Drum at MJ - Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin because of black-voter suppression.

Post #420,948 by Another Scott 10/20/17 7:49:34 AM 10/20/17 7:49:34 AM Reply	Drum at MJ - Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin because of black-voter suppression. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/10/wisconsin-shows-how-to-do-voter-suppression-right/ These things matter. We have to fight to make sure everyone has the ability to vote. Cheers, Scott.
Post #420,949 by mmoffitt 10/20/17 9:25:55 AM 10/20/17 9:25:55 AM Reply	I'm inferring something probably not intended. Haven't read Drum's piece yet, but your post appears to be saying that it is only with the Black vote that a Democratic candidate can win. Do you believe that to be true? Doesn't that statement play into the meme that the Democratic Party is all about "identity politics"? bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #420,950 by drook 10/20/17 9:44:49 AM 10/20/17 9:44:49 AM Reply	Not intended and not true -- Drew
Post #420,951 by mmoffitt 10/20/17 2:20:16 PM 10/20/17 2:20:16 PM Reply	I didn't think it was intended, but that's what Scott's Subject Line says. The statement, "Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin because of black-voter suppression" pretty clearly suggests that had there not been Black voter suppression, Hillary would have won Wisconsin and thus, the Presidency. Whence, Hillary winning Wisconsin depended on the Black vote. Moreover, without that voting block, she lost. Drum's piece more or less makes the same argument. That Hillary lost WI because not enough Blacks cast a vote. Myself, I don't know if the Democratic Party is dependent on the Black vote nationally. To be sure, Democratic candidates often carry 90% or more of the Black vote (with cause, I hasten to add), but I never really asked myself the question, "Can a Democrat win in a predominately White State without the Black vote?" It would appear that in today's America at least (and this may have always been the case after the VRA, I don't know), a Democratic candidate cannot win without Black votes. YMMV, but I think that is a very damning statement about White America. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #420,953 by Another Scott 10/20/17 4:19:21 PM 10/20/17 4:19:21 PM Reply	Blacks and other minorities, women,the young, liberals, etc., are the heart of the Democratic party. Of course any voter suppression efforts that disproportionately impact any of those groups are going to have an impact in a close election. That's why they're pushing so hard to suppress the vote of people in groups that traditionally support Democrats. Why you're seeing this as something somehow nefarious ("it is only with the Black vote that a Democratic candidate can win") on the part of Democrats is beyond me. Bernie would have trouble in Vermont if any Democratic-leaning voting group there was suppressed, too. From Berman's piece in MJ that Drum cites: You can’t say Andrea Anthony didn’t try. A 37-year-old African American woman with an infectious smile, Anthony had voted in every major election since she was 18. On November 8, 2016, she went to the Clinton Rose Senior Center, her polling site on the predominantly black north side of Milwaukee, to cast a ballot for Hillary Clinton. “Voting is important to me because I know I have a little, teeny, tiny voice, but that is a way for it to be heard,” she said. “Even though it’s one vote, I feel it needs to count.” Listen to this story: Tell us what you think by emailing talk@motherjones.com. And for more articles read aloud: download the Audm iPhone app. She’d lost her driver’s license a few days earlier, but she came prepared with an expired Wisconsin state ID and proof of residency. A poll worker confirmed she was registered to vote at her current address. But this was Wisconsin’s first major election that required voters—even those who were already registered—to present a current driver’s license, passport, or state or military ID to cast a ballot. Anthony couldn’t, and so she wasn’t able to vote. The poll worker gave her a provisional ballot instead. It would be counted only if she went to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get a new ID and then to the city clerk’s office to confirm her vote, all within 72 hours of Election Day. But Anthony couldn’t take time off from her job as an administrative assistant at a housing management company, and she had five kids and two grandkids to look after. For the first time in her life, her vote wasn’t counted. [...] On election night, Anthony was shocked to see Trump carry Wisconsin by nearly 23,000 votes. The state, which ranked second in the nation in voter participation in 2008 and 2012, saw its lowest turnout since 2000. More than half the state’s decline in turnout occurred in Milwaukee, which Clinton carried by a 77-18 margin, but where almost 41,000 fewer people voted in 2016 than in 2012. Turnout fell only slightly in white middle-class areas of the city but plunged in black ones. In Anthony’s old district, where aging houses on quiet tree-lined streets are interspersed with boarded-up buildings and vacant lots, turnout dropped by 23 percent from 2012. This is where Clinton lost the state and, with it, the larger narrative about the election. It's pretty clear that it was voter suppression that flipped the state. That's why they did it - to flip the state. Cheers, Scott.
