Politico: Democrats Underperforming W/ Black Voters

[I Really Mean It]

Yes. Vote Trump. That way all the Americans u can't stomach and topics u cant comprehend will magically disappear.

Why do idiots like you always assume those of us who don't support the present Democratic agenda are Trump supporters? Why can't we reject both?

 

[Oatmeal]

Look at the links and quotes I posted on the last page. The Republicans literally went through looking for the IDs White people had the most and made those valid for elections, but left off the ones that Black folk used. They also eliminated the voting days and places that Black folk were most likely to use. This isn't speculation, in North Carolina they were caught explicitly using racial voting data to fukk over Black people.

There was explicit racist discrimination against Black folk in the voting laws on at least three different levels - they tried to fukk Black people over on IDs, on voting days, and on gerrymandering districts. And none of this is guesswork - there were receipts showing they had been explicitly racist on ALL three of those:

Supreme Court thwarts voter ID law that targeted black voters with 'almost surgical precision'

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...blicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/

New Files From GOP Operative’s Hard Drive Suggest N.C. Republicans Lied in Court to Maintain Racial Gerrymander

N.C. Republicans lied to federal court about racial gerrymander

So really it wasn't about the ID it was because of all the extra stuff attached to it. Why was it always discussed as an ID issue then? That's probably why it was viewed the way it was because people figured that if you dont care to have an ID why you care about voting. Probably would've changed opinions if it was focused on the other stuff, but now I'm curious as to with the gerrymandering how many white folks that stuff affected too, like did it decrease the total amount of votes not just the black percentage?

Disparate impact legislation are laws that are meant to keep people from doing racist shyt and covering it up by using some other rationale. Disparate impact regulations say that if a policy has a negative impact on Black people, the feds can force the bank/insurer/city to change the policy even if they can't prove the negative impact was intentional.


For example, back in the early 2000s in Inglewood I was paying $2,600 every 6 months for my car insurance on a used Corolla. That was 3-4x higher than I would have paid if I lived in some white rural area. But insurers jacked prices way up if you lived in a "high crime" zip code, even though crime wasn't the major factor behind car insurance claims, accidents were. Since dense inner-city areas have the highest crime rates, Black and Brown folk in places like Inglewood were by far the worse affected by those policies.

In 2005 the state forced insurance companies to stop using zip codes as a primary factor. Overnight my insurance rates dropped to something like $800-900 / six months.

ZIP Code still a factor in auto insurance


But insurance companies are still trying to find ways around it that screw over Black and Brown people. And the state is noticing the disparate impact and fighting them.

California to Investigate Racial Discrimination in Auto Insurance Premiums — ProPublica

California tries to curb discrimination in auto insurance pricing



So what Trump has done is remove all disparate impact regulations at the federal level. Meaning that if a bank, or an insurance company, or a local government passes a policy or law that fukks over Black people, you have to PROVE that they intended to fukk over Black people and not just that the law had a discriminatory effect. Unless you get a hold of their private records that's almost impossible to prove.



TLDR: Disparate impact regulations say that you can't have policies that hurt minorities more than White people. Trump has eliminated disparate impact regulations, so banks, insurance companies, and local governments are free to pass laws that have a bigger negative impact on Black folk and the feds won't call them to task.

I was told car insurance rates can be calculated by accident reports in areas, density, as well as the number of uninsured motorists in an area because statically the majority of accidents happen within a short distance from the home. I dont know how Cali does it because they do almost everything differently but that's how it is done for majority of everyone else

 

[BaileyPark31]

Why do idiots like you always assume those of us who don't support the present Democratic agenda are Trump supporters? Why can't we reject both?

Quote: If that makes me a Trump supporter, well...





Please take your corny, illogical, both sides are the same, I cant name a specific policy but i dont like the gheys, ws right wing nut hugging, why should i vote azz up out this grown folks conversation.

 

[Easy-E]

Breh, did you see these two bullet points in that Trump administration list?




Trump signed a bill that exempted 80% of lending institutions from having to report their loan and mortgage practices by race. EXACTLY what you just called for, and Trump straight up rolled back the exact regulation that you were calling for.

They he followed it up by pulling back disparate impact regulation, so that even if you DID find discrimination by race in their loan and mortgage practices, you couldn't do anything about it unless you could prove they did it on purpose.


A Provision Hidden in the Banking Bill Could Hurt Black Homeowners

Trump Is Making It Easier to Get Away With Discrimination


I mean, you can't get more on-target than that. EXACTLY the issue you were talking about being a big problem, and Trump is 100% behind making the problem worse.

So did Obama.

He gave the banks a bailout with zero conditions.

Stop Democrat-splaining to me.

I think Trump is a horrible president. But, this is the third presidental election in a row, since I was old enough to vote, i have been told to vote blue or the world is gonna end.

I'm not uninformed or ignorant.

I have looked at all the front running Democrat and I'm worried they don't care how bad thinga are for black voters.

I am not "reparations or no vote' but it's illuminating Dems are saying "it wouldn't work" while giving no alternative and championing things working directly for specific groups

 

[GoAggieGo.]

