Rand Paul: No ‘objective evidence’ African Americans are precluded from voting any longer

[LibertyEagle]

I changed the title to what Rand really said. The Washington Post misconstrued it. Huge surprise there, right. :rolleyes:


The potential presidential candidate’s comment comes amidst a brewing battle over voting rights.

Republican-controlled state legislatures across the country have been passing new Voter ID laws and other measures, including a recent North Carolina bill that cuts back on early voting days. And the Supreme Court recently struck down a key part of the Voting Rights Act that gave the Justice Department the authority to approve or halt such changes in areas with a history of voter suppression.

Paul’s comments come in contrast to another potential 2016 presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who said Monday, “Anyone that says that racial discrimination is no longer a problem in American elections must not be paying attention.”


read the rest... (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/14/rand-paul-no-objective-evidence-african-americans-are-prevented-from-voting/)

[Brett85]

Rand is right, but of course the left wing websites are just taking this comment and claiming that Rand is some kind of "racist" like they always do.

[jkr]

she would know...


...he kinda got played here...STOP talking in groups rand...

love peace and freedom r universal!

[LibertyEagle]

Rand is right, but of course the left wing websites are just taking this comment and claiming that Rand is some kind of "racist" like they always do.

They are going to do what they are going to do.

[evilfunnystuff]

nm

[whoisjohngalt]

I'm was defending him on WaPo earlier for awhile. Just point out that there are very few cases of voter suppression claims, much lower than the already negligible examples of in person voter fraud.

So, yes, these are bad laws because they cost time, energy, and a lot of money to implement and do nothing to solve a made up problem. But trying to use the Racist Boogeyman to get rid of these laws just weakens your credibility.

Point out Rand did not defend ID laws though. He just said that there was no objective evidence of voter suppression. And there isn't. Challenge them to point to it.

[Brian4Liberty]

There are two obvious legitimate reasons for voter identification. One is to ensure that a person is of age. The second is to ensure that people vote only once. There are other reasons for verification, such as convicted felons not being able to vote. Perhaps that is the real concern, but they don't want to say that? IMHO, prisoners should not be allowed to vote, but free men are free, and should be able to vote.

The left (and authoritarians in general) seems to be caught in a trap of their own making. They love myriads of tedious restrictions on every aspect of life. And the left is also caught in their ongoing lie. They claim to be for the underclasses, but in fact, they do everything they can to keep them down. They are masters of double-speak. Crony corporatist socialists.

[AuH20]

Yep. Like 99% turnout in some heavily black areas in Philadelphia. Voter suppression my ass.

[ObiRandKenobi]

objective evidence are racist codewords

[FrankRep]

Rachel Maddow prediction: "Rand Paul hates Black people and wants to prevent them from voting!"

[Brett85]

Point out Rand did not defend ID laws though. He just said that there was no objective evidence of voter suppression. And there isn't. Challenge them to point to it.

Actually, Rand said in the question and answer session at Howard University that he supports voter ID laws. There's certainly nothing un-libertarian about making sure that people don't vote twice and that illegal immigrants don't vote. The Democrats oppose voter ID laws simply because they want to get as many illegal votes as possible.

[anaconda]

I think this is a big story. This is all I get with a "Rand Paul" Google search.

[juleswin]

Way liberals see blacks: black man dumb dumb cant get ID, white liberal make you no need ID to vote.

Its funny how those same voter ID laws do not affect hillbilly (aka poor whites) in the same manner. I just wish Rand would call em out of their soft bigotry of lowered expectation. I have never meet any legal adult black person in my life that doesn't have a valid driver's license.

[tsai3904]

Couple days old but here's the video of his remarks:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIz9k7TFHl8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIz9k7TFHl8

[acptulsa]

Rand is right, but of course the left wing websites are just taking this comment and claiming that Rand is some kind of "racist" like they always do.

Hey, as long as they can prove that some minorities don't vote, they can allow a few dead ones to vote and call it 'affirmative action', right? And, of course, dead minorities, like most dead voters, have traditionally voted Democrat over the history of this Union...

