North Carolina Admits to Suppressing Black Voters on Purpose

"“Our Republican Board members should feel empowered to make legal changes to early voting plans, that are supported by Republicans,” Woodhouse wrote in an email obtained by The News & Observer. “Republicans can and should make party line changes to early voting.” (There’s little evidence this is true.) Woodhouse also said college students are not “entitled” to their own voting sites, and pushed for the abolition of Sunday voting. (Woodhouse’s cousin Eddie Woodhouse was the board member who wanted Wake County to end Sunday voting.) Sunday voting is a partisan flashpoint because black churches across the state have long organized “Souls to the Polls” drives, transporting churchgoers to vote early after Sunday services.

Under state law, county boards consist of two members of the governor’s political party and one of the opposition party. Because Governor Pat McCrory is a Republican, every county includes two Republicans and a Democrat, even in staunchly blue counties. That means a pair of Republicans who agree can push plans through on party-line votes, as Woodhouse said, but any plan that is not unanimous goes to the state board of elections for review, to ensure it aligns with the “geographic, demographic and partisan interests of the county.”

Hall, the voting advocate, blasted Woodhouse.

“What the Republican executive director was doing was despicable and outrageous and illegal. He’s basically advising his Republicans to take illegal action by being completely partisan. Board members take an oath that they are serving the public interest,” he said. “It’s a big mistake in providing this document that’s a smoking gun.”"
edit: source, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/north-carolina-voting/496415/
Fuck these people.
 
Last edited:
Except that those other counties already had decreased these voting hours in their own counties prior to this move by a quarter! Money is limited. If you can cut your budget and hurt your opponent while only restoring parity....that's a win-win-win.

I don't see the relevance to this thread.

Wouldn't it have been preferable to just extend voting everywhere or is democratic participation an inherently bad thing? Republicans fight to keep people from voting every chance they get. They're universally opposed to anything that will increase voter turnout. How is that defensible? Of all the shit to go to bat for and this is what you pick?
I don't get it either. There is no good argument to be made for taking actions that are known to result in fewer people voting.
 
North Carolina admits that it shut down Sunday voting because African Americans vote heavily on Sundays and vote heavily Democrat In a legal filing.

The State then elaborated on its justification, explaining that “[c]ounties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black” and “disproportionately Democratic.” J.A. 22348-49. In response, SL 2013-381 did away with one of the two days of Sunday voting.
pg. 39

http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/7-29-16 4th Circuit NAACP v NC.pdf


Please refer to things like this whenever somebody whines about why more African Americans don't vote Republican.

6 other days and absentee voting not an option?
 
North Carolina admits that it shut down Sunday voting because African Americans vote heavily on Sundays and vote heavily Democrat In a legal filing.

The State then elaborated on its justification, explaining that “[c]ounties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black” and “disproportionately Democratic.” J.A. 22348-49. In response, SL 2013-381 did away with one of the two days of Sunday voting.
pg. 39

http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/7-29-16 4th Circuit NAACP v NC.pdf


Please refer to things like this whenever somebody whines about why more African Americans don't vote Republican.
So only black people weren't allowed to vote on Sunday?
 
The imperative here is reducing black votes. Until you admit that, Mick, you're fucking clown shoes.
 
TS didn't read/understand his own source, Jackie. I'm not addressing other case arguments by proxy.
Perhaps it's because they don't limit themselves to just one tactic.
This article from the Atlantic goes into detail about how the reduced hours are just one part of an organized program to suppress the black vote in that state,
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/11/north-carolina-early-voting/506963/
The imperative here is reducing black votes. Until you admit that, Mick, you're fucking clown shoes.
The goal is reducing Democratic votes, duh. The question is whether or not these policies are unfairly "racist" and discriminatory. That argument collapsed immediately.
 
@Madmick
First you disagree that any voter suppression is going on, then you change the goalpost and pivot to "well democrats are doing it too". ANY kind of voter suppression is against the very nature of the democratic process. You want as many people voting as possible.

Yes, republicans wont be able to vote on sundays either, but if there's a statistical difference in voting turnout at specific days, it's OBVIOUS they targeted it for no other reason than to suppress a political vote they don't like. That's not parity at all. Parity would be to extend open sundays everywhere. Give everyone a chance to vote, no matter which party, and turn op the voting percentage. Claiming that they did this out of financial necessity or that they can't afford it is so disingenous that I simply refuse you believe that yourself.

0070_Discretionary-Breakdown-full.gif
 
Last edited:
TS didn't read/understand his own source, Jackie. I'm not addressing other case arguments by proxy.


The goal is reducing Democratic votes, duh. The question is whether or not these policies are unfairly "racist" and discriminatory. That argument collapsed immediately.
My main concern overall is voter suppression regardless of race. I'm entertaining starting a thread specifically about allowing gun licenses as valid ID but not student ID. You're a smart guy so I'd be interested in hearing your take on that. However, if the thread is just going to be merged or dumped, then it's really not worth it. Do you think it would get merged or dumped?
 
My main concern overall is voter suppression regardless of race. I'm entertaining starting a thread specifically about allowing gun licenses as valid ID but not student ID. You're a smart guy so I'd be interested in hearing your take on that. However, if the thread is just going to be merged or dumped, then it's really not worth it. Do you think it would get merged or dumped?
I addressed an absurd allegation of racism pertaining to a specific case, and the TS didn't even realize he was talking about a separate case from over two years ago. It's a frustrating level of comprehension to engage.
@Madmick
First you disagree that any voter suppression is going on, then you change the goalpost and pivot to "well democrats are doing it too". ANY kind of voter suppression is against the very nature of the democratic process. You want as many people voting as possible.

Yes, republicans wont be able to vote on sundays either, but if there's a statistical difference in voting turnout at specific days, it's OBVIOUS they targeted it for no other reason than to suppress a political vote they don't like. That's not parity at all. Parity would be to extend open sundays everywhere. Give everyone a chance to vote, no matter which party, and turn op the voting percentage. Claiming that they did this out of financial necessity or that they can't afford it is so disingenous that I simply refuse you believe that yourself.

0070_Discretionary-Breakdown-full.gif
Ridiculous to argue that I switched the goalposts when the TS is rooting his claims in cases other than the one he presents.
 
I addressed an absurd allegation of racism pertaining to a specific case, and the TS didn't even realize he was talking about a separate case from over two years ago. It's a frustrating level of comprehension to engage.
The size and scope of the "racism" label is currently so immense that it risks becoming increasingly meaningless. I think these things are more implicitly racist than explicitly racist. It's not that Republican Party leadership outright hates black people and goes out of their way to fuck them. But they need to suppress the vote as much as possible in order to win and blacks bear the brunt of that more than anyone. Anyway, I may or may not start that aforementioned thread...
 
I addressed an absurd allegation of racism pertaining to a specific case, and the TS didn't even realize he was talking about a separate case from over two years ago. It's a frustrating level of comprehension to engage.

Ridiculous to argue that I switched the goalposts when the TS is rooting his claims in cases other than the one he presents.
That case indicates a specific pattern of behavior, what's hard to understand about that?
 
The size and scope of the "racism" label is currently so immense that it risks becoming increasingly meaningless. I think these things are more implicitly racist than explicitly racist. It's not that Republican Party leadership outright hates black people and goes out of their way to fuck them. But they need to suppress the vote as much as possible in order to win and blacks bear the brunt of that more than anyone. Anyway, I may or may not start that aforementioned thread...
Here you have honed in on my objection to how this has been framed. In the past, I wouldn't have minded it. Following the rhetoric that was forwarded by Democrats, and gleefully swallowed and reprinted by the MSM, I have come to realize that there is a need to push back against the abuse of this word/concept. A failure to do so resulted in Democrats widening a rational inch to the irrational mile; where suddenly mainstream liberalism is arguing that blacks can't be racist because they "don't control the institutions of power".
That case indicates a specific pattern of behavior, what's hard to understand about that?
That Democrats equate this to racism. It has nothing to do with that. On the last page, someone asked, "Do you think if they voted Republican there would be issues with the budget?" Of course not! But that's just it. Do you think if blacks voted 90% Republican that Republicans would be peeling back disproportionately proactive measures to precipitate higher vote participation in this counties? Also a resounding no! Yet in your very OP you said, "In case you wonder why blacks don't vote for Republicans..." That's crap, circular, self-fulfilling logic. Bending over backwards to yield a higher vote won't change the character of that vote.

You are opportunistically racializing this problem, when race is a coincidence, or correlative, not a cause. I saw in 2015-2016 the ultimate effect of this. It will only divide this country further, and empower morons like Trump. I have learned. I am wiser in my middle age. This rhetoric needs to be nipped in the bud. Republicans don't care about suppressing the vote of any particular race; their foes are Democrats. If predominantly white counties were heavily Democratic, but also saw decreased turnout by these measures, Republicans would eagerly enact them there, too. If you wanted to prove racism this would be your control, but no such logical control is implemented by the NAACP or the MSM purveyors of their narrative. Ask yourself why.

"Racism" and "discrimination" are words that only have power if you wield them responsibly. You have not. It's one more example where these arguments are rooted in the outcome. While I understand the noble desire of any citizen to see a higher vote turnout, I don't believe that is your motive in reporting this story, two years later, just before November, and I certainly don't agree that it reflects racism or discrimination. On a purely philosophical level politicians owe it to their state to offer an equal opportunity in terms of voting hours, Sunday voting, identification prerequisites, stations per capita, and so forth across counties. If that opportunity is equal the outcome in turnout is irrelevant, and there is no discrimination; furthermore, assuming those conditions, it's partisan to expect Republicans to bend over backwards to offer superior accommodations in hostile territory so that their opposition sees a stronger turnout.

The rest is political gaming that is being opportunistically misconstrued as discrimination. If Democrats in here were willing to admit that "open borders" and the resistance to immigration control has nothing to do with compassion, labor markets, or a stronger economy, and everything to do with a desire to recruit more votes-- a glorified gerrymandering effort-- then we would be dealing with this issue more honestly in a broad sense. Democrats do it, too: electioneering. Does that in itself make Democrats racist against whites? No, obviously. It just makes them Democrats who understand how their demographics break down.

But do you know what is racist? Insisting that someone is "disgusting" on racial grounds when race is a coincidence. Insisting that someone is discriminatory when their measures amount to strategy-- not discrimination.
 
North Carolina's position appeared to be that Sunday voting was only open in counties that were disproportionately black and Democratic. That's why they closed down Sunday voting: to restore parity.

Listen to the big bad conservative champion equality of outcome.
 
The imperative here is reducing black votes. Until you admit that, Mick, you're fucking clown shoes.
Coming from someone who was banned for being racist. ;)
 
I think the GOP is more concerned with Dem votes than they are with black votes. What... are they one and the same or something? I had no idea.

<30>
 
I think the GOP is more concerned with Dem votes than they are with black votes. What... are they one and the same or something? I had no idea.

<30>
These measures are meant to discourage African Americans from voting because they vote 90% Democratic. This makes North Carolina Republicans scumbags which is the par for the course for Trumps Republican party.
 
These measures are meant to discourage African Americans from voting because they vote 90% Democratic. This makes North Carolina Republicans scumbags which is the par for the course for Trumps Republican party.

Of course they are scumbags, but don't turn it racial. The parties try to suppress each other and fuck with districts all the damned time. This is nothing new, are you young or something? It's been quite a while since any major party has been anything but scumbaggish.
 
NC republican are some of the lowest form of Republican. Proven on multiple occasions to be racists, gerrymandering cunts. Let's not forget the millions they lost the state with the whole "Bathroom Bill" thing. Fucking idiots!

Also, they pull the most underhanded shit. When Roy Cooper was elected they stripped powers from the governor and setup a bunch of unneeded road blocks for appointments. Of course they didn't do that to McCrory. Every living Governor of NC spoke out against the changes, even McCrory! It's going through the courts now to defend separation of powers.

NC republicans do not want a democracy.
 
Back
Top