I want the assertion in my post to be wrong. No idea what you are beating your chest about. People should vote. The entire idea that you can impact the process by not participating is moronic, especially when we have candidates who are pushing for the types of things that are being asked for. And yes, I absolutely do believe that there are people who will continue to operate with this mindset.

Steyer doing well in SC is a good thing, especially if he is driving increased black voter turnout.

Beating my chest? Dawg, the only one beating there chest in the conversation was you. You came in here attempting to talk down on those who viewed politics different than you; those who are demanding tangibles, and tried to ridicule them. Now, that Steyer appears to be doing ok in South Carolina, a black state, that ridicule of yours isn’t looking so well.

I agree that people should vote, but you have to give them something to vote for.

 

[I Really Mean It]

Quote: If that makes me a Trump supporter, well...





Please take your corny, illogical, both sides are the same, I cant name a specific policy but i dont like the gheys, ws right wing nut hugging, why should i vote azz up out this grown folks conversation.

Be incapable of comprehending english, brehs.

 

[BaileyPark31]

Be incapable of comprehending english, brehs.

Deflect when ur exposed a dumbass, brehs.

 

[Isaiah Bradley]

I definitely get that energy, and I respect you being careful in how you use the language.
But in a country where 1 in 12 Black males has lost their voting rights due to a felony conviction, where Black men are more than twice as likely to go to prison for a non-violent marijuana conviction even though White folk smoke pot at the exact same rates, where Black folk live in police jurisdictions that are far more likely to hit them with bullshyt fines, are less able to pay them off, and far more likely to catch a warrant for outstanding fines, we HAVE to treat criminal justice issues as issues that the Black community wants addressed. I don't know where you from but where I lived you could see what that shyt was doing.
Asset forfeiture, the War on Drugs, mandatory minimums, the disfranchisement of men with felony convictions, those are ALL important issues to the community. You don't have to call them Black issues but it's bullshyt to not treat them as important.
Breh, multiple federal court decisions proved that the voter ID laws were EXPLICITLY racist.
Federal judge blocks North Carolina's voter ID law, citing its discriminatory intent

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...blicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/
They purposely allowed voters to use ID that White people tended to have more often, like Concealed Carry Cards. But they purposely blocked the use of ID that Black people tended to have more often, like government employee IDs, student IDs, and welfare IDs.
That's right, they allowed you to use a fukking concealed carry card but not you government employment ID.
Read that shyt again. They straight LOOKED for the racial data on Black folk when they were writing up the law. This shyt is documented.
Again, read that shyt. They OPENLY admitted that they were looked to block the kinds of voting that black folk used the most.

precious political capital shouldn't be wasted on prisoners who targets the voters/advocates that're pushing for legislation to help them. Affordable housing and debt reduction should replace prison reform as default talking point about addressing Black problems from all politicians

ID requirements isn't racial discrimination. SOLUTION:

Spoiler

Dems should react with same urgency to get Black folks IDs as they do illegals, instead of piggybacking on Black plight to squeeze out more votes with scare tactics

Sanctuary cities are juelzing federal laws and providing to illegals resources so to inform about laws/fill out docs/made aware of deadlines, to ensure illegals get government ID. The responsibility/due diligence is on the illegals to take advantage of benefits offered by such special cities. No difference in responsibility/due diligence for Black folks who don't need to live in special cities to secure ID

As with most fomenting topics, clarity about the definition of words/phrases are as important as distinguishing between facts and opinions. In the theguardian article, the meaning of "government ID" is confusing because it presents both the North Carolina Law requirement and common held IDs by African Americans as government IDs...so there should be no problems

Spoiler

This iteration of the North Carolina law required voters to present one of 10 forms of acceptable identification, such as a driver’s license, passport, or military ID in order to vote. But Biggs noted that minority voters in the state were less likely to possess an acceptable form of ID. She also noted that African American voters were more likely to have public assistance and government IDs – both of which were largely not considered an acceptable form of voter ID under the law.

In the Washington Post article, the requirements presented as racially biased seems more to do with inconveniences rather than poll taxing/literacy test to completely stop the poor or illiterate from voting because in those cases a month of due diligence prior to election day wouldn't make a difference to voting eligibility

Spoiler

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.

Also, it's suspect for article to reference "found only 31 individual cases of voter impersonation out of more than 1 billion votes cast in the United States since the year 2000" as an argument against efforts to address vote fraud(regardless of nefarious reason)...it don't matter the number of times something occurred or not, regulations/oversight needs to be in place to restrict/deter all illegal activity

 

[Based Lord Zedd]

Beating my chest? Dawg, the only one beating there chest in the conversation was you. You came in here attempting to talk down on those who viewed politics different than you; those who are demanding tangibles, and tried to ridicule them. Now, that Steyer appears to be doing ok in South Carolina, a black state, that ridicule of yours isn’t looking so well.

I agree that people should vote, but you have to give them something to vote for.

