening. Thank goodness for our judicial system.