IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New A case can be made that she lost because of voter suppression.
MoJo:

A post-election study by Priorities USA, a Democratic super-PAC that supported Clinton, found that in 2016, turnout decreased by 1.7 percent in the three states that adopted stricter voter ID laws but increased by 1.3 percent in states where ID laws did not change. Wisconsin’s turnout dropped 3.3 percent. If Wisconsin had seen the same turnout increase as states whose laws stayed the same, “we estimate that over 200,000 more voters would have voted in Wisconsin in 2016,” the study said. These “lost voters”—those who voted in 2012 and 2014 but not 2016—”skewed more African American and more Democrat” than the overall voting population. Some academics criticized the study’s methodology, but its conclusions were consistent with a report from the Government Accountability Office, which found that strict voter ID laws in Kansas and Tennessee had decreased turnout by roughly 2 to 3 percent, with the largest drops among black, young, and new voters.

According to a comprehensive study by MIT political scientist Charles Stewart, an estimated 16 million people—12 percent of all voters—encountered at least one problem voting in 2016. There were more than 1 million lost votes, Stewart estimates, because people ran into things like ID laws, long lines at the polls, and difficulty registering. Trump won the election by a total of 78,000 votes in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.

In Wisconsin, the intent of those who pushed for the ID law was clear. On the night of Wisconsin’s 2016 primary, GOP Rep. Glenn Grothman, a backer of the law when he was in the state Senate, predicted that a Republican would carry the state in November, even though Wisconsin had gone for Barack Obama by 7 points in 2012. “I think Hillary Clinton is about the weakest candidate the Democrats have ever put up,” he told a local TV news reporter, “and now we have photo ID, and I think photo ID is going to make a little bit of a difference as well.”


That you never (that I recall) mention voter-suppression in your beloved Red States (without my prompting) continues to baffle me.

Hillary didn't lose because she was a lousy candidate. She lost because even with being a very good candidate, the GOP (with overt Russian help) twisted the playing field and kept too many people from voting.

You're continuing to miss the forest for the trees. IMO.

Cheers,
Scott.
New correlation is not causation
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New Fake news! :)
Alex

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

-- Isaac Asimov
New not really, fake conclusions, exactly as we do here but on a larger scale
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New "While the law likely had some impact on deterring potential voters, ..."
The GOP has explicitly said that the purpose is to drive down Democratic turnout.

This isn't hard to understand, though the "fact checkers" too often try to minimize it. Both-sidery Uber Alles, after all.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Hillary was a decent Republican candidate, I’ll give you that.
But she has long been reviled by Red Staters as much as she has been by true Progressives. Red Staters irrationally, Progressives rationally. That’s a toxic combination.

BTW, being familiar with Red State thinking doesn’t make the region “beloved” by any stretch. Quite the contrary. But somebody’s got to be behind enemy lines. ☹️
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New Fair enough.
     Good news! Unimpeachable source (no, not that one) predicts… - (rcareaga) - (23)
         I won't be watching any of that ... care to summarize? -NT - (drook) - (3)
             I confess that I lacked the stamina. - (rcareaga)
             Re: I won't be watching any of that ... care to summarize? - (Another Scott) - (1)
                 great! just came back from vaca was not looking forward to going on base liberating a couple of SAWs -NT - (boxley)
         Haven't yet looked in there, but [did later] - (Ashton)
         Good news for me? - (mmoffitt) - (17)
             Hey Rand - (crazy) - (12)
                 This one isn't exactly 'feeding' the Despicables, - (Ashton) - (11)
                     Nit - "Basket of Deplorables" - (Another Scott) - (10)
                         You are quite Right; me Wrong in this allusion - (Ashton)
                         What she *should* have said - (drook) - (8)
                             That would have been much better. - (mmoffitt) - (7)
                                 A case can be made that she lost because of voter suppression. - (Another Scott) - (6)
                                     correlation is not causation - (boxley) - (3)
                                         Fake news! :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (1)
                                             not really, fake conclusions, exactly as we do here but on a larger scale -NT - (boxley)
                                         "While the law likely had some impact on deterring potential voters, ..." - (Another Scott)
                                     Hillary was a decent Republican candidate, I’ll give you that. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                         Fair enough. -NT - (Another Scott)
             on joining the cult - (rcareaga) - (3)
                 he was an elron fan? -NT - (boxley)
                 +10 for use of "empyrean." -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                     ... - (Ashton)

"Yes, but what if you get out of that groove?"
"Well, then I'm in trouble."
106 ms