I am talking down to people who are still saying no tangibles any vote, despite there being candidates in this primary who are offering policies that have been asked for. If Steyer is driving these people out to vote that is a good thing, but we are in a thread about democrats underperforming with black voters.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

So really it wasn't about the ID it was because of all the extra stuff attached to it. Why was it always discussed as an ID issue then? That's probably why it was viewed the way it was because people figured that if you dont care to have an ID why you care about voting. Probably would've changed opinions if it was focused on the other stuff, but now I'm curious as to with the gerrymandering how many white folks that stuff affected too, like did it decrease the total amount of votes not just the black percentage?

Any ID law will affect Black folk more than other folk, because poor folk are less likely to have ID and poor folk are disproportionately Black. But a non-discriminatory ID law will have a relatively small effect (that in many cases might be balanced out by the extra mobilization Democrats and Black political activists do to oppose the move). That's why states like Texas and North Carolina passed discriminatory ID laws meant to have a bigger effect by specifically targeting the kinds of IDs by the race of the people who use them.

So did Obama.

He gave the banks a bailout with zero conditions.

Stop Democrat-splaining to me.

I think Trump is a horrible president. But, this is the third presidental election in a row, since I was old enough to vote, i have been told to vote blue or the world is gonna end.

I'm not uninformed or ignorant.

I have looked at all the front running Democrat and I'm worried they don't care how bad thinga are for black voters.

I am not "reparations or no vote' but it's illuminating Dems are saying "it wouldn't work" while giving no alternative and championing things working directly for specific groups

I'm not a Democrat. I didn't vote for Obama in 2012 or Clinton in 2016 because both of them were doing little to improve the status quo. I 100% agree with you on Obama's bank bailouts. I only vote for Democrats who are committed to explicitly changing the status quo in a manner that will improve the status of the Black community. But I'm still gonna put Trump on blast because he's trying to actively make shyt even worse.

 

[xoxodede]

I am talking down to people who are still saying no tangibles any vote, despite there being candidates in this primary who are offering policies that have been asked for. If Steyer is driving these people out to vote that is a good thing, but we are in a thread about democrats underperforming with black voters.

Not the policies that BLACK Americans are asking for. Just say you don't care about what specifics we are asking for and go. You clearly are not Black American.

It's eye-opening - that the people who attack Black Americans and call out our names -- and call us Trump supporters are majority not Black Americans. And also the main ones who are OK with pushing us aside and having us wait -- and not ask for specifics. You see us as trouble-makers for asking for reparations and a Black Agenda -- and most importantly -- asking to be acknowledged directly. Not as "people of color" -- not as "minorities" -- but as Black Americans.

Stop the faux shaming -- cause you are not winning no-one -- you are only alienating more of us -- and pushing us away more -- and showing you are more divided and disconnected from us -- than we even thought you were.

 

[GoAggieGo.]

I am talking down to people who are still saying no tangibles any vote, despite there being candidates in this primary who are offering policies that have been asked for. If Steyer is driving these people out to vote that is a good thing, but we are in a thread about democrats underperforming with black voters.

What are some of the policies being offered by these candidates that are specific to Black Americans? I’d like to know so if Steyer doesn’t work out, i have another candidate I can go to.

 

[Based Lord Zedd]

Not the policies that BLACK Americans are asking for. Just say you don't care about what specifics we are asking for and go. You clearly are not Black American.

It's eye-opening - that the people who attack Black Americans and call out our names -- and call us Trump supporters are majority not Black Americans. And also the main ones who are OK with pushing us aside and having us wait -- and not ask for specifics. You see us as trouble-makers for asking for reparations and a Black Agenda -- and most importantly -- asking to be acknowledgedly directly. Not as "people of color" -- not as "minorities" -- but as Black Americans.

Stop the faux shaming -- cause you are not winning noone -- you are only alienating more of us -- and pushing us aware more -- and showing you are more divided and disconnected from us -- than we even thought you were.

I didn't say any of this nonsense and you don't know anything about me.

 

[Jekyll]

We ask the Dems to do it, because 25% of primary voters are Black; you can't win the nom w/o majority Black support(last Dem to win the nom w/o Black support was in either 88 or 92), and high Black turnout was a driving factor in Obama winning.

Our leverage is with the Dems, either you come through for us, or you take another L to Trump, simple as that.

Ehh this doesn't seem like the smartest strategy. Pretty damn soon not even Democrats will actually need the black vote because of the growing Latino population. The "candidate with a black agenda" thing is just a pipe dream that smart-dumb nikkas cling too to sound smart.

In reality we are just teaching Democrats how to win without us. Republicans can already win with sub 20% black support. The first election Democrats win without black support will be the end of any party caring significantly about black issues. Hillary came damn close to winning with low black turnout. It won't be long.

But yall nikkas keep walking around like you doing something by sitting out.

 

[CHICAGO]

really.
This alone could affect every AA on this board:


Sep 15: AG Sessions pulls out of a federal effort to reform police departments after officer-involved shootings

YOU nikkaS CANT BE THIS STUPID...

ALL THESE POLICE SHOOTINGS
STARTED UNDER OBAMA
AND NON WERE CONVICTED...

SO ONCE AGAIN WHAT HAS CHANGED?



​