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Actually, Rand said in the question and answer session at Howard University that he supports voter ID laws. There's certainly nothing un-libertarian about making sure that people don't vote twice and that illegal immigrants don't vote. The Democrats oppose voter ID laws simply because they want to get as many illegal votes as possible.

While voting is a privilege, I certainly don't like mandatory Government ID's whether it be nationally, or locally. There are other ways of making sure of reducing voter fraud (e.g. name and affidavit), and then go over the rolls. I guess I wouldn't be that opposed to ID's if all the information they collected was your name and age. I don't like Government having identifying information such as address :>

[BlackTerrel]

This isn't some big secret. The more these laws pass the lower the black turnout and vice versa.

This is a demographic that will go heavy Hillary over Rand (sorry but true).

Hillary wants more blacks voting, Rand wants less.

Racist? ..fine line...

[LibertyEagle]

This isn't some big secret. The more these laws pass the lower the black turnout and vice versa.

This is a demographic that will go heavy Hillary over Rand (sorry but true).

Yes, and that is sad.


Hillary wants more blacks voting, Rand wants less.

Racist? ..fine line...

What proof do you have that Rand wants less blacks to vote? It sounds to me like he wants less illegal immigrants and dead people to vote. That is what the Democratic establishment doesn't want to happen.

[Mr.NoSmile]

This isn't some big secret. The more these laws pass the lower the black turnout and vice versa.

This is a demographic that will go heavy Hillary over Rand (sorry but true).

Hillary wants more blacks voting, Rand wants less.

Racist? ..fine line...

What, so just because they'll vote Democrat that the laws are fine? This sounds all too similar to some Republicans wanting to repeal the 17th Amendment, since, as we know, the GOP never tires of self-righteously lecturing others about the wonders of democracy, but domestically they don't want certain people, in their own code words, voting. You know, those who they see as not Real Americans, in other words, those who wouldn't vote, think or talk like the GOP base.

[The Free Hornet]

Here's Why Black People Have to Wait Twice as Long to Vote as Whites

Viewed nationally, African Americans waited an average of 23 minutes to vote, compared to 12 minutes for whites; Hispanics waited 19 minutes. While there are other individual-level demographic difference present in the responses, none stands out as much as race.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/heres-why-black-people-have-to-wait-twice-as-long-to-vote-as-whites/274791/

I'm not ready to agree.

FWIW, I support a poll tax (no skin in the game, no voice) and ending anonymous voting (starting with state-wide and national offices) as much as is practical. Nobody has a right to run my life, I do think if some asshole or ballot measure is going to, then I ought to be able to verify, to a man, that the result is genuine.

[Anti-Neocon]

Rand is right that blacks aren't precluded from voting, but the laws are definitely designed to increase the ratio of white to black voters. It's the natural consequence of Democrat strategy being to turn out as many as they can out of a specific subset of low information blacks. High information black voters generally aren't affected by the maneuvers of either side.

[fr33]

Here's Why Black People Have to Wait Twice as Long to Vote as Whites

Viewed nationally, African Americans waited an average of 23 minutes to vote, compared to 12 minutes for whites; Hispanics waited 19 minutes. While there are other individual-level demographic difference present in the responses, none stands out as much as race.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/04/heres-why-black-people-have-to-wait-twice-as-long-to-vote-as-whites/274791/

I'm not ready to agree.

FWIW, I support a poll tax (no skin in the game, no voice) and ending anonymous voting (starting with state-wide and national offices) as much as is practical. Nobody has a right to run my life, I do think if some asshole or ballot measure is going to, then I ought to be able to verify, to a man, that the result is genuine.

Your link makes sense to me. Blacks statistically live in urban areas so lines should be expected.

I live in a rural area and the only time I've had to wait in line to vote was when Texas was trying out their new ID system (scanning licenses) right before the courts said they couldn't. I can't remember if that was the last primary or if it was the mid-term elections. The stupid scanner wasn't working for any of the people in front of me so they finally gave up on it.

[LibertyEagle]

I'm not ready to agree.