Post #421,001 by mmoffitt 10/23/17 11:34:52 AM 10/23/17 11:34:52 AM Reply	Re: nefarious. I said that if it is true that a Democrat can't win without the Black vote, then that was damning of White people. The biggest difference between Republican voters and Democratic voters is empathy. Democrats have it, Republicans don't. If Democrats can't win without Black votes, then there are more empathy-lacking Whites than there are empathetic Whites. This deficit requires an infusion of 90% of the Black vote to overcome. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #421,002 by drook 10/23/17 11:59:36 AM 10/23/17 11:59:36 AM Reply	When you say it's damning of white people ... ... does that include white people who couldn't bring themselves to vote for a Goldwater Girl? -- Drew
Post #421,003 by mmoffitt 10/23/17 12:59:44 PM 10/23/17 12:59:44 PM Reply	Obviously not. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #420,954 by drook 10/20/17 7:24:29 PM 10/20/17 7:24:29 PM Reply	No Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin because of black-voter suppression. It is only with the Black vote that a Democratic candidate can win. The first says that a specific candidate did actually lose because of this factor. The second says that any candidate of a particular party must inevitably lose because of this factor. True, Democrats generally do better with minorities than Republicans do. So a Democrat who doesn't get the minority vote - whether through personal failings or voter suppression - is likely to have a harder path. But you can say that about virtually any interest group. -- Drew
Post #420,964 by CRConrad 10/22/17 7:55:34 AM 10/22/17 7:55:34 AM Reply	"Hillary" =/= "a[ny] Democratic candidate" It was true for her, because {the GOP Reality Distortion Field / Clinton Derangement Syndrome / Cowardly "objective" "he-said, she-said" MSM / Putin's Troll Factories} had all together poisoned the ordinary whilte (esp. male) working class, who would otherwise to a much larger degree have voted Democrat, against her. But that won't necessarily succeed with the next Democratic candidate, so "Hillary lost because the Black vote was suppressed" does not at all necessarily mean "a Democratic candidate cannot win without Black votes". Pretty obvious logicsl fallacy there. -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #420,955 by boxley 10/20/17 9:19:25 PM 10/20/17 9:19:25 PM Reply	its not the law that is at issue but breakage of same the the Justice Department needs to move in and enforce the law like they did in the south, and if they do not there is a mechanism for folks like the aclu and naacp to have the courts force them to do so. She had secretly recorded the DMV employees to show that the state was not complying with a court order to distribute voter IDs within a week to people…who did not have access to their birth certificates or other required documents. "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #420,956 by boxley 10/20/17 9:35:15 PM 10/20/17 9:35:15 PM Reply	interesting factoids Wisconsin's African American population totaled 348,308 in 2008, which was 6.1 percent of the state total of 5,672,297. The African American population increased 9.7 percent since the 2000 Census. Milwaukee County is home to 240,203 African Americans, comprising 69.4 percent of Wisconsin's African American population. This group is the largest racial minority group in Wisconsin. so does 29% of 6.1% of the population swing the vote? I could not find stats on registered voters by race in wisconsin which would provide a better picture of what the numbers really were. I do know there is also a lot of articles about black voters in wisconsin that didnt give a flying fuck about hillary and some that even voted for the Dumpfster so I think that 29% drop off is not entirely due to voter suppression. "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #420,965 by CRConrad 10/22/17 8:14:04 AM 10/22/17 8:14:04 AM Reply	Eleven percent of voters. After the election, registered voters in Milwaukee County and Madison’s Dane County were surveyed about why they didn’t cast a ballot. Eleven percent cited the voter ID law and said they didn’t have an acceptable ID. [Emphasis in the original - CRC] Didn't she lose the state by something tiny, like 23,000 votes? Since the Black population is ~650,000, surely at least half of those should be eligible (but for having their registration suppressed) voters? So at least some 325,000, of which then at least 35,000 were denied registration. Sure, you had some freak minority voting for Trump or Stein or whatever... But if only 70 % would have voted D, that would have been her missing 23 K votes. And I think my percentages (both the 50% and the 70%) are intentionally low-balled enough to give a good safety margin. So, yes, AFAICS 29% of 6% lost to GOP criminality was indeed enough to rob her of the victory. -- Christian R. Conrad Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi (Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
Post #420,978 by boxley 10/22/17 3:20:03 PM 10/22/17 3:20:03 PM Reply	rob? hardly "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #420,986 by CRConrad 10/22/17 6:23:01 PM 10/22/17 6:23:01 PM Reply	By their illegal behaviour deprive her of... Yes, Rob is the exact word. HTH.
Post #420,989 by drook 10/22/17 7:01:20 PM 10/22/17 7:01:20 PM Reply	Yes and no Right word, wrong object. The election wasn't stolen from Hilary. It was stolen from the electorate. -- Drew

Welcome to IWETHEY!