2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Susan Sarandon: Trump Might Be Better for America Than Hillary Clinton [View all]Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)doubt even your claim of knowing the VRA. You can cut and paste all the articles you can find about the difficulty of proving the causal connection between voter ID laws and disenfranchisement of a protected class (not to mention proving their substantial infringement upon the exercise of the right to vote) without the VRA presumption all you want. I would even agree completely with what they say. They STILL have nothing whatsoever to do with what could have been done in 2000 in Florida to stop the purge of thousands of eligible voters. In 2000 Florida ADMITTED their purging criteria would disenfranchise all felons without regard to whether their civil rights had been restored by the state in which they had been convicted. What's more, Florida admitted it BEFORE the purge. The state of conviction of every registered felon was easily discoverable and, in fact, was actually contained in the Florida database. Same for the race of these felons. There was ZERO question about the substantiality of the impact. It was total disenfranchisement. There was ZERO question about disparate impact on a protected group. It could be proven with mathematical certainty. The DNC didn't even need the presumption. It only needed the will to stand up for a group of people of color who were scary to their suburban base.
You can throw out all the cut and paste about how tough it is to challenge Voter ID laws until the cows come home and it doesn't change what the DNC did in 2000.
Those, friend, are FACTS. Your desire to hide the fact that BOTH Nader voters' abandonment of Gore AND the DNC's kowtowing to their suburban base would have, independently and without any help from the other, allowed the theft of Florida's electors doesn't change them.