{"id":13954,"date":"2014-10-22T00:01:27","date_gmt":"2014-10-22T07:01:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/?p=13954"},"modified":"2014-10-22T00:01:27","modified_gmt":"2014-10-22T07:01:27","slug":"republicans-keep-in-the-vote","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.politicsplus.org\/blog\/2014\/10\/22\/republicans-keep-in-the-vote\/","title":{"rendered":"Republicans Keep In the VOTE!"},"content":{"rendered":"

Once upon a time, Democrats and Republicans presented their issues to the people, and let the majority decide whose policies would be implemented.  The problem is that now only Democrats are trying to win that way.  Since Republicans can no longer win an honest majority, they are trying to keep the people, whom they have offended through their wars on everyone but the 1%, hate mongers, wing nuts, and people too stupid to pay attention, from voting.  Nothing is too sleazy for them.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\"GOPvoting\"Are voting laws requiring photo IDs inherently racially discriminatory<\/strong>, as Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg maintained<\/a> in her blistering dissent Saturday morning?  <\/p>\n

A team of politician scientists from Appalachian State, Texas Tech and the University of Florida took on that question for an article just published in Political Research Quarterly<\/a> (h\/t: Justin Levitt<\/a>). Their conclusion is that the claims of proponents that they’re just upholding the principle of ballot integrity can be discounted; the photo ID laws aim to disenfranchise Democratic voters; they cite findings that the raised cost of voting imposed by photo ID requires "falls overwhelmingly on minorities." In other words, the answer is yes<\/strong>\u2026<\/p>\n

…What happened? The GOP, they say, recognized that its homogeneous white, male, older and Southern electoral base was competing against "a racially and ethnically diverse, younger, secular, liberal, and Northern-based Democratic Party." Moreover, the demographic changes bringing more Latinos, African Americans, and Asians into the voting population were working strongly against the GOP and strengthening the Democratic coalition.<\/p>\n

The GOP could have evolved to meet these voters on their turf, but chose not to. "Rather than altering issue positions as a means to attract new supporters, the GOP has turned to restrictive voter ID laws to disproportionately deter the participation of current Democratic Party supporters," the researchers write.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In other words, appealing to a racial coalition was beyond the GOP’s capacity, so the party chose instead to disenfranchise the members of that coalition<\/strong>…<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Inserted from <LA Times<\/a>> <\/p>\n

Had SCROTUS not gutted the Voting Rights Act several of these new restrictions could never have become law, because the racial discrimination is so blatant, not to mention discrimination against workers and students.<\/font><\/p>\n

Rachel Maddow discussed Ginsburg’s dissent and the effects of disenfranchisement on the election with Emily Schultheis.<\/font><\/p>\n