FWIW, I support a poll tax (no skin in the game, no voice) and ending anonymous voting (starting with state-wide and national offices) as much as is practical. Nobody has a right to run my life, I do think if some asshole or ballot measure is going to, then I ought to be able to verify, to a man, that the result is genuine.

Not a good idea. Because then you are providing the ammo for vengeance to be enacted on you because of your vote.

[RabbitMan]

Anyone proposing that the idea behind these Voter ID laws is to "keep illegal immigrants and dead people from voting" is incredibly naive. The number of cases of abuse are so negligible it really isn't even worth mentioning. Maybe 1 per 100,000ish if I recall correctly?

This is a power play in the same vein as gerrymandering districts--gaming the system instead of actually competing with ideas. Blech.

[CaptLouAlbano]

Government by the people at work and the radical left attempting to thwart the will of the people. 70% or so of people support Voter ID laws. (source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2012/04/18/fox-news-poll-most-think-voter-id-laws-are-necessary/). They lobby their state reps, a bill gets introduced, passed and the radical left (who undoubtedly will be hurt by Voter ID) has a conniption and reaches into their usual playbook and labels the laws racist.

[BlackTerrel]

What proof do you have that Rand wants less blacks to vote? It sounds to me like he wants less illegal immigrants and dead people to vote. That is what the Democratic establishment doesn't want to happen.

The proof is that 90% of blacks will vote Hilary. So yeah if he wants to win - then on average yeah he wants less black people to vote.

[phill4paul]

Why the hell would anyone want another form of identification? For any reason? SMH.

[juleswin]

Anyone proposing that the idea behind these Voter ID laws is to "keep illegal immigrants and dead people from voting" is incredibly naive. The number of cases of abuse are so negligible it really isn't even worth mentioning. Maybe 1 per 100,000ish if I recall correctly?

This is a power play in the same vein as gerrymandering districts--gaming the system instead of actually competing with ideas. Blech.

Lol, you are the naive one. I was able to register to vote as a green card holder, if not for a last minute talk with a friend, I would have been able to walk to the polling station and vote. Btw how exactly would they know that I wasn't allowed to vote? cos I had a valid state ID on me.

If you asked me, I say everyone trying to register to vote prove that they are a US citizen before they are allowed to vote. An ID is just the bare minimum.

[juleswin]

The proof is that 90% of blacks will vote Hilary. So yeah if he wants to win - then on average yeah he wants less black people to vote.

Btw what is the % of black voters do you think will be restricted with this new ID law? I have so many black friends and I can tell you that not one of them goes around with a drivers license. I can understand that maybe some older americans will find it difficult obtaining the records needed to obtain an ID but what is the excuse for younger African Americans? I just dont get it.

[phill4paul]

This is how it goes...

Voter I.D. needed. Proof of personhood will be needed. Give us a record of all your previous government identifiers so we can get one big dossier.
Fake cards out there so there be a will need to be more secure with the cards.
Biometrics will be needed to add to to your dossier.
There has been some trouble with state voter I.D.s that disturbs the government in the federal elections.
We'll need to compile all the state voter I.D.s into a national database.

No. No, thank you.

[Deborah K]

This might be of interest to those of you who are worried about discrimination against minorities. :rolleyes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7rkSmdDIIU#at=31

[angelatc]

This isn't some big secret. The more these laws pass the lower the black turnout and vice versa.

This is a demographic that will go heavy Hillary over Rand (sorry but true).

Hillary wants more blacks voting, Rand wants less.

Racist? ..fine line...

It is far more racist to leave the system unchecked for that reason. pandering to the lowest common denominator is not what is best for the system.

[Working Poor]

Hey, as long as they can prove that some minorities don't vote, they can allow a few dead ones to vote and call it 'affirmative action', right? And, of course, dead minorities, like most dead voters, have traditionally voted Democrat over the history of this Union...

Several dead people voted for Bush jr too.

