Texas GOP Pushing Bill to Suppress 1/3 Of All Female Voters In Bid To Stop Wendy Davis

[The Real]

Damn, it seems like they're really starting to get desperate.

http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/3959?share_ref=H58Y2dbO76U

"They've pushed through a Voter ID law that blocks the votes of countless Texas women.

Starting this November, Texans must show a photo ID with their up-to-date legal name instead of IDs like a birth certificate. That's not a problem for single or married men — but it leaves a third of Texas women scrambling in a state with just 81 DMVs in its 254 counties.

The only way the GOP can keep Texas is by rigging the game. Women have the power to turn this state blue for the first time in two decades, but we need to help secure their rights first."

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Good. This will backfire and make women more determined to go to the polls, and win Wendy Davis new normally apolitical voters out of outrage.

 

[Serious]

@Hiphoplives4eva

 

[DEAD7]

So the argument is that married women will have to have I.D. with their up to date name? Not their maiden name.... I see the issue, but I dont think this is an outrage.

 

[88m3]

south brehs ! the south!

 

[Hiphoplives4eva]

Damn, it seems like they're really starting to get desperate.

http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/3959?share_ref=H58Y2dbO76U

"They've pushed through a Voter ID law that blocks the votes of countless Texas women.

Starting this November, Texans must show a photo ID with their up-to-date legal name instead of IDs like a birth certificate. That's not a problem for single or married men — but it leaves a third of Texas women scrambling in a state with just 81 DMVs in its 254 counties.

The only way the GOP can keep Texas is by rigging the game. Women have the power to turn this state blue for the first time in two decades, but we need to help secure their rights first."

This is bullshyt. Texas is red and the MAJORITY of women here are republicans. I know most libs would prefer for there to be no IDs necessary, but its still important that only citizens have the right to vote.

And no one will have to "scramble" to fix this, being that there is at least 1-2 years before the next election. Not sure why this is such a big deal. It appears whenever voter laws are changed, liberals want to scream discrimination.

 

[The Real]

This is bullshyt. Texas is red and the MAJORITY of women here are republicans. I know most libs would prefer for there to be no IDs necessary, but its still important that only citizens have the right to vote.

And no one will have to "scramble" to fix this, being that there is at least 1-2 years before the next election. Not sure why this is such a big deal. It appears whenever voter laws are changed, liberals want to scream discrimination.

Let's take that bolded statement for a second and ask a simple question- there is already an ID requirement to vote, so that point is irrelevant. The question is why it would they change it so that even a birth certificate isn't enough?

So the argument is that married women will have to have I.D. with their up to date name? Not their maiden name.... I see the issue, but I dont think this is an outrage.

It's not an "outrage," it's just a slimy attempt to try and lower voter turnout among a demographic the ruling party fears. In other words, it's an attempt to hijack the democratic process.

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

The only way the GOP can keep Texas is by rigging the game. Women have the power to turn this state blue for the first time in two decades, but we need to help secure their rights first."

I would say the hispanic population are the ones who will turn it blue, maybe not next election but it's coming.

 

[FaTaL]

I would say the hispanic population are the ones who will turn it blue, maybe not next election but it's coming.

do u have any info of the population of texas based on race?

 

[DEAD7]

It's not an "outrage," it's just a slimy attempt to try and lower voter turnout among a demographic the ruling party fears. In other words, it's an attempt to hijack the democratic process.

Asking for up to date information is slimy eh?

Silly things like this go on both sides, i don't think they are really "issues" at all tbh. If they get it passed they get it passed

 

[Domingo Halliburton]

@FaTaL

White - 11,397,345
Black - 2,886,825
American Indian - 80,586
Asian - 948,426
Pacific Islander - 17,920
Some Other Race - 33,980
Two or More Races - 319,558
Hispanic - 9,460,921


this is just from a quick search, it may be a few elections but the hispanic population is definitely growing while whites are shrinking and hispanics vote in favor of dems.

 

[The Real]

Asking for up to date information is slimy eh?

If it is designed to put a high amount of pressure on one particular demographic, and furthermore, for anti-democratic purposes, then yes, it is. If you don't think so, I can only attribute it to a preference for abstract formalism over concrete realities.

Furthermore, there's no need to ask for "up-to-date" information, since the basic, constitutional criteria for voting depends on no information but citizenship. If you were born here, you should be able to vote here, which is something a birth certificate can prove just fine. The addition of requirements can only come from an attempt to play dirty. It shouldn't matter whether you got married or not, divorced, dyed your hair or changed hairstyles, got plastic surgery on your face, or whatever else, which are the things that "up-to-date" info would document. None of those changes would affect citizenship, which would be the same on all documents for people born here.

 

[FaTaL]

@FaTaL

White11,397,345
Black2,886,825
American Indian80,586
Asian948,426
Pacific Islander17,920
Some Other Race33,980
Two or More Races319,558
Hispanic9,460,921


this is just from a quick search, it may be a few elections but the hispanic population is definitely growing while whites are shrinking and hispanics vote in favor of dems.

i think they see the writing on the wall, they defiantly gonna be voting for hilary

 

[DEAD7]

Furthermore, there's no need to ask for "up-to-date" information, since the basic, constitutional criteria for voting depends on no information but citizenship. If you were born here, you should be able to vote here, which is something a birth certificate can prove just fine. The addition of requirements can only come from an attempt to play dirty. It shouldn't matter whether you got married or not, divorced, dyed your hair or changed hairstyles, got plastic surgery on your face, or whatever else, which are the things that "up-to-date" info would document. None of those changes would affect citizenship, which would be the same on all documents for people born here.

@ how the constitution is used when beneficial and ignored when considered a hindrance.

 

[The Real]

@ how the constitution is used when beneficial and ignored when considered a hindrance.

That's a totally different discussion, though. Do you think that being born here and being over 18 is enough to secure voting, if proper proof of that citizenship is presented?