[The Free Hornet]

Not a good idea. Because then you are providing the ammo for vengeance to be enacted on you because of your vote.

a) Bring it on.

b) I would start w/ statewide and national offices where individual retaliation makes no sense (too many votes, and the penalties to muck about in this area are already super stiff) and not a small town election for sheriff - but maybe we should eventually have that too.

c) If our congress critters, DAs, judges, and others are relatively safe, then I can't help but think the fear you present is 100% bullshit. TPTB don't care how people vote because they control the process and count the votes (or determine eligibility and the district lines - I would eliminate geographical districts for the US reps). Keeping us in the dark works to their favor.

d) People could take pride in picking the loser.

http://image.spreadshirt.com/image-server/v1/compositions/102484806/views/1,width=280,height=280,appearanceId=63.png/kodos-2012-shirt_design.png

or

http://www.bustercollings.com/images/dontblameme.gif

[phill4paul]

Like it matters anyway....

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4953906577148506&pid=15.1

[Brett85]

Requiring a driver's license or photo ID to vote is simply common sense. In a lot of states, a photo ID is needed to get food stamps, but not for voting. So the Democrats will claim that the poor don't have photo ID's because they can't afford them, but yet the poor are somehow able to get a photo ID in order to get food stamps. Then there are all kinds of other things that require a photo ID, such as boarding an airplane and writing a check out of town. But yet despite all this, it's somehow a violation of someone's "rights" to require that they show a photo ID in order to vote. Under the current system we have, someone who goes to vote in a big city could just claim that they were someone else, and they would get away with it since a big community like that wouldn't know the names and faces of every voter. Then they could just come back a few days later when different poll workers would likely be working, give them their real name, and vote for the second time. There really isn't any reason at all to not require a photo ID to vote. The government will even come to your house and give you a photo ID if you don't have one.

[juleswin]

Requiring a driver's license or photo ID to vote is simply common sense. In a lot of states, a photo ID is needed to get food stamps, but not for voting. So the Democrats will claim that the poor don't have photo ID's because they can't afford them, but yet the poor are somehow able to get a photo ID in order to get food stamps. Then there are all kinds of other things that require a photo ID, such as boarding an airplane and writing a check out of town. But yet despite all this, it's somehow a violation of someone's "rights" to require that they show a photo ID in order to vote. Under the current system we have, someone who goes to vote in a big city could just claim that they were someone else, and they would get away with it since a big community like that wouldn't know the names and faces of every voter. Then they could just come back a few days later when different poll workers would likely be working, give them their real name, and vote for the second time. There really isn't any reason at all to not require a photo ID to vote. The government will even come to your house and give you a photo ID if you don't have one.

This is what baffles me about the whole issue. The democrats claims they are doing this for the little guy but for a little guy without an ID, voting is the least of his problem. If they truly want to help em out, they will have "Get out the register for ID" drives and help these people. This is why I think its about being able to commit voter fraud.

[heavenlyboy34]

While voting is a privilege, I certainly don't like mandatory Government ID's whether it be nationally, or locally. There are other ways of making sure of reducing voter fraud (e.g. name and affidavit), and then go over the rolls. I guess I wouldn't be that opposed to ID's if all the information they collected was your name and age. I don't like Government having identifying information such as address :>
That's how we do it in AZ. You have to sign an affidavit when you cast a ballot. They don't collect any more personal info than they've always had-name, address, phone, etc. When casting the ballot, one has to provide one photo ID or 3 non-photo IDs. Provisional ballots are available for those who don't have their ID handy.

[BlackTerrel]

Btw what is the % of black voters do you think will be restricted with this new ID law? I have so many black friends and I can tell you that not one of them goes around with a drivers license. I can understand that maybe some older americans will find it difficult obtaining the records needed to obtain an ID but what is the excuse for younger African Americans? I just dont get it.

I wouldn't want to speculate on percentages because it would be a pretty wide range. But it will definitely impact blacks disproportionately.

...Which is good for Rand. Even if some people want to pretend it isn't.

[LibertyEagle]

a) Bring it on.

Bring it on for yourself. I don't like the government spying on me in any regard. If you want to mail them how you voted, go right ahead. But, leave the rest of